|
Michael S. |
Austria
Comments
 |  |  |
| Steamin' Mad by ahrensjt from Angered Subjects (Street Photography) | Smile by Olymguy from Ultra Asian Indian Female Faces | Space Shuttle Cockpit- by vbuhay from Aircraft Control Stick |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
2457FeatureWhat is equivalence?
Question is:
Is it worth $5952?!!!
Cause that's the price Sony is asking in Europe - so almost $1500 more.
(5300 Euros converted to US dollars by todays exchange rate).
Hehe...still have it in good shape and still working.
As well as the Olympus E100rs - also in top condition and running too.
;-)
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
@Tical:
According: "Enjoy, though I’m not sure you’ll get what he means...".
Oh...another insult, wow. The only problem here is your ego, don't know why you do feel so inferior, but I don't care. Live onwards in your fantasy world and as you are not able to discuss - I'm out, enough of your arrogance.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
@ Tical:
What's your problem by posting: "I'll skip replying to a pathetic moron who's infesting this tread." ???
Out of arguments or are you always insulting people?
First - I've NEVER said or wrote that all lenses for CanNikon are inferior to those of Leica, I just compared what is possible with right now being available - 24-90, 90-280 and 50mm prime, there are no more SL-lenses so far.
So I took the one closest in range - 24-90SL vs 24-70 CanNikon - that's it.
Second - I'm not fanboy, I wrote too what is not so good in the SL system, no blind praising.
Third - nobody forces you to buy a Leica product, so let other people buy what they do like to enjoy their personal fun in photography.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
@Tical - the only "simple" here are your posts. I compared Leica camera + Leica lens vs CanNIkon + CanNikon lens, a fair comparison. You're always constructing arguments and flaming other brands that you don't own yourself.
I for my part don't care - started digital Olympus in 2000, changed to Nikon in 2002 until 2015 and now Leica. The SL IS a workhorse not a showcase piece and does its pros and cons - as with everthing in life.
So stop whining around and flaming other brands.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
nerd2 - now you're constructing "excuses". Why do so many people do have a problem accepting that those CanNikon pro zoom lenses are optically not so good as those from Leica? You're paying twice the price, so would you not expect a better optical performance with the Leica lenses?
There is no need for searching "excuses" that those f2.8 L lenses or Nikon Pro lenses are not as good, you do pay less.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
@Tical - again, I do have tested, full frame NIKON DSLR + 24-70 f2.8 vs. Leica SL + 24-90 SL lens.
If you take for example a shot of a large group of people - 30, 40 or so with let's say f5.6 at 24mm - you would be surprised (it not "shocked") how much better the images taken with the SL/SL24-90mm look especially on the far left and far right sight than taken with DSLR and 24-70mm top zoom-lens.
So plz - as you don't have made this comparison for yourself ever in your life, stop posting "it's not true" - you simply have not seen the huge difference.
And if you do compare some portrait shots made - 70mm f4.0 with DSLR and 70mm SL, f4.0 - there is a CLEAR difference in favor of the SL between them according, sharpness, rendering, bokeh, details...although both cameras do have the same 24MP like a D750 or D610.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
Oh - and I forgot to mention - the quiet (compared) to my DSLR (D800E) shutter release. Very useful for me - have done lots of work during an opera festival - always been a problem if standing close to the audience with an DSLR and its quite loud mirror slap.
And of course I'm running the latest SL-firmware and eagerly waiting for the big (so I've been told) firmeware update upcoming in March.
Michael S.: As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
Good Evening!
Yes, main reason have been the superior lens quality, but to be fair - you do pay twice the price for about the same lens. 😊
As an actual SL-user I can say the review is 90% very fair and describing the pro and cons of that camera-system correctly.
What I'm missing is a clear statement that the lenses are superior compared to the ones from Nikon and Canon - like the 24-70 or 70-200. THAT's actually the part where the SL systems shines - and I've used NIKON's finest lenses for 15 years and its best cameras of the period of time.
The two main drawbacks for me, so far, of the SL-system are:
1) AF-C takes too long (compared to top-DSLR) to start following and your percentage of keepers is quite low.
2) The SF-64 and SF-40 flashes (rebranded products) are not as good as you are used too like getting with the Nikon system.
And all that whining about size and weight - a D5 for D810 with 24-70 f2.8, SB-910 flash on it is neither small or light weight too. Seeing the better performance of the SL with the 24-90SL lens really compensates for the little difference.
Truebar: I downloaded image nr. 57. It reads iso500 on f 1.4. Zoomed in into the face of the standing woman, I must say Im not impressed with the image quality. I thought the image was very soft, and noisy really.
