Hi there Luis, Giving you a shout from over the pond UK that is. Having been with canon for over 20 years I drifted back to manual lens so shooting Leica lens for about 4 years. This is now the configuration I shoot, the SL with M lenses, fixed focal length works for me, in fact I found after shooting a wedding in Italy the most shots where with the 35mm f1.4, it just works. It forces you to be closer and interact with your subjects. Nice sincere video too. Best of luck.
thx for the nice review ... despite the flexibility of zoom I prefer the continuity in a prime lense ... and there are so many great photography skills that can be learned like hyperfocal focus, and zone focusing that make manual lenses my favorite ... but I admit the zoom would be nice here and there ;) ciao!
I think you need to expand what the '24-90mm' lens is. Click 'More' and you don't even mention it. For your own info it's actually this lens: Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 ASPH
Thanks Marko! Wait till you try out the 50mm Summilux-SL. It's amazing and not as heavy as it looks. If you're doing 4K video, you should think about the T/TL lenses. That's what we used to shoot this video: 35 TL and 11-23 T.
I have the 11-23 T lens but don't really like the look it has. I've found the Summilux 21mm, 35mm and 50mm to be solid but are all manual. I also use the Leica Q a lot now for my vlogs because of its auto focus. Will have to try the 50mm SL.
hey man love the video! I have the sl with the m adapter and one thing I noticed is that focus peaking doesn't work? or am I doing something wrong? It's a challenge but I love the photos my SL with the 35mm makes
best pictures were taken with fixed focal lengths. look like he was searching for pictures that weren't there or just "getting rid of shots" while using the 24-90
Thanks for defining why people so love to work around on zoom lens. I love the form and design of the SL. Although I think TL shrink of this design with a 16-50OS lens would yield similar results in a more manageable package.
Really great review and excellent results shooting video with the SL. Would love a short ( or long!) post on getting the best out of the SL for video, any tips or lessons learned from this shoot. See it was recoded on the pix-e5h for the 10 bit and in log. Who shot the film? Cheers! John
Thanks for the feedback! David shot, edited and graded the footage. We definitely plan on posting articles and videos discussing video production on the SL.
What about focusing with M lenses stopped down to either F8, or F11? Is it too dark to see well when focusing with the EVF? I read that you have to open up, focus and then stop down again.
It really depends on the ambient light. In daylight, you could stop down to f/11 and the EVF brightness wouldn't change. It auto-gains to compensate for changes in aperture and illumination. But, if you were in a very dark environment, stopping down to f/11 could result in a less-than-perfect EVF view. Generally, though, M lens functionality on the SL is outstanding.
Glad to help! If you're interested in getting the SL, please give us a call at Leica Store Miami. We'd be happy to get you set up and answer any and all questions you might have. I'd also recommend checking out our full SL review on Red Dot Forum (www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/).
I am using M-lens on my new Leica SL, but it seems I can't set the aperture f at my freedom. Aperture Priority Mode and Manual Mode don't work. Am I missing something?
M lenses have no linkage between the lens and the SL body, so you just set the aperture on the front of the M lens manually - the same as you would on a Leica M camera.
Hi Luis, Jose from Puerto Rico. Really enjoyed your review. One question I have and it's about the viewfinder. That EVF is one of the best out there, but I saw a RUclipsr mention that at night it's a nightmare.Is this true and how do you personally overcome that. I've never owned a Leica and I look forward in the future getting one.
Just some of the standard stuff: quality, frame rate, high ISO (low light) performance, focus tracking with the 24-90mm (if any), image stabilization, high dynamic range - bit depth quality, video codec, video formats, clip length, battery performance, rolling shutter, etc.
Thanks for this review. I too would like to see a review of the SL's video capabilities. One thing I'd like to see is that from around the web there are those who've tested it while recording internally and they have noticed that anything over ISO 400 turns into unusable mush because of overzealous noise reduction. However another post mentioned that if you record over HDMI that this does not happen - but I've not seen any tests of this. Since you are using the PIX-E recorder, can you test and post the results? And the microphone/headphone breakout cable is available now and I'm curious to hear about the internal audio features.
Okay, so for this video, I set the exposure mode to M and set the aperture at f/1.4 and shutter speed to 1/50th. Then, I let the camera tweak the exposure by utilizing Auto ISO, where I let the camera dynamically adjust ISO up to 1600. Some of the darker indoor shots are in this zone. But.... I can't tell which as there is no video metadata showing the exact ISO used. That said, I think the high ISO mush was on early firmware. I recently did a test where I shot video to SD card at ISO 1600 and 3200 at night. The results surprised me - in a good way. They looked great. I didn't try to push much in post, but right out of camera, the look was nice. I don't use the Audio Adapter as the PIX-LR has incredible sounding analog mic pre-amps with XLR inputs. The audio is synced directly to my video with a delay needed for my Sennheiser AVX wireless system. The PIX could be justified if only for the increased audio quality. The fact that it makes shooting easier and records at higher bit depth and less compression is also nice.
Thanks for the additional info about this video. I have a PIX-E5 with the LR audio module and it is a nice unit. When you send out from the SL does the PIX auto sense 10-bit 4:2:2 correctly or did you set it manually? I've been considering the purchase of the SL but still waiting to see high ISO tests for video out to a PIX recorder.
Good video. Thank you. A bit surprised to see how folks in Miami seem so open to street photos. This won't work in CA Bay area where people are more skeptical....The SL seems like a very good camera, really nice color profile, EVF, etc. If I were to buy it one day, I'll use only my M lenses on it, and won't buy any of the bazooka SL lenses (they all are).
We have still pictures in this video from an assortment of M lenses and the 24-90. In my experience, the 24-90 offers (Leica) prime lens quality with the flexibility of a zoom. The M lenses offer much faster apertures for shallow DOF and better low light performance. But apples to apples, same focal length, same aperture, same subject, you'd be hard pressed to see a difference between the two. The 24-90 is really that good!
The shots he took with 24-90 were pretty ordinary, you must be able to see that. They were a little better with the M lenses. This isn't a great showcase for the SL.
Thanks. The video was shot on the Leica SL using TL lenses. If you look in the description, you can see the detailed tech notes with equipment, settings and processing.
Great content guys! First video I have watched from you. Never owned a Leica but have always loved the system, was just checking out some SL videos to see what it was all about. I enjoyed the way you interacted with your subjects. I'm not sure that the SL has any real place though... That lens is just way out of line size wise, and most of your 'pro's' were simply having autofocus and a zoom. On top of that the camera is just comically large. Half of what made Leica famous was their discrete look, and that is 100% gone. I'm sorry to say but an A9,A7RIII,A7III with many of the Zeiss or G-Master glass would just wipe the floor with this thing from every aspect. Sure it may not have the same level of refinement, but its more functional and the smaller size make is more attractive. And you still have the option to adapt M mount glass if you wanted, with better focus assist than the SL.
