Going back from GFX100S to SL2

[fmueller]

think for me it comes down mainly to the enjoyment of using the equipment and the lenses, and the GFX for some reason just didn't inspire me to pick it up and go out shooting like the Leicas do....

That matters. The Leica interface and quality is quite something.

I moved away from the GFX100 to the Hasselblad 907 and CVFII 50C, because I wanted a dual purpose back that could also fit on my tech cam, and the Hasselblad interface and color science are really to my liking (second time with that 50mp sensor, first time with the Fuji GFX50S)

I added an SL2 for negative scanning, with a side benefit of being able to use some old M lenses on the SL2. Then things got outta hand... 2 more Leica bodies and a few additional M lenses. I think I'm having a near retirement crisis. So far, only a couple Sigma primes (a 70macro for scanning and a 45/2.8 because it is so darn good and inexpensive)for the SL2 because the M10M is really where my heart is right now.

 

[peterm1]

Have been using the SL2 again and am loving it. Now my dilemma is whether to let my M10R go to buy more lenses, but that's for another post....

 

[Paratom]

I use the SL2 a lot too but would not want to let my m10r go, the m10r +28+50 is just so a great, light kit, and I enjoy shooting it and the results as well.

 

[bernardl]

I can relate to this.

i use the GFX100s and the Nikon Z system and far prefer the Nikon lenses. Not to mention that eye AF is in a different league obviously.

I am really hesitating whether I keep the Fuji system.

 

[Paul2660]

The SL2 has a different look and feel to the files, over pretty much any other camera, Nikon Fuji etc. I have have had more issues with Nikon's color, at least the LR/C! raw conversions. The D810 was a much cleaner camera as far as noise levels, and with the D850/Z7, I have not found the files as pushable which was a surprise for me. Fuji IMO has more push, with either the 50s or 100 cameras. On the same side the Leica SL2 has the least amount of shadow push/reach of any of the modern cameras. The LR/ACR conversions of Leica SL2 raw IMO is less than stellar, way too much contrast, and very little shadow recovery, no dedicated color profile either, only the "stock" adobe DNG color profiles, again less than stellar. C1 IMO does a much better job on color, and with latest versions can pull quite a bit of detail from the files.

Leica has some limitations that I don't understand:

No focus bracketing process, (standard on most cameras of this class now)
No ability to use the self timer to fire off anything but a single exposure (can't use it for exposure bracketing for example)
No ability to change the self timer to more than 2 sec on a multi shot exposure.

The Multi shot capability of the SL2 is impressive and I have found it to be much more useable outdoors than I expected. That would rate a separate post however.

Love the lenses, not the cost. Nikon's Z 24-70 lens is IMO very close to the Leica 24-90. However Nikon has no tele zoom that I feel can approach the 90-280. (considering Nikon 80-400, 200-500, have not tried the Z 70-200 with a TC, but not planning on that purchase).

Paul

 

[Duff photographer]

peterm1
Perhaps a careful read of the 14 June LULA article on Proof is in the Printing-Part III of Sony Sensors is worth a read before you part with your GFX100S. Tried to give you the link but it seems to be too difficult here.

The complete article can be found here...

The Proof is in the Printing – Part III of A Slew of Similar Sony Sensors - Contractor Daily News

You’ve never seen files like this before, unless you’ve used either the original GFX 100 or very expensive medium format modular systems from Phase One or

contractordailynews.com

...but I'd take what is written in that article with a pinch of salt, and any explanation would be beyond the remit of this thread. Suffice to say that the purported differences in print quality between the three sensor systems, and methodology (including lack of), as reported in the article, are very suspect and does not reflect my experience and the experience of pro' printers whom I work with (and have worked for). A quick example, the print quality from the Fuji X-T4 image shown in comparison with the GFX100 and the A7 mkIV wouldn't pass muster even at 4x6"!

Yes, with regard to print size, MF sensors will produce higher quality images than current smaller sensors due to their greater area and 16-bit files they produce, all else being equal. The lens used must also be a resolution match for the sensor.

Cheers,
Duff.

 

[aksclix]

You see I couldn’t make that decision.. so I have an SL2 and the GFX 100s.. and a Sony a1 and the R5.. and a few others honestly.. I think I’ll be holding onto these for 3 years at least.. if not more.. No sane person would buy all the gear that I have but last year I made a decision to have no regrets! I’ll save up later but will live happily for now

 

[MGrayson]

Preferences don't need justification. A "better in