Actually you can't blame the SL or the best 50mm lens on the market if the man behind the camera does not nail the focus.
(unknown member): You guys can keep all this publicity, but that camera still take pictures that look a lot worse (specially in any kind of shadows even at base ISO) of what you can get with half of the money that camera cost and Olympus is not the only one with weather sealing. Its doesn't matter how many article you guys published about this camera, the camera still fails to provide IQ of the same level as Nikon, Canon, Sony or Fuji and you can get weather sealing with this others brands too.
First - MShot - STOP insulting me..., ok?!
Second - AGAIN, I've not replied here to write negative about Olympus - used that products too for a long time, I just posted because of wrong statements made technical wise, nothing more. And a D610 for example is almost half the price of the EM1-Mk II and also full frame, weighs not that much more, so you won't have to buy a D5.
Besides that, a full frame sensor not only has 4times the size of m4/3 it also does have larger photosites and they do ALWAYS catch more light than those of the m4/3 sensor, no matter what apertures you do compare giving you more dynamic range too.
And you know, this conversation is over now for me, I'm out - as personal insults are coming up - again - I repeat, USE what you LIKE, I'm NOT posting here to make any brand bad...by the way - using a m4/3 sensor still myself in the body of the Leica Dlux type 109.
;-)
(unknown member): You guys can keep all this publicity, but that camera still take pictures that look a lot worse (specially in any kind of shadows even at base ISO) of what you can get with half of the money that camera cost and Olympus is not the only one with weather sealing. Its doesn't matter how many article you guys published about this camera, the camera still fails to provide IQ of the same level as Nikon, Canon, Sony or Fuji and you can get weather sealing with this others brands too.
And Ab Latchin you can go on and on showing your lack of knowledge according basic physics. A larger sensor collects more photons, does not matter if you exchange aperture for lower iso. It's that simple.
And to make it clear, I'm not a fan boy like you, I don't care what brand I do use for work. I started with the Oly 20p, than Oly E1 and changed to Nikon with the release of the D100, dumped my Olympus equipment.
(unknown member): You guys can keep all this publicity, but that camera still take pictures that look a lot worse (specially in any kind of shadows even at base ISO) of what you can get with half of the money that camera cost and Olympus is not the only one with weather sealing. Its doesn't matter how many article you guys published about this camera, the camera still fails to provide IQ of the same level as Nikon, Canon, Sony or Fuji and you can get weather sealing with this others brands too.
Actually used D800E over 3 years, EM1 mk1 and had a Sony A7s for testing.
And only in your dreams that Hi-Res mode will beat a Sony A7R II with a proper lens. And who cares - nobody hinds me takine a Pano with any DSLR and even produce 1Gigapixel large file.
And I was not talking about APS-C sized DSLRs but of full frame versions like D5.
(unknown member): You guys can keep all this publicity, but that camera still take pictures that look a lot worse (specially in any kind of shadows even at base ISO) of what you can get with half of the money that camera cost and Olympus is not the only one with weather sealing. Its doesn't matter how many article you guys published about this camera, the camera still fails to provide IQ of the same level as Nikon, Canon, Sony or Fuji and you can get weather sealing with this others brands too.
Ahhh...no.
If anything of what you wrote would be even close to reality, many large newspapers, news agencies and so on would have dumped their N or C gear as Olympus' equipment costs less and weighs less, which would be welcomed by the pro-photographers too.
Nice Ad for Olympus...but keep in mind - shooting at f5-f7 with the m4/3 sensor means shooting at f10-f14 with a full format camera, so getting a quite sharp picture is kudos to far larger depth of field too with that small sensor, not only the AF-capability of that camera.
;-)
Hong Chow: Looks like Nikon in a bad shape. Sad.
Not as bad as your beloved Canon!
;-)
Good move Nikon!
Better stopping than loosing too much money - Canon already showed how to throw money out of the window, no need to copy that.
;-)
And for sure 1000+ calls at the local police stations: "The Aliens are coming...".
;-)
Michael S.: Uhhh...AF accuracy, high iso IQ behind Nikon --> Canon fanboys will start to see a conspiracy against their beloved brand!
;-)
PhotoKhan - and yous is landscape. So what's your point?
And that I would call fanboy blabla:
"Rishi,
1. DPR HAS a pro-Nikon (...and a pro-Sony...) bias.
2. The reviews of the Nikon D5 and, now, of the 1DXII are a model of impartiality, professionalism and sheer technical and journalistic..."