Thanks for the feedback! The SL is an incredibly capable camera, with unbelievable optics, exceptional image quality and perfect (and simple) ergonomics with the highest resolution and largest EVF on the market. I'd recommend you check out our various SL-related reviews on Red Dot Forum for more info and sample images: Leica SL (601) full review: www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/ 90-280mm SL lens review: www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/04/leica-apo-vario-elmarit-sl-90-280mm-f2-8-4-lens-review-telephoto-titan-for-the-sl-typ-601/ 50mm Summilux SL lens review: www.reddotforum.com/content/2017/03/leica-summilux-sl-50mm-f1-4-asph-review-a-new-standard/ The 24-90 lens is larger than most mirrorless lenses, but not too much larger than a Nikon or Canon 24-70, while offering superior all-metal build quality, prime lens performance at every focal length, silent and fast AF, image stabilization and full weather sealing. The lens looks big because the body is smaller than a typical C or N pro body. The biggest selling point, though, is the image quality, which cannot be stressed enough. The 24-90 SL is the first zoom lens that is as good or better than *Leica* prime lenses at every focal length, at every distance, from wide-open on. Literally, the only compromise is size, which is one we are happy to make. Leica M lenses wider than normal don't work very well on the Sony bodies, as the Sony sensors are built for retrofocus designs. 35mm and wider M lenses have an increasingly high angle of incidence, which manifests as smeary corners, vignetting and color shifts. On Leica cameras, like the SL and all digital Ms, the microlens structure is offset to accommodate for the high incident angle of M lenses. As to focus assist, the SL is as straightforward and quick as it gets. With a manual lens mounted, just tap the rear thumb joystick and the image will jump to 100% view. With the 4.4 MP EVF, nailing focus is easy, with or without focus peaking.
I'll quote myself from our full review of the Leica SL (www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/): "It’s likely that some will express concern that the new SL zooms do not feature a constant f/2.8 aperture, given what they might be used to in their Canon or Nikon lenses. I’m confident after using the lenses, any apprehension will melt away. I’ve used the equivalent zooms in Nikon and Canon and the Leica glass is in a different league with regards to both build quality and imaging performance. The one stop fall-off in max aperture over the full focal range really isn’t that significant. Here, you can see that on the 24-90, up to 50mm you’re only giving up a half stop, at most. And, the quality offered wide-open is equivalent to what you might get stopping down on the other lenses." After tens of thousands more exposures on the SL since writing the review, I can attest that the 24-90 is the best zoom lens I've ever used from any manufacturer. It performs flawlessly at every focal length, every aperture and every distance. In fact, the quality is on par with Leica prime lenses - no easy feat. I'm absolutely willing to sacrifice a stop for perfection.
It is like they are just selling the brand name with these funny prices. I tested Leica Sl. It is awesome camera built like a tank but sorry I can buy Fujifilm Gfx medium format with 65mm f2.8 lens around 8000 usd. So no thank you.
I agree with RDF. Aperture from f2.8 to f4 is a fantastic design choice, because it allows even more superb image quality, without penalties. All best PanaLeica lenses for m4/3 have it nowadays, and Pentax takes the same approach with DA HD 20-40, also a fantastic lens.
Some adaptors, such as the Megadap, allows autofocus with M lenses on certain camera bodies, such as the Nikon Z range. As far as I know, there is no adaptor that will allow autofocus on the L mount bodies, like the SL.
RedDotForum so will I get same Bokeh effect in video if I shoot with the 35mm f1.4 on CL/TL2 camera? Can M4/3 camera Panasonic GX85/G85 get same effect?
When shooting in 4K, the SL uses no pixel interpolation. So, one pixel on the sensor is one pixel in the final video. This results in very sharp capture. Coincidentally, the 8 MP cropped area is almost the same as Super35, which is the standard for motion picture. Super35 is about the same dimensions as APS-C. The TL lenses are APS-C, and work beautifully for video. The SL lenses are awesome, but much larger, making handheld shooting like this challenging.
Similar, I suppose. The CL and TL2 will use a smaller capture area than the SL when shooting in 4K. M4/3 is also smaller than APS-C. A large part of the look also comes from the 35 f/1.4 TL lens. Just about this whole video was shot wide open, with an ND filter on the lens to knock down the exposure.
I swapped my entire collection of EOS pro gear to leica M, having a fixed focal length forces you to work in a different way, the 24-90 is way to big, and its simply impossible to be as sharp as a fixed lens plus the DOF as f1.4 50mm is amazing not to mention the 50 f0.95
For sure, the M lenses are much more compact and do offer faster apertures vs. the 24-90 zoom. But, you'd be surprised just how sharp the 24-90 actually is. It is the first zoom lens we've seen that is as good as Leica primes at matching focal lengths. The 90-280 SL was the second. :)
the 24-90 is a bad ass lens for sure. I feel it loses the Leica shooting style though(out of the way inconspicuous) . With my M10 i shoot as low key as possible. I travel to miami constantly to check up on my rental property. Maybe next time we can go shoot Luis
a zoom lens always going to be more convenient if you're just going to shoot where you are. but from my years of shooting with m cameras and lenses is, you know the lens you're shooting with and you know what's going to be in your frame wherever you stand. you position yourself where you need to be before looking through the lens.
A few advantages of the SL over the A7r2: - simpler/more intuitive UI - better build quality - better EVF (4.4MP with large magnification = best EVF on market) - faster AF - better native lenses - usable with *all* M lenses (Sony has issues with wide angle M lenses) - also compatible with R and S lenses with native adapters
RedDotForum cheers for the reply. the first 3 points are valid... but hardly worth the extra $3000+ just for the small difference on those 3 things. the lenses argument doesnt stand up... since sony has tons more lenses aswell as being able to adapt tons of others like canon even with autofocus. plus the sony offers higher resolution and is much lighter. maybe im missing something but the leica has overall worse features for more money... doesnt add up
You really need to try the SL for yourself. No amount of spec comparison will convince you. Getting one in your hand, shooting it, then looking at the files... that usually does the trick. I'd also encourage you to read our full Leica SL review on Red Dot Forum: www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
It is worth it. Leica's cameras are a different league of use, material and design philosophy. Try, and you will understand, especially if using the camera and lenses daily, or a few times during the week. Or if you think system cameras are too much, just try Sony RX1 and Leica Q, and compare design, feeling, and output. Any price difference is paid off in use over the years, and in amount and quality of pictures obtained. If you are only a holiday or a Sunday afternoon shooter, though, then any modern m4/3 camera with a fine small lens will do, especially with PanaLeica lenses. No need for Sony whatsoever.
