[Leica] the SL first month

[cummer at netvigator.com (H&ECummer)]

Hi Doug,
Thank you for posting your thoughts on the first month with the SL. I was to 
my photo store in Hong Kong yesterday and played with an SL for the first 
time.
Visitors to Hong Kong will recognize how privileged I was to have that 
opportunity because standard practice in Hong Kong is that you pay for a 
camera and then get to play with it. There is no trying and testing. I was 
impressed by the size and weight and the very clear viewfinder but put off 
by the lack of marked control buttons. I realize that with familiarity the 
unmarked buttons wouldn?t be a problem but the lack of any AF lens except 
the honking big zoom really limits the appeal of the camera to me. I felt 
also that the price against performance - especially high ISO performance - 
was not better than my Nikons. So, I will pass for now and wait for further 
info from experienced users like yourself.
Thanks for the one month review and please keep them coming.
Cheers
Howard

Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 19:55:56 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
From: Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net <mailto:wildlightphoto at 
earthlink.net>>
To: lug at leica-users.org <mailto:lug at leica-users.org>
Subject: [Leica] the SL: first month

The SL has been in my possession for about a month now so I've gathered a 
few of my thoughts about this camera, and how it compares with my current 
equipment, the Sony a7II.

General impressions: the SL is a very solid, well-made camera. It's 
significantly heavier than the a7II, and it fits the hand extremely well 
especially when wearing gloves (which I cannot say for the a7II). The 
viewfinder is outstanding, with one complaint which I'll get to. The camera 
overall is very responsive and reasonably quiet, the files have rich full 
color and will take a lot of abuse without falling apart and the noise at 
higher ISO settings is manageable. The noise pattern, unlike the a7II, is 
quite pleasing.

The stuff I don't like: the viewfinder's default mode is 'automatic 
brightness', which can be overridden temporarily to 'exposure preview'. It 
always reverts to 'automatic brightness' after each exposure. I'd much 
prefer the 'exposure preview' mode to be sticky. This is how I've set up the 
a7II; this way I can use the entire viewfinder as an exposure meter in 
manual mode. It makes spot, full-field and matrix modes look primitive and 
IMHO is among the really big advantages of an EVF. Leica needs to do a 
firmware update to fix a few other issues notably lens profiles so I hope 
they fix this as well and SOON.

My biggest complaint about the SL: no sensor stabilization. I'm smitten with 
the a7II's sensor stabilization. I can use all of my old lenses, stabilized. 
It's allowed me to push a lot of boundaries while my muscles have weakened 
with age and abuse, and are no longer as steady as they used to be. The 
Leica SL doesn't have sensor stabilization. In good light when I use a big 
Series 5 Gitzo my FD 500mm L is brilliant on the SL. Gorgeous colors, easy 
to focus, and with software correction for lateral chromatic aberration it's 
sharp sharp sharp sharp sharp.

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/anatidae/anas/gwteal04.html 
<http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/anatidae/anas/gwteal04.html>

Using the lens on the a7II, I can brace the lens against my truck's window 
frame in sh!tty rainy light with wind shaking the truck and the images are 
nearly as good as with the SL in good light on the Gitzo. The Sony's colors 
aren't as rich, the files don't take as much abuse, but they're sharp in 
conditions that don't work with the SL.

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/accipitridae/circus/noharr14.html 
<http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/accipitridae/circus/noharr14.html>

I can partially compensate with the SL's excellent high-ISO capabilities

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/picidae/sphyrapicus/rbsaps03.html 
<http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/picidae/sphyrapicus/rbsaps03.html> (ISO 
3200)

but... the Sony's stabilization makes magnified focussing with the 500mm 
lens much easier, and fast shutter speeds mean I don't show rain streaks 
like I can with the Sony's slower shutter speeds (i.e., the Northern Harrier 
photo above).

What the SL can do the Sony can't touch: the camera is quick and responsive 
at all shutter speeds. I can make the a7II adequately responsive by enabling 
electronic first shutter curtain but with my mechanical lenses it's good 
only up to 1/1000 sec. At faster shutter speeds I get uneven exposure. The 
SL is quick, quiet and responsive at every shutter speed.

The Sony is a sturdy, reliable camera, the SL will take a beating that would 
destroy most other cameras.

The SL's LCD doesn't show nose prints. I tried to deliberately make nose 
prints.  Can't do it.

There are numerous little differences that come down to personal preference, 
for example the SL allows me to change shutter speeds while in magnified 
view, with a dial that's almost a real shutter speed dial.  The Sony's dial 
moves the magnified box.

The Sony leaves a lot more stuff in my wallet. Aside from the purchase 
price, spare batteries don't cost $250 each and I can get them at Fry's.  
I'm struck by a comparison of the a7II with the Canon FD 300mm f/4 L and the 
SL with the 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R.  Either lens can be used on either camera 
but this is an extreme for illustrative purposes.  The a7II + FD 300 L is a 
decent camera; the lens now, with digital image processing not available in 
1990, is better than when it was new.  It's not an APO-Telyt, but quite 
good.  The a7II+300L is about 2 kg.  The SL+280 APO is about 3 kg, 50% 
heavier than the a7II combo.  

Did I mention the Sony leaves a lot more stuff in my wallet?  There's an 
order of magnitude difference in the entry ticket.  An ORDER OF MAGNITUDE.  
Is there an order of magnitude difference in the output?  An order of 
magnitude difference in image sales potential?  Given sales lately I'd have 
to answer an emphatic NO to the last question, which leaves the subjective 
and unquantifiable differences.  Not to mention being able to say "oh 
shucks" and head over to eBay if I drop the camera in the ocean instead of 
panicking about the expense of repairs and the months of downtime when the 
280 develops a sticky aperture.

Except for two features the SL is much more enjoyable to use.  The first is 
the SL's #%@! automatic viewfinder brightness default.  Please Leica, make 
the 'exposure preview' mode a sticky option! The second is the a7II's sensor 
stabilization.  This is where I see the biggest differences between the SL's 
output and the a7II's output.  This feature on the a7II pushed me off the 
buy/wait fence.

Both of these cameras have numerous capabilities that I haven't begun to 
try, but for my uses the Leica SL isn't quite "there", and I say this as a 
die-hard Leica user for the last 35 years. A firmware update with an option 
to make the 'exposure preview' mode sticky would be a serious threat to my 
wallet; given a hardware upgrade with a stabilized sensor, resistance would 
be futile.

For a first-generation product it's outstanding and with the two fixes I've 
mentioned I'd be ecstatic.  As it is when I grab a camera to head out the 
door it's most likely the a7II for the lower weight, the stabilized sensor, 
the exposure preview viewfinder and the much lower worry about loss or 
damage.


Doug Herr
Birdman of Sacramento
http://www.wildlightphoto.com <http://www.wildlightphoto.com/>
http://doug-herr.fineartamerica.com <http://doug-herr.fineartamerica.com/>