kpaddler: And of course no one has any problem with that radio active orange sweater
So you only shoot jpegs?
At the rate she's shooting images, you can say she's not of the film era.
HowaboutRAW: Why the lossy raws?
It's not really "artifacting" I'm seeing, but that's there too.
No factual evidence, except what is easy to see. That's in the "mid tones". And in fact DPR's own examples on this issue demonstrate the problem. It ain't just edges.
I don't know why you brought up "lowest tones"--well except as distraction.
It's a look.
It can be solved with Selective Colour in Photoshop CS.
colour is not important I guess.
Why the lossy raws?
schaki: Leica wasn't the only ones to overprice their cameras. Contax did the same thing with their digital compact cameras before Kyocera which manufactured those, after the design by Contax, decided to withdraw from the camera market.For the Contax TVS Digital which was available in champagne-color and black they charged $899 respectively a grand, $999 for the black in 2003.It shall be said though that Contax included a leather-case and a simple IR remote control. The battery charger was a simple AC-charger with contact which you plug into the camera.The Contax TVSD used a common 5mp 1/1.8" sensor and a pretty much standard, though with near superb performance, 35-105mm f2.8 - 4.8 zoomlens. Most of the camera-body was in Titanium. The Lcd is only 1.6".I didn't buy a TVSD back then but a used one at a much lower price in 2013, I think it was.It is a photographers' camera with a very much intuitive UI and good handling overall.
And how much did a Canon G3 retail for in 2003?
At the end of 2001, I bought a G2, it cost something like $700.
RStyga: They are a long way from debugging this camera. Instead of fixing some bugs, they release more "features" in an effort to catch up with competition and improve marketability. Newsflash, they are light years behind competition... Not that they take notice.. If they fix the bugs, reduce by around 50% the ridiculous and unjustified prices of their lenses and 30-40% of the T body they can hope to compete in the mirrorless (DSLM) market. Until that time, they'll be the stuff of ...laughter (sorry, the "45-minute polished stuff of laughter).
Care to list some of the bugs? And I"ve used this camera.
"unjustified lens prices", um get back to me when some other party can match the 50mm M f2.0 APO. But the 23mm T could be better for colour.
The SL is a very nice camera, and retailers are selling all that Leica can ship, this will be true for the next year.
Thorgrem: It's a shame it's so expansive. I think it looks like a great camera to use. Although the next one needs a EVF.
It's odd to use, the add-on EVF is not great.
The 23mm lens doesn't have good enough colour.
HeyItsJoel: Color sucks.
Let us wait on raws, and samples shot under very different lighting.
ijustloveshooting: so sad to see sony is letting noobs handle these beauties,,, even if they'd sent me this lens, i'd create a set of photos that may cause many preorders...
irony detector turned off.
Robert Kempen: Why is firmware updates a problem all of a sudden?
Is it not wonderful that Leica or any other manufacturer continuously improves the firmware etc for their cameras - this does not cost you any money after all - the manufacturer is providing sterling after sales service and gets bashed on this site for doing so!
By the way, the SL worked just fine as released but any improvements are worth having are they not? This holds true for any device that has firmware!
Just my opinion, but the comments are starting to border on childishness
Why does the SL have the best EVF if it's a "relic"?
"insults"? When? Pointing out that you've not used the SL and that it is about the size of a Nikon D810 is not an insult. Pointing out that many people like the camera is not an insult. (Photographyblog just yesterday is the latest example that I know of).
Challenges to your unsupported claims, or supported ones, are not necessarily insults.
Geodesiq: It's a bloated, overpriced, underfeatured trophy camera for insecure photographers more interested in their image than the image. You can almost justify the camera price but $5k for a 24-90 zoom??? Does anyone in their right mind think they'll see any difference between this and a typical high end zoom from the competition for 1/3 - 1/4 the price??? The Sony a7rII beats this in every way.
I checked another example of the M 90mm f/2.0; it too was unremarkable--used an M240.
Walsh_uk: Sitting on the fence waiting for the Sigma FE series.. At these Sony prices I can wait another year.
Well there's Zeiss Batis.
Except I avoided insults, it's you who are heavy with the putdowns.
Still haven't used the SL I have to imagine.
Photoman: Sorry Canon. You left a lot of 1D X customers disappointed and if there not shooting sports, you will see customer buying current/future mirrorless cameras.
With your logic, sort of, until you got to the joke about the A7RII.
HowaboutRAW: Cool CFast, enough with pins and nice to see an option other than XQD.
SD cards are subject to physical breakage in ways other cards avoid.
I think on a bigger body, like the D5S, there may come a time when one directly plugs a low profile USB 3 drive into the system--behind the door. Those are even faster, and cheap.
Right, but that was in my original point, so you've agreed with me.
Open format, very fast, versus faster (if everything keeps up) but limited to a couple of manufacturers--so far Sony and Lexar.
SATA v PCIe depends on the guts too.
I was under the impression that Sony still controlled XQD, I guess it could change, or have changed.