Zvonimir Tosic lol im a professional shooting and use either canon full frame or sony dslr or mirrorless with L lenses. i still dont see the benefit of the leica... im sure u are aware of the new sony a9 (and the r and s versions that will inevitably come soon)... they make way more than the leica into a smaller better package. sorry but leica is just a brand marketing its history it makes no logical sense to buy the leica over competion available
This video could be called "A Leica M shooter discovers the convenience of a zoom lens" :p Oh and I really don't understand the appeal of modern Leicas in comparison to Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji but that is another subject! (i own an M6 and some lenses but use a Canon professionally so I am not anti-Leica, I am anti rip off)
I suppose you're right about the alternate title. :) For many M shooters, getting *Leica* prime lens quality in a zoom hasn't been an easy endeavor. Many "pro-level" AF zooms are just not that great, or have particular weaknesses (soft wide open, excessive vignetting, smeary corners at the wide end, etc). The 24-90 SL has no such weakness. It actually is prime lens quality in a zoom. There is a value in the Leica SL vs Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, etc. I can think of several reasons for me personally: 1) The build quality and simple ergonomics. The camera feels great and reassuring to use. Everything is metal, not plastic. It is a pleasure to use. 2) The Leica SL lenses. SL lenses are incredible performers. The 24-90 and 90-280 zooms are the two best zoom lenses I've ever used. The upcoming fixed lenses will push this level of performance even further. You can't mount an SL lens on any other camera. 3) Almost universal lens compatibility. By my last estimation, you can mount more than 200 different lenses on the SL, including Leica M, Leica R, Leica S, Leica TL, Nikon, Canon EF, Contax, Hasselblad, Pentax 67, not to mention PL mount cine lenses. 4) The EVF is astonishingly good. No one else has a 4.4MP EVF in a mirrorless camera. It is the largest, clearest electronic viewfinder I've used. The only comparison in the DSLR world would be the Leica S, which is a medium format camera and has a class-leading viewfinder. 5) The image quality is incredible. The color, nuance, three-dimensionality and per-pixel acuity of the SL are amazing. Recently, someone tested Canon EF lenses on the Leica SL, a Canon 5Ds and a Sony A7RII. The results were surprising as the Canon lenses produced the best results on the Leica body. The Canon had "average performance" and the Sony suffered from "soft corners." While no one disputes Leica's acumen with lenses, very few give them credit they deserve for their digital imaging expertise. Look, there are plenty of great cameras on the market. No one is arguing that. But, before dismissing the SL as a "rip-off", I'd suggest trying one for yourself. Leica has a test drive program so that you can do so. The reality is that the SL is priced no higher than top of the line Canon or Nikons. And in fact, Leica just introduced a 1.9% 36 month lease program for working professionals that puts the SL squarely in the affordable column at about $200/mo. www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/10/leica-offers-special-lease-program-for-professional-photographers/
I didn't know I would get a reply and I didn't want to reply at first but I will. So I will reply to your points one by one. 1) the pro DSLRs that I use for work (canon) are all metal that being said, contrary to what most people think, if you want the best shock resistance plastic bodies are better because they absorb shocks and, if the body happens to crack it is easier and cheaper to replace hence, in terms of durability and if you are not planning to use super heavy lenses that could bend the front of the camera, plastic is really not that bad. 2) Those two zooms might be the best you have ever tried but I doubt that you could see the difference between the image quality of the Canon&Nikon zooms vs the Leica zoom in anything but a super large photo exhibition print (or a computer zoomed at 200-400% !). Also, have you ever been to a photo exhibition in the past 20-30 years and complained about the pictures not being sharp? I know I haven't. Still on this point, it is not difficult to make a great lens, it is expensive. Leica is no better in optics than Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Zeiss etc. in fact, I would say that I suspect that they are not as good but, because they charge ludicrous amount of money for their lenses, they can add elements or coatings that others just cannot add without increasing prices and loosing market shares. Recently both Sigma and Zeiss have entered the super high end (price is no object) compartment of the market and have done superb lenses. Also, we are talking law of diminishing return here, paying 3x the price for sometimes 5-10% more quality which you could only see on 1sqm prints is not worth it for most people and almost all pros. Lastly, a. it is much easier to engineer lenses for mirrorless cameras than for SLRs especially wide angles (which explains why for a long period of time, M lenses would beat the SLR lenses, now not so much anymore), b. this advantage almost vanishes for long focal length lenses. 3) Yeah ... well same as many mirrorless cameras such as the Sony A7 line. 4) Yes that is what I have heard, still doesn't match an optical view finder for quality of the image. Also, although that is important, you can live without ... and lastly that doesn't compensate for the fact that it is a very bulky and heavy mirrorless camera, it misses slightly the point. At this size I would rather have a DSLR or a medium format mirrorless camera such as the Hasselblad or the Fuji recently announced. 5) That one is a mystery for me as Leica sensors are known for being good but not excellent and Leica is probably the last brand to have jumped into the digital band wagon. I haven't heard about the test you mention, which cameras had anti-aliasing filters, which didn't? what were the resolution of the sensors? at what ISO? what was the dynamic range of the different cameras? what were the autofocus speeds? In real life you generally can't have the sharpest possible image (so absolute sharpness doesn't really count) and you need to compromise, the most important thing is AF speeds (otherwise you miss the shot), then you have ISO performance and shutter vibration etc. And then you have things like: can the camera work with flashes and TTL on Leica cameras is terrible. Lastly, you don't buy something because you can get good finance on it. You are not going to pay twice the price for a house because you can get a cheap mortgage loan (which you probably wouldn't get because the bank would send a valuer to the property but that is another story), you are going to get a house which is well priced in its market and then you are going to get a loan ... which is probably going to be as cheap or cheaper. Same for everything in life including cameras and lenses.
Photoandcargeek I currently own a Nikon D750, Sony A7S, the Leica M-P and a good collection of native glass for each system. My photos are mainly shot in raw and processed through LR. The pictures from the Leica in most conditions are usually better. Well, better colors, contrast and bokeh, which require less work in post. Some people would be happy with a $100 bottle of wine, and there are others that believe Mouton Rothschild is good value. Each to their own but to me, the Leica experience and that signature look make it a worthy investment.
F430F1 OK, if that works for you ... I have access and use cameras from all manufacturers as I can get most cameras just by calling a manufacturer or my pro camera gear store and ask them for a loaner and, if that doesn't work, I can call another pro photographer and ask him/her if I can try their camera... and I have heard people say what you said, I strongly disagree so I have happened to have run a blind test: which picture comes from which camera? Well, if you do it properly ie same light, same focal length, pro lenses (fixed focal or very high quality zooms), same aperture and low ISO ... results are inconclusive. If you tell them the brands of camera then results start to change, more so with amateurs than with pros, because they are influenced by what they think should be better. Oh and you have paid so much more for your Leica than for any of your other cameras that your opinion is also biased just like when you read online reviews by consumers you rarely see people saying that they made a bad choice, most often than not, they claim that what they have is better than what the competitors make. You will notice that I never said that Canon cameras are the best, Canon cameras are the ones I own and use for work but I know they have flaws, there is no perfect camera ... i have a slight preference for how Nikon feel in the hand, Nikon have better dynamic range (until 5D4 and 80D), Sony mirrorless are incredible for video and super light, I love using my Fuji X100S (that I used to shoot my uncle's wedding as the non official photographer and under cover pro) ... on weekends or for leisure, I often don't need more than an M6 TTL or a Nikon 35Ti and a roll of film and I enjoy seeing the imperfection and character of film. Anyway, i am getting lost here, for a pro who doesn't spend his life doing studio photography, Leica is not an option. And, to be honest, aside from medium format users, I don't know any pro who shoots Leica APS-C or full frame for work... which probably means that they don't think it is the right tool and that their clients are happy with pictures taken with other cameras.
