Leica SL

[dirk]

The Leica SL (Type 601) was launched in October 2015. Fullframe sensor (24MP) and electronic viewfinder with 4,4MP (!)

Of course with L-Mount

Here is a video of Hugh Brownstone about it:

 

[Sandokan]

It seems price of SL has dropped to £3195
https://www.macfilos.com/2019/04/26/leica-sl-prices-plummet/
which means second hand price will also drop.
Maybe time to pick up a second body?

 

[BLev65]

It looks like this thread gets no action, so I'll post the following: I just purchased an SL from the Leica Store San Francisco for $1650. Now that I have it in my hands, I understand what others have said. Sure, it's not a current body, but it is a work of art and a pleasure to hold. As someone who shoots a Z9 as their regular wildlife camera, I can imaging using the SL for landscape and detail work.
If anyone has a suggestion of some high quality, but affordable optics, I'm all ears.
regards,
bruce

 

[pdk42]

It looks like this thread gets no action, so I'll post the following: I just purchased an SL from the Leica Store San Francisco for $1650. Now that I have it in my hands, I understand what others have said. Sure, it's not a current body, but it is a work of art and a pleasure to hold. As someone who shoots a Z9 as their regular wildlife camera, I can imaging using the SL for landscape and detail work.
If anyone has a suggestion of some high quality, but affordable optics, I'm all ears.
regards,
bruce

For landscape?

UWA - the Sigma 16-28 f2.8 is excellent, as is the Panasonic 14-28 f4-f5.6. I did a mini comparison here => https://l-mount-forum.com/community...4-28-f4-5-6-and-sigma-16-28-f2-8.76/#post-187

Std zoom - I really like the 24-105 f4. It delivers for me on landscape shots.

Short primes - The Sigma I Series are all great. Metal build, AF, aperture rings, and great IQ. I don’t have any myself yet, but the 35 f2 is on my list!

 

[BLev65]

For landscape?

UWA - the Sigma 16-28 f2.8 is excellent, as is the Panasonic 14-28 f4-f5.6. I did a mini comparison here => https://l-mount-forum.com/community...4-28-f4-5-6-and-sigma-16-28-f2-8.76/#post-187

Std zoom - I really like the 24-105 f4. It delivers for me on landscape shots.

Short primes - The Sigma I Series are all great. Metal build, AF, aperture rings, and great IQ. I don’t have any myself yet, but the 35 f2 is on my list!

I've been looking at the Sigma 16-28 DG DN, thanks for sharing the link. I have a Nikon Z 24-120S f/4, and will pass on the Panasonic.. I am actually looking to differentiate the kit. I am going to make the Leica my landscape/macro/details kit and will also grab it for walking around my town. I've been impressed with the build and construction of the 45mm f2.8 DG DN I and was excited when I saw that Sigma is introducing a 17mm lens. In the short term, I could see buying the new 17mm lens and either the 90mm DG DN I or 105 DG DN macro ART. If I fall in love with the Leica system, I'd add the Sigma 16-28 and the new Leica 100-400. I'd go with the Leica because of the build and the built in tripod mount that is not present on Sigma's version of the lens.

bruce

 

[Biro]

It looks like this thread gets no action, so I'll post the following: I just purchased an SL from the Leica Store San Francisco for $1650. Now that I have it in my hands, I understand what others have said. Sure, it's not a current body, but it is a work of art and a pleasure to hold. As someone who shoots a Z9 as their regular wildlife camera, I can imaging using the SL for landscape and detail work.
If anyone has a suggestion of some high quality, but affordable optics, I'm all ears.
regards,
bruce

I already have an original S5 and I expect to pull the trigger on an S5 II before long. But, the thing is, I can get an SL from the Leica Store Miami for about the same price. Normally, I'd opt for most up-to-date body. But I recently took delivery of a Q2 and I absolutely love the way it feels in my hands.

One of the reasons I bought a Q2 is because I can't afford to chase Leica lenses at this point in my life. So if I opted for the SL, I would be using my Sigma DG DN lenses on it: 16-28/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 24/3.5, 35/2.0, 45/2.8 and 90/2.8. There are also a number of other DG DN primes: 17/4, 20/2.0, 50/2.0 and 65/2.0. So there is my suggestion for affordable optics. The Sigma L-mount glass is an order of magnitude better than what they offered a few years ago.

As for my impending choice between the S5 II and a gently used SL, any advice from anyone?

 

[xaviergut]

I already have an original S5 and I expect to pull the trigger on an S5 II before long. But, the thing is, I can get an SL from the Leica Store Miami for about the same price. Normally, I'd opt for most up-to-date body. But I recently took delivery of a Q2 and I absolutely love the way it feels in my hands.

