OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
RustyBug wrote:
Gotcha at 40 vs. 60 ... compared to AF (and 24 vs. 60) performance gains. That does have me a bit curious to what AF will be like for the SL3-P. Trying to mentally apply the -P factor from my (former) M240-P (and other -P variants) and how the SL3 variant of a -P might be more "P"erformance oriented. Your point about 40 (M10R) could be equally valid to the SL3-P. Reading some of Panny's literature for the S1R II ... they cite some more "natural" color science improvements (reminiscent of HNCS language) ... and while I understand that Panny's color science and Leica's color science (future) decisions may or may not align with each other, and they may / may not be more "natural" (semantics vs. Hassy HNCS).
But, I do think that I'm hearing ya ... even if the decision between SL3 / SL3-S / SL3-P is TBD ... looking at the decision in terms of M10R vs. SL2 (rather than M11 vs. SL3) ... you're suggesting SL2 is the one to make a move on (before moving off the M10R). Of course, if an SL3-P is on its way, you know the SL4 is likely a year or so away after that. 
Also, I'd be curious to understand the readout speeds (i.e. electronic shutter / rolling shutter) diff's of the SL3 vs. SL3-P. I suspect there may be a spec diff in the bands / speeds. Getting into the weeds there, but I know that when pushing my files (i.e. where they fall apart), readout speeds can be part of the IQ puzzle as to how well they hold out. That said, I'd be curious to understand if the SL3-P / SL3 correlate to my SL2-S and M10R. Ideally, whatever move I make in the SL body will be better than my Q2, and hopefully better than the M10R (closing the gap a bit toward X2D levels)....Show more →
Yeah I think you definitely understand what I'm implying. For comparison, I'm a Nikon Z9/Z8 shooter that has a pair of Leica M cameras because I like the experience when I want to just carry a camera or do street photography. The M's I have could never replace my Nikons, but I like the option of slowing everything down and just focusing on the fundamentals of photography. I have an M8 and M 240, neither are resolution kings or known for their wide dynamic range, yet they fulfill a niche for me when I'm looking for a tendency breaker. Looking at your work, I think the M10R fits that niche. If I were a committed Leica shooter instead of a Nikon shooter who uses a Leica from time to time, I'd probably opt for the M10R because of its reliability and simplicity. I loved the M10 when I had it, but I felt I had too much equity tied into a camera that gets used infrequently.
I see your SL series system as kind of the parallel to my Nikon system. My Nikon's are my pro use bodies, they get beat up, they travel with me, they are shot in the rain and snow, and they are often exposed to salt air, mud, and sand. I need them to work, because they go where the wildlife is or where the weather is. Leica's SL system is highly rated for their weather resistance, and the L-Alliance has an amazing list of available lenses. As a wildlife shooter, I am terribly tempted by the 300-600 f/4 and could imagine pairing that with the 500mm f/5.6, the Leica 24-70 and 70-200. The limit of the Leica L system for my application is the absence of stacked or partially stacked sensors. Here the high-end Nikons, Canons, and Sony's have a huge advantage. The readout speeds are instantaneous and the AF systems are equally fast and responsive. If Leica uses the Panasonic platform to build a camera with a stacked or partially stacked sensor, then their users will be able to really take advantage of the optical benefits that the L-Alliance has to offer. I would wait to see what the SL3-P looks like, as this may be the best of all worlds.
cheers,
bruce
|
your "daft" comment about the Reporter / grip.