F430F1 OK, if that works for you ... I have access and use cameras from all manufacturers as I can get most cameras just by calling a manufacturer or my pro camera gear store and ask them for a loaner and, if that doesn't work, I can call another pro photographer and ask him/her if I can try their camera... and I have heard people say what you said, I strongly disagree so I have happened to have run a blind test: which picture comes from which camera? Well, if you do it properly ie same light, same focal length, pro lenses (fixed focal or very high quality zooms), same aperture and low ISO ... results are inconclusive. If you tell them the brands of camera then results start to change, more so with amateurs than with pros, because they are influenced by what they think should be better. Oh and you have paid so much more for your Leica than for any of your other cameras that your opinion is also biased just like when you read online reviews by consumers you rarely see people saying that they made a bad choice, most often than not, they claim that what they have is better than what the competitors make. You will notice that I never said that Canon cameras are the best, Canon cameras are the ones I own and use for work but I know they have flaws, there is no perfect camera ... i have a slight preference for how Nikon feel in the hand, Nikon have better dynamic range (until 5D4 and 80D), Sony mirrorless are incredible for video and super light, I love using my Fuji X100S (that I used to shoot my uncle's wedding as the non official photographer and under cover pro) ... on weekends or for leisure, I often don't need more than an M6 TTL or a Nikon 35Ti and a roll of film and I enjoy seeing the imperfection and character of film. Anyway, i am getting lost here, for a pro who doesn't spend his life doing studio photography, Leica is not an option. And, to be honest, aside from medium format users, I don't know any pro who shoots Leica APS-C or full frame for work... which probably means that they don't think it is the right tool and that their clients are happy with pictures taken with other cameras.
Photo Tip: Experienced low light photographers know, to keep your elbows in to reduce shake. Rule Exception, If your are using an on camera flash and you need the light on the other side. (or) If the camera is on a tripod. Tip Two: Breath in and than Exhale. At the end of the exhale press the shutter gently.
I own an M and a few M lenses so it beats the crap out of me why some insists on no camera strap!!! you're carrying $12K with no safety net! I can do one hand shooting with an M lens. High F value and zone focusing will do some magic.
When I was using a strap it was always in the way, and got snagged on things once in a while. Since getting rid of straps I feel much safer and shoot in a more fluid manner. I have never dropped an unstrapped camera...and I do a lot of action sports/event photography.
Not sure we would agree with this assertion. The 24-90 SL is the best zoom lens I've ever used, matching or exceeding the quality of many fixed focal length *Leica* lenses. After shooting tens of thousands of images with the SL over the last year or so, I can honestly say that the one stop difference at 90mm isn't even a factor in actual use. I'd recommend checkout out the full SL review for more info on this lens, with plenty of sample images: www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
It's not really clear if you were shooting stopped-down or wide open with M-lenses. Did that effect shooting focus? Did you use Focus-Peaking for accuracy? What about TOUCH AF on the touchscreen with the 24-90? Poor review.
For interior shooting in the bakery, the M lenses were shot wide-open. Outside, stopped down a bit. We're not fans of focus peaking. The 4.4MP EVF on the SL is clear enough that you can achieve manual focus visually. Some people will just use the full view, but you can also tap the rear thumb button once to magnify to 100% to really dial in focus. Then just half press the shutter to come back to full view. We also don't use the Touch AF for handheld shooting. The SL is designed like an SLR. This is how we use it. Touch AF can be useful for tripod-mounted static photography like architecture though. Sorry you didn't like the video. It's wasn't meant to be a review. Rather, it is just a way to convey the different experiences of shooting with the 24-90 zoom versus that of shooting with M lenses on the Leica SL. If you want to read a full in-depth review of the Leica SL, I'd suggest you check out our full review here: www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
Hi there Luis, Giving you a shout from over the pond UK that is. Having been with canon for over 20 years I drifted back to manual lens so shooting Leica lens for about 4 years. This is now the configuration I shoot, the SL with M lenses, fixed focal length works for me, in fact I found after shooting a wedding in Italy the most shots where with the 35mm f1.4, it just works. It forces you to be closer and interact with your subjects. Nice sincere video too. Best of luck.
Thanks Adrian!
This is a nice vibrant, warm, interesting video. Better than most of the "techy" videos. subscribed
Awesome feedback. Thanks!
I love how friendly your vibe is.
Thanks Luis for a great review and comparison of lens choices for the SL...great images and excellent presentation....
EXCELLENT review Luis! Thank you!
Why did you not shoot on the same first location with the 24-90 in comparison to the m-lenses? This would have been so interesting to see.
IQ of that SL lens is mind blowing
I enjoyed verry mush this Video, Looking forward to see also The SL AF with the new 50 mm f1.4 asf. Wish would be my combination.
Superb video, thank you for sharing. By the way, what make is that camera bag?
Steven Brooks It’s an ONA bag 👍📷
thx for the nice review ... despite the flexibility of zoom I prefer the continuity in a prime lense ... and there are so many great photography skills that can be learned like hyperfocal focus, and zone focusing that make manual lenses my favorite ... but I admit the zoom would be nice here and there ;) ciao!
I think you need to expand what the '24-90mm' lens is. Click 'More' and you don't even mention it. For your own info it's actually this lens: Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 ASPH
I love the 24-90 lens but its so heavy. I totally agree, the close focal length of the 24-90 is super helpful. Great video guys!
Thanks Marko! Wait till you try out the 50mm Summilux-SL. It's amazing and not as heavy as it looks. If you're doing 4K video, you should think about the T/TL lenses. That's what we used to shoot this video: 35 TL and 11-23 T.
I have the 11-23 T lens but don't really like the look it has. I've found the Summilux 21mm, 35mm and 50mm to be solid but are all manual. I also use the Leica Q a lot now for my vlogs because of its auto focus. Will have to try the 50mm SL.
I was really waiting for an image compairson of fix vs this new zoom. The whole thing is more about what is the pro and cons of fix vs zoom.
Mmm... Amazing combo... Leica SL, Summilux 35mm, Summicron 90mm and Leica SL 24-90 lens!
hey man love the video! I have the sl with the m adapter and one thing I noticed is that focus peaking doesn't work? or am I doing something wrong? It's a challenge but I love the photos my SL with the 35mm makes
best pictures were taken with fixed focal lengths. look like he was searching for pictures that weren't there or just "getting rid of shots" while using the 24-90
Does Luis mora have his own channel? He’s the most charismatic reviewer here
Nice review. I wish there was more comment on image quality comparison.
