Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/10/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] BIG new Leica
From: rgacpa at (Robert Adler)
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:26:16 -0700
References: <>

I deliberated and researched quite thoroughly on whether to pre-order the
SL (body only) to replace my M240. Here's why I decided not to:

1. No in body stabilization. Sony has it, Fuji has it, Oly has it. Why
didn't Leica do it?? Perhaps because as said by Leica they started this
project 3 years ago before in body stabilization was available in most
mirrorless cameras and then could not redesign the camera to do it. So all
R and M lenses cannot be stabilized.

2. Nothing definitive is available from Leica as to evidence that corner
problems with wide angles on other mirrorless, full frame cameras have been
solved. All they are saying is that wide angles will be able to be mounted
on the camera, even when asked specifically about corner problems with some
of the best Leica WA's. So for me this would be a step backwards if my
wides did not work as well as on the M240.

3. High (and I mean 12,500 and above) ISO performance has not been

4. There is no ability to stop the camera from taking a noise reducing
image after long exposure shots. I really need this (and Sony and Nikon
allow this: perhaps others do too).

So I will be waiting for other's results. I really don't want to pay $7,500
for a better EVF with the possibility of reduced WA performance. I will be
watching with interest as others tell us about their purchase.

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at>

> That is a somewhat frustrating first look review from them for me. I used
> to follow their reviews on many brands where they provided good features
> description, handling and impressions even in first looks, I think. Perhaps
> they will add more later.
> Their comment on the default DNG profile (and default JPEG rendering)
> reflects that it was not yet optimised when they tested. Adobe will
> doubtless address that (as they have just done in the newest raw processing
> for S (Typ 007) DNG's).
> Re the banding comments, when I read this is a problem at base ISO if you
> push the file by five or six EV, I feel like this has got  into the realm
> of theoretical analysis absent practical use of the camera. How many of us
> would expect no loss of quality in that circumstance?
> It doesn't matter about the equipment brand, surely this is hardly relevant
> in practical use? Personally I have sometimes been surprised at just how
> much information is in the shadows from  the M (Typ 240) and S2 for
> example. But if I needed to fix an underexposure by that much it would need
> to be a Pulitzer Prize candidate image for me to admit that I got the
> exposure that wrong in the first place.
> I don't think that direct camera to camera performance comparisons are
> necessarily sensible either when they are not even being compared with the
> same optics for example. The 'real world samples' they provide were
> evidently with a Summilux 35 (unknown model). Must be an M lens with
> adapter I guess.
> Maybe if the review is updated to talk about the actual camera features and
> their experience in using it with the first to be released lens It might be
> more interesting/relevant for me in any case.
> No-one even has a serial camera yet as far as I know yet there is no
> shortage of criticism it seems. Maybe the 'it's too big, Leica should.....'
>  theme is lessening at least ;-) DPreview bear some responsibility for
> influencing that with a misleading image too, as I recall.
> --------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Paul Roark <roark.paul at>
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at>
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 08:39:35 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Leica] BIG new Leica
> See
>  "[The Leica SL's] shadow performance can be significantly undermined by
> the hard-to-correct-for banding."
> Paul
> <>
> Cheers
> Geoff
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information

Bob Adler

Replies: Reply from mark at (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] BIG new Leica)
In reply to: Message from hopsternew at (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] BIG new Leica)