One of the reasons I bought a Q2 is because I can't afford to chase Leica lenses at this point in my life. So if I opted for the SL, I would be using my Sigma DG DN lenses on it: 16-28/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 24/3.5, 35/2.0, 45/2.8 and 90/2.8. There are also a number of other DG DN primes: 17/4, 20/2.0, 50/2.0 and 65/2.0. So there is my suggestion for affordable optics. The Sigma L-mount glass is an order of magnitude better than what they offered a few years ago.

As for my impending choice between the S5 II and a gently used SL, any advice from anyone?

I think the Panasonic Lumix S5II is the best 24mpx full frame hybrid camera in the market right now. And bearing in mind that you already have Sigma L-Mount lenses...

In comparison with the Leica SL, if you buy the S5II you'll get better autofocus (pdaf), high resolution modus, much better video specs and better articulating screen.

I like Leica a lot, and the Leica SL is famous because of the colors that its sensor produces, but we have seen here in this forum wonderful pictures taken with the S5II, in terms of color and contrast. It is a great photo camera too. Is a camera for the future. The SL is to me more like a "nostalgic" camera.

 

[Jayneboo]

I already have an original S5 and I expect to pull the trigger on an S5 II before long. But, the thing is, I can get an SL from the Leica Store Miami for about the same price. Normally, I'd opt for most up-to-date body. But I recently took delivery of a Q2 and I absolutely love the way it feels in my hands.

One of the reasons I bought a Q2 is because I can't afford to chase Leica lenses at this point in my life. So if I opted for the SL, I would be using my Sigma DG DN lenses on it: 16-28/2.8, 28-70/2.8, 24/3.5, 35/2.0, 45/2.8 and 90/2.8. There are also a number of other DG DN primes: 17/4, 20/2.0, 50/2.0 and 65/2.0. So there is my suggestion for affordable optics. The Sigma L-mount glass is an order of magnitude better than what they offered a few years ago.

As for my impending choice between the S5 II and a gently used SL, any advice from anyone?

It depends on what you mostly shoot. I've had SL and shot with an SL2 for a couple of years. If you are mostly landscape, portrait, studio (though flash can be a problem with original SL), and have no need for IBIS, especially given the Sigma i-series lenses have no image stabilisation either, and can live with the size and weight of the body, then there is no doubt the SL produces beautiful files, but it's getting a bit long in the tooth now. For me needing to shoot some sports and wanting a wildlife option the autofocus was frustrating in the end and I went back to Canon. If you have the Leica itch though it's probably a good time to scratch it, SL prices are probably as low as they are going to go for a while so you could buy and try... can't think you would have much of a loss if it didn't work out and you sold it on again.

 

[BLev65]

It depends on what you mostly shoot. I've had SL and shot with an SL2 for a couple of years. If you are mostly landscape, portrait, studio (though flash can be a problem with original SL), and have no need for IBIS, especially given the Sigma i-series lenses have no image stabilisation either, and can live with the size and weight of the body, then there is no doubt the SL produces beautiful files, but it's getting a bit long in the tooth now. For me needing to shoot some sports and wanting a wildlife option the autofocus was frustrating in the end and I went back to Canon. If you have the Leica itch though it's probably a good time to scratch it, SL prices are probably as low as they are going to go for a while so you could buy and try... can't think you would have much of a loss if it didn't work out and you sold it on again.

All of this matches my thinking. As I said, I have a full Nikon kit w/ the Z9 being my primary body. If you need fast AF, then Canon/Sony/Nikon are best in class if you are willing to pay top dollar for their bodies.
My Leica SL is my "other" camera... the one I'll reach for when walking in town or when I want to shoot patterns in rocks, bark, etc... While the AF isn't as reliable as my Z9 or Z6II, it works well enough for when I want to slow things down. The beauty of the SL is its build and simple design...
BTW.. I just found a used 90mm DG DN I-series to join the 45mm f2.8. I will probably add the 17mm lens that was just released and make that my "Leica kit,"

cheers,
bruce

 

[Biro]

I think I’ve made up my mind. I’m going to go with the S5 II in a few months. I’ll also keep my eye on used SL2-S prices going forward. Maybe in another couple of years.

 

[pdk42]

I think I’ve made up my mind. I’m going to go with the S5 II in a few months. I’ll also keep my eye on used SL2-S prices going forward. Maybe in another couple of years.

I think that’s a wise choice. The S5 is just so much smaller and lighter. I had a foray into an S1R and although a wonderful camera in many ways, its size and weight I just found ultimately to be a deal breaker.