If there is a leica L zoom lens has the same size as Panasonic 20-60, I would definitely buy it no matter how much is it.
I love this video and was in this area 2 weeks ago. What bag are you using if you don't mind saying?
Love it! owning this camera is my dream
Fantastic video and beautiful shots! I would love to see a video with some vintage M lenses on the SL in future videos.
Luisssss amigo paisano
nice video and pictures， can i know the name of your bag？
It should be a ONA bag Prince Street Smoke.
Thanks for defining why people so love to work around on zoom lens.
I love the form and design of the SL. Although I think TL shrink of this design with a 16-50OS lens would yield similar results in a more manageable package.
Really great review and excellent results shooting video with the SL. Would love a short ( or long!) post on getting the best out of the SL for video, any tips or lessons learned from this shoot. See it was recoded on the pix-e5h for the 10 bit and in log. Who shot the film?
Cheers!
John
Thanks for the feedback! David shot, edited and graded the footage.
We definitely plan on posting articles and videos discussing video production on the SL.
Great video. Fun and informative.
What about focusing with M lenses stopped down to either F8, or F11? Is it too dark to see well when focusing with the EVF? I read that you have to open up, focus and then stop down again.
why do you want to shoot video at f8 or f11?
No, still images. Architecture and landscapes. I normally stop down for those shots.
It really depends on the ambient light. In daylight, you could stop down to f/11 and the EVF brightness wouldn't change. It auto-gains to compensate for changes in aperture and illumination. But, if you were in a very dark environment, stopping down to f/11 could result in a less-than-perfect EVF view. Generally, though, M lens functionality on the SL is outstanding.
Thanks, that's what I needed to know. I think that I am going to go ahead and get the SL.
Glad to help! If you're interested in getting the SL, please give us a call at Leica Store Miami. We'd be happy to get you set up and answer any and all questions you might have. I'd also recommend checking out our full SL review on Red Dot Forum (www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/).
So which one had better IQ? 35 M or 35 in SL ?
I am using M-lens on my new Leica SL, but it seems I can't set the aperture f at my freedom. Aperture Priority Mode and Manual Mode don't work. Am I missing something?
M lenses have no linkage between the lens and the SL body, so you just set the aperture on the front of the M lens manually - the same as you would on a Leica M camera.
Great video! But... You can't be inconspicuous with the SL, much less with that 24-90mm f/2.8-4. I just had to say it 😏
Gotta get the Q-P for that role.
Hi Luis, Jose from Puerto Rico. Really enjoyed your review. One question I have and it's about the viewfinder. That EVF is one of the best out there, but I saw a RUclipsr mention that at night it's a nightmare.Is this true and how do you personally overcome that. I've never owned a Leica and I look forward in the future getting one.
I'd love to see a 4K video review.
Thanks for your feedback. What exactly would you like to see in a 4K video review?
Just some of the standard stuff: quality, frame rate, high ISO (low light) performance, focus tracking with the 24-90mm (if any), image stabilization, high dynamic range - bit depth quality, video codec, video formats, clip length, battery performance, rolling shutter, etc.
Thanks for this review. I too would like to see a review of the SL's video capabilities. One thing I'd like to see is that from around the web there are those who've tested it while recording internally and they have noticed that anything over ISO 400 turns into unusable mush because of overzealous noise reduction. However another post mentioned that if you record over HDMI that this does not happen - but I've not seen any tests of this. Since you are using the PIX-E recorder, can you test and post the results? And the microphone/headphone breakout cable is available now and I'm curious to hear about the internal audio features.
Okay, so for this video, I set the exposure mode to M and set the aperture at f/1.4 and shutter speed to 1/50th. Then, I let the camera tweak the exposure by utilizing Auto ISO, where I let the camera dynamically adjust ISO up to 1600. Some of the darker indoor shots are in this zone. But.... I can't tell which as there is no video metadata showing the exact ISO used. That said, I think the high ISO mush was on early firmware. I recently did a test where I shot video to SD card at ISO 1600 and 3200 at night. The results surprised me - in a good way. They looked great. I didn't try to push much in post, but right out of camera, the look was nice.
I don't use the Audio Adapter as the PIX-LR has incredible sounding analog mic pre-amps with XLR inputs. The audio is synced directly to my video with a delay needed for my Sennheiser AVX wireless system. The PIX could be justified if only for the increased audio quality. The fact that it makes shooting easier and records at higher bit depth and less compression is also nice.
Thanks for the additional info about this video. I have a PIX-E5 with the LR audio module and it is a nice unit. When you send out from the SL does the PIX auto sense 10-bit 4:2:2 correctly or did you set it manually? I've been considering the purchase of the SL but still waiting to see high ISO tests for video out to a PIX recorder.
Good video. Thank you. A bit surprised to see how folks in Miami seem so open to street photos. This won't work in CA Bay area where people are more skeptical....The SL seems like a very good camera, really nice color profile, EVF, etc. If I were to buy it one day, I'll use only my M lenses on it, and won't buy any of the bazooka SL lenses (they all are).
Has anyone compared the images from the 24-90sl lenses against m lenses?
We have still pictures in this video from an assortment of M lenses and the 24-90. In my experience, the 24-90 offers (Leica) prime lens quality with the flexibility of a zoom. The M lenses offer much faster apertures for shallow DOF and better low light performance. But apples to apples, same focal length, same aperture, same subject, you'd be hard pressed to see a difference between the two. The 24-90 is really that good!
Great video
Tocallo , have you shoot with S.typ 007?
The shots he took with 24-90 were pretty ordinary, you must be able to see that. They were a little better with the M lenses.
This isn't a great showcase for the SL.
actually it looks kinda creepy. He seems nice but just the way this was shot I guess it wouldn't be the same in CA.
+1. Perhaps next-time, they can use L-mount primes.
which camera was this video shoot with? Looks amazing
Thanks. The video was shot on the Leica SL using TL lenses. If you look in the description, you can see the detailed tech notes with equipment, settings and processing.
Are the pictures straight out of the camera or processed?
more lens review please
does the leica slhave continuous autofocus for video?
Yes, it does. But, for this video we shot everything with manual focus.
Great content guys! First video I have watched from you. Never owned a Leica but have always loved the system, was just checking out some SL videos to see what it was all about. I enjoyed the way you interacted with your subjects.
I'm not sure that the SL has any real place though... That lens is just way out of line size wise, and most of your 'pro's' were simply having autofocus and a zoom. On top of that the camera is just comically large. Half of what made Leica famous was their discrete look, and that is 100% gone.
I'm sorry to say but an A9,A7RIII,A7III with many of the Zeiss or G-Master glass would just wipe the floor with this thing from every aspect. Sure it may not have the same level of refinement, but its more functional and the smaller size make is more attractive. And you still have the option to adapt M mount glass if you wanted, with better focus assist than the SL.
Thanks for the feedback! The SL is an incredibly capable camera, with unbelievable optics, exceptional image quality and perfect (and simple) ergonomics with the highest resolution and largest EVF on the market. I'd recommend you check out our various SL-related reviews on Red Dot Forum for more info and sample images:
Leica SL (601) full review:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
90-280mm SL lens review:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/04/leica-apo-vario-elmarit-sl-90-280mm-f2-8-4-lens-review-telephoto-titan-for-the-sl-typ-601/
50mm Summilux SL lens review:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2017/03/leica-summilux-sl-50mm-f1-4-asph-review-a-new-standard/
The 24-90 lens is larger than most mirrorless lenses, but not too much larger than a Nikon or Canon 24-70, while offering superior all-metal build quality, prime lens performance at every focal length, silent and fast AF, image stabilization and full weather sealing. The lens looks big because the body is smaller than a typical C or N pro body. The biggest selling point, though, is the image quality, which cannot be stressed enough. The 24-90 SL is the first zoom lens that is as good or better than *Leica* prime lenses at every focal length, at every distance, from wide-open on. Literally, the only compromise is size, which is one we are happy to make.
Leica M lenses wider than normal don't work very well on the Sony bodies, as the Sony sensors are built for retrofocus designs. 35mm and wider M lenses have an increasingly high angle of incidence, which manifests as smeary corners, vignetting and color shifts. On Leica cameras, like the SL and all digital Ms, the microlens structure is offset to accommodate for the high incident angle of M lenses. As to focus assist, the SL is as straightforward and quick as it gets. With a manual lens mounted, just tap the rear thumb joystick and the image will jump to 100% view. With the 4.4 MP EVF, nailing focus is easy, with or without focus peaking.
24-90 should be f2.8 not 2.8-4. Sorry but you should mention that. If Leica is creating that much big lens, it should be f2.8
I'll quote myself from our full review of the Leica SL (www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/):
"It’s likely that some will express concern that the new SL zooms do not feature a constant f/2.8 aperture, given what they might be used to in their Canon or Nikon lenses. I’m confident after using the lenses, any apprehension will melt away. I’ve used the equivalent zooms in Nikon and Canon and the Leica glass is in a different league with regards to both build quality and imaging performance. The one stop fall-off in max aperture over the full focal range really isn’t that significant. Here, you can see that on the 24-90, up to 50mm you’re only giving up a half stop, at most. And, the quality offered wide-open is equivalent to what you might get stopping down on the other lenses."
After tens of thousands more exposures on the SL since writing the review, I can attest that the 24-90 is the best zoom lens I've ever used from any manufacturer. It performs flawlessly at every focal length, every aperture and every distance. In fact, the quality is on par with Leica prime lenses - no easy feat. I'm absolutely willing to sacrifice a stop for perfection.
I'd happily trade the 2.8 at the longer focal lengths for better performance across the entire range. I think that what Leica just did.
It is like they are just selling the brand name with these funny prices. I tested Leica Sl. It is awesome camera built like a tank but sorry I can buy Fujifilm Gfx medium format with 65mm f2.8 lens around 8000 usd. So no thank you.
I agree with RDF. Aperture from f2.8 to f4 is a fantastic design choice, because it allows even more superb image quality, without penalties.
All best PanaLeica lenses for m4/3 have it nowadays, and Pentax takes the same approach with DA HD 20-40, also a fantastic lens.
What?? That huge of a lens is not a 2.8!!!... I like how the zoom work, but I was waiting image comparison- not a fix vs zoom.
Lol i can do single handed shooting with my M.... just wait for the dude to walk into focus...
Is there autofocus with M lens?
Some adaptors, such as the Megadap, allows autofocus with M lenses on certain camera bodies, such as the Nikon Z range. As far as I know, there is no adaptor that will allow autofocus on the L mount bodies, like the SL.
Video shoot with 11-23mm TL lens on SL body???
Only the tracking shot walking to Wynwood Walls was with the 11-23 TL. The rest of the video was shot with the 35mm f/1.4 TL on the SL.
RedDotForum ok I see, but why APSC TL lens and not SL lens?
RedDotForum so will I get same Bokeh effect in video if I shoot with the 35mm f1.4 on CL/TL2 camera? Can M4/3 camera Panasonic GX85/G85 get same effect?
When shooting in 4K, the SL uses no pixel interpolation. So, one pixel on the sensor is one pixel in the final video. This results in very sharp capture. Coincidentally, the 8 MP cropped area is almost the same as Super35, which is the standard for motion picture. Super35 is about the same dimensions as APS-C. The TL lenses are APS-C, and work beautifully for video. The SL lenses are awesome, but much larger, making handheld shooting like this challenging.
Similar, I suppose. The CL and TL2 will use a smaller capture area than the SL when shooting in 4K. M4/3 is also smaller than APS-C. A large part of the look also comes from the 35 f/1.4 TL lens. Just about this whole video was shot wide open, with an ND filter on the lens to knock down the exposure.
I swapped my entire collection of EOS pro gear to leica M, having a fixed focal length forces you to work in a different way, the 24-90 is way to big, and its simply impossible to be as sharp as a fixed lens plus the DOF as f1.4 50mm is amazing not to mention the 50 f0.95
For sure, the M lenses are much more compact and do offer faster apertures vs. the 24-90 zoom. But, you'd be surprised just how sharp the 24-90 actually is. It is the first zoom lens we've seen that is as good as Leica primes at matching focal lengths. The 90-280 SL was the second. :)
more videos like this ! cheers!
Good info, thanks.
the 24-90 is a bad ass lens for sure. I feel it loses the Leica shooting style though(out of the way inconspicuous) . With my M10 i shoot as low key as possible. I travel to miami constantly to check up on my rental property. Maybe next time we can go shoot Luis
a zoom lens always going to be more convenient if you're just going to shoot where you are. but from my years of shooting with m cameras and lenses is, you know the lens you're shooting with and you know what's going to be in your frame wherever you stand. you position yourself where you need to be before looking through the lens.
This is certainly true. And, it also applies to shooting with a zoom. You just don't have to switch lenses to before moving to a new position.
your reply shows you don't get my point.
what was the video shot on?
The video was shot on a Leica SL (Typ 601). Check the video description for full tech notes.
oops sorry...
Looks like the SL and it's glass offer the highest video quality for those who can afford it
whats the benefit of this leica over the lighter, cheaper but yet much higher resolution a7r2?
A few advantages of the SL over the A7r2:
- simpler/more intuitive UI
- better build quality
- better EVF (4.4MP with large magnification = best EVF on market)
- faster AF
- better native lenses
- usable with *all* M lenses (Sony has issues with wide angle M lenses)
- also compatible with R and S lenses with native adapters
RedDotForum cheers for the reply. the first 3 points are valid... but hardly worth the extra $3000+ just for the small difference on those 3 things. the lenses argument doesnt stand up... since sony has tons more lenses aswell as being able to adapt tons of others like canon even with autofocus. plus the sony offers higher resolution and is much lighter. maybe im missing something but the leica has overall worse features for more money... doesnt add up
You really need to try the SL for yourself. No amount of spec comparison will convince you. Getting one in your hand, shooting it, then looking at the files... that usually does the trick. I'd also encourage you to read our full Leica SL review on Red Dot Forum:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
It is worth it. Leica's cameras are a different league of use, material and design philosophy. Try, and you will understand, especially if using the camera and lenses daily, or a few times during the week. Or if you think system cameras are too much, just try Sony RX1 and Leica Q, and compare design, feeling, and output. Any price difference is paid off in use over the years, and in amount and quality of pictures obtained. If you are only a holiday or a Sunday afternoon shooter, though, then any modern m4/3 camera with a fine small lens will do, especially with PanaLeica lenses. No need for Sony whatsoever.
Zvonimir Tosic lol im a professional shooting and use either canon full frame or sony dslr or mirrorless with L lenses. i still dont see the benefit of the leica... im sure u are aware of the new sony a9 (and the r and s versions that will inevitably come soon)... they make way more than the leica into a smaller better package. sorry but leica is just a brand marketing its history it makes no logical sense to buy the leica over competion available
I LOVE LEICA
This video could be called "A Leica M shooter discovers the convenience of a zoom lens" :p
Oh and I really don't understand the appeal of modern Leicas in comparison to Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji but that is another subject! (i own an M6 and some lenses but use a Canon professionally so I am not anti-Leica, I am anti rip off)
I suppose you're right about the alternate title. :) For many M shooters, getting *Leica* prime lens quality in a zoom hasn't been an easy endeavor. Many "pro-level" AF zooms are just not that great, or have particular weaknesses (soft wide open, excessive vignetting, smeary corners at the wide end, etc). The 24-90 SL has no such weakness. It actually is prime lens quality in a zoom.
There is a value in the Leica SL vs Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fuji, etc. I can think of several reasons for me personally:
1) The build quality and simple ergonomics. The camera feels great and reassuring to use. Everything is metal, not plastic. It is a pleasure to use.
2) The Leica SL lenses. SL lenses are incredible performers. The 24-90 and 90-280 zooms are the two best zoom lenses I've ever used. The upcoming fixed lenses will push this level of performance even further. You can't mount an SL lens on any other camera.
3) Almost universal lens compatibility. By my last estimation, you can mount more than 200 different lenses on the SL, including Leica M, Leica R, Leica S, Leica TL, Nikon, Canon EF, Contax, Hasselblad, Pentax 67, not to mention PL mount cine lenses.
4) The EVF is astonishingly good. No one else has a 4.4MP EVF in a mirrorless camera. It is the largest, clearest electronic viewfinder I've used. The only comparison in the DSLR world would be the Leica S, which is a medium format camera and has a class-leading viewfinder.
5) The image quality is incredible. The color, nuance, three-dimensionality and per-pixel acuity of the SL are amazing. Recently, someone tested Canon EF lenses on the Leica SL, a Canon 5Ds and a Sony A7RII. The results were surprising as the Canon lenses produced the best results on the Leica body. The Canon had "average performance" and the Sony suffered from "soft corners." While no one disputes Leica's acumen with lenses, very few give them credit they deserve for their digital imaging expertise.
Look, there are plenty of great cameras on the market. No one is arguing that. But, before dismissing the SL as a "rip-off", I'd suggest trying one for yourself. Leica has a test drive program so that you can do so. The reality is that the SL is priced no higher than top of the line Canon or Nikons. And in fact, Leica just introduced a 1.9% 36 month lease program for working professionals that puts the SL squarely in the affordable column at about $200/mo.
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/10/leica-offers-special-lease-program-for-professional-photographers/
I didn't know I would get a reply and I didn't want to reply at first but I will. So I will reply to your points one by one.
1) the pro DSLRs that I use for work (canon) are all metal that being said, contrary to what most people think, if you want the best shock resistance plastic bodies are better because they absorb shocks and, if the body happens to crack it is easier and cheaper to replace hence, in terms of durability and if you are not planning to use super heavy lenses that could bend the front of the camera, plastic is really not that bad.
2) Those two zooms might be the best you have ever tried but I doubt that you could see the difference between the image quality of the Canon&Nikon zooms vs the Leica zoom in anything but a super large photo exhibition print (or a computer zoomed at 200-400% !). Also, have you ever been to a photo exhibition in the past 20-30 years and complained about the pictures not being sharp? I know I haven't. Still on this point, it is not difficult to make a great lens, it is expensive. Leica is no better in optics than Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Zeiss etc. in fact, I would say that I suspect that they are not as good but, because they charge ludicrous amount of money for their lenses, they can add elements or coatings that others just cannot add without increasing prices and loosing market shares. Recently both Sigma and Zeiss have entered the super high end (price is no object) compartment of the market and have done superb lenses. Also, we are talking law of diminishing return here, paying 3x the price for sometimes 5-10% more quality which you could only see on 1sqm prints is not worth it for most people and almost all pros. Lastly, a. it is much easier to engineer lenses for mirrorless cameras than for SLRs especially wide angles (which explains why for a long period of time, M lenses would beat the SLR lenses, now not so much anymore), b. this advantage almost vanishes for long focal length lenses.
3) Yeah ... well same as many mirrorless cameras such as the Sony A7 line.
4) Yes that is what I have heard, still doesn't match an optical view finder for quality of the image. Also, although that is important, you can live without ... and lastly that doesn't compensate for the fact that it is a very bulky and heavy mirrorless camera, it misses slightly the point. At this size I would rather have a DSLR or a medium format mirrorless camera such as the Hasselblad or the Fuji recently announced.
5) That one is a mystery for me as Leica sensors are known for being good but not excellent and Leica is probably the last brand to have jumped into the digital band wagon. I haven't heard about the test you mention, which cameras had anti-aliasing filters, which didn't? what were the resolution of the sensors? at what ISO? what was the dynamic range of the different cameras? what were the autofocus speeds? In real life you generally can't have the sharpest possible image (so absolute sharpness doesn't really count) and you need to compromise, the most important thing is AF speeds (otherwise you miss the shot), then you have ISO performance and shutter vibration etc.
And then you have things like: can the camera work with flashes and TTL on Leica cameras is terrible.
Lastly, you don't buy something because you can get good finance on it. You are not going to pay twice the price for a house because you can get a cheap mortgage loan (which you probably wouldn't get because the bank would send a valuer to the property but that is another story), you are going to get a house which is well priced in its market and then you are going to get a loan ... which is probably going to be as cheap or cheaper. Same for everything in life including cameras and lenses.
Photoandcargeek I currently own a Nikon D750, Sony A7S, the Leica M-P and a good collection of native glass for each system. My photos are mainly shot in raw and processed through LR. The pictures from the Leica in most conditions are usually better. Well, better colors, contrast and bokeh, which require less work in post. Some people would be happy with a $100 bottle of wine, and there are others that believe Mouton Rothschild is good value. Each to their own but to me, the Leica experience and that signature look make it a worthy investment.
F430F1 OK, if that works for you ... I have access and use cameras from all manufacturers as I can get most cameras just by calling a manufacturer or my pro camera gear store and ask them for a loaner and, if that doesn't work, I can call another pro photographer and ask him/her if I can try their camera... and I have heard people say what you said, I strongly disagree so I have happened to have run a blind test: which picture comes from which camera? Well, if you do it properly ie same light, same focal length, pro lenses (fixed focal or very high quality zooms), same aperture and low ISO ... results are inconclusive. If you tell them the brands of camera then results start to change, more so with amateurs than with pros, because they are influenced by what they think should be better. Oh and you have paid so much more for your Leica than for any of your other cameras that your opinion is also biased just like when you read online reviews by consumers you rarely see people saying that they made a bad choice, most often than not, they claim that what they have is better than what the competitors make. You will notice that I never said that Canon cameras are the best, Canon cameras are the ones I own and use for work but I know they have flaws, there is no perfect camera ... i have a slight preference for how Nikon feel in the hand, Nikon have better dynamic range (until 5D4 and 80D), Sony mirrorless are incredible for video and super light, I love using my Fuji X100S (that I used to shoot my uncle's wedding as the non official photographer and under cover pro) ... on weekends or for leisure, I often don't need more than an M6 TTL or a Nikon 35Ti and a roll of film and I enjoy seeing the imperfection and character of film.
Anyway, i am getting lost here, for a pro who doesn't spend his life doing studio photography, Leica is not an option. And, to be honest, aside from medium format users, I don't know any pro who shoots Leica APS-C or full frame for work... which probably means that they don't think it is the right tool and that their clients are happy with pictures taken with other cameras.
F430F1 OK, if that works for you ... I have access and use cameras from all manufacturers as I can get most cameras just by calling a manufacturer or my pro camera gear store and ask them for a loaner and, if that doesn't work, I can call another pro photographer and ask him/her if I can try their camera... and I have heard people say what you said, I strongly disagree so I have happened to have run a blind test: which picture comes from which camera? Well, if you do it properly ie same light, same focal length, pro lenses (fixed focal or very high quality zooms), same aperture and low ISO ... results are inconclusive. If you tell them the brands of camera then results start to change, more so with amateurs than with pros, because they are influenced by what they think should be better. Oh and you have paid so much more for your Leica than for any of your other cameras that your opinion is also biased just like when you read online reviews by consumers you rarely see people saying that they made a bad choice, most often than not, they claim that what they have is better than what the competitors make. You will notice that I never said that Canon cameras are the best, Canon cameras are the ones I own and use for work but I know they have flaws, there is no perfect camera ... i have a slight preference for how Nikon feel in the hand, Nikon have better dynamic range (until 5D4 and 80D), Sony mirrorless are incredible for video and super light, I love using my Fuji X100S (that I used to shoot my uncle's wedding as the non official photographer and under cover pro) ... on weekends or for leisure, I often don't need more than an M6 TTL or a Nikon 35Ti and a roll of film and I enjoy seeing the imperfection and character of film.
Anyway, i am getting lost here, for a pro who doesn't spend his life doing studio photography, Leica is not an option. And, to be honest, aside from medium format users, I don't know any pro who shoots Leica APS-C or full frame for work... which probably means that they don't think it is the right tool and that their clients are happy with pictures taken with other cameras.
Photo Tip: Experienced low light photographers know, to keep your elbows in to reduce shake. Rule Exception, If your are using an on camera flash and you need the light on the other side. (or) If the camera is on a tripod. Tip Two: Breath in and than Exhale. At the end of the exhale press the shutter gently.
Same things we learned at Parris Island when getting trained on The M-16.
Just give me a mini SL for using m lenses. Preferably with a rangefinder placed evf. An evil M!!!
I put my Q and my M on sale for SL :)
The SL can certainly make good use of your M lenses while giving you the responsiveness of the Q. Hope you enjoy the SL as much as we do.
If the zoom lens is so amazing, why doesn't the SL have more megapixels?
I own an M and a few M lenses so it beats the crap out of me why some insists on no camera strap!!! you're carrying $12K with no safety net! I can do one hand shooting with an M lens. High F value and zone focusing will do some magic.
I (David) agree with you Becker. Luis has his own style and I give him grief about it too. Constantly. :-)
it doesn't matter why they do, it's their choice. as long as they're not shooting with your camera or lenses, who cares?
@@RedDotForum More films with Luis, please :)
When I was using a strap it was always in the way, and got snagged on things once in a while.
Since getting rid of straps I feel much safer and shoot in a more fluid manner.
I have never dropped an unstrapped camera...and I do a lot of action sports/event photography.
I thought you are John Snow
1:05 Miami Gothic
Those 24-90 shots look like basic iPhone snaps
Dude do you know zone focusing means? Hmmm one hand shooting
Thanks for this. The size of the 24-90 is ridonculous. I'm sure it is an amazing lens, but there is a reason I ditched Canon zooms for Leica M primes.
That babe from Belarus looked lovely!!
M lenses all day long
What an absolute scrub lol
f2.8-4 = fail
Not sure we would agree with this assertion. The 24-90 SL is the best zoom lens I've ever used, matching or exceeding the quality of many fixed focal length *Leica* lenses. After shooting tens of thousands of images with the SL over the last year or so, I can honestly say that the one stop difference at 90mm isn't even a factor in actual use. I'd recommend checkout out the full SL review for more info on this lens, with plenty of sample images:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
Says the person who has never touched a SL w/ 24-90mm
what a joker !!!
It's not really clear if you were shooting stopped-down or wide open with M-lenses. Did that effect shooting focus? Did you use Focus-Peaking for accuracy? What about TOUCH AF on the touchscreen with the 24-90? Poor review.
For interior shooting in the bakery, the M lenses were shot wide-open. Outside, stopped down a bit. We're not fans of focus peaking. The 4.4MP EVF on the SL is clear enough that you can achieve manual focus visually. Some people will just use the full view, but you can also tap the rear thumb button once to magnify to 100% to really dial in focus. Then just half press the shutter to come back to full view.
We also don't use the Touch AF for handheld shooting. The SL is designed like an SLR. This is how we use it. Touch AF can be useful for tripod-mounted static photography like architecture though.
Sorry you didn't like the video. It's wasn't meant to be a review. Rather, it is just a way to convey the different experiences of shooting with the 24-90 zoom versus that of shooting with M lenses on the Leica SL. If you want to read a full in-depth review of the Leica SL, I'd suggest you check out our full review here:
www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/01/leica-sl-typ-601-review-a-professional-mirrorless-camera/
Boring subjects, boring shots, poor color grading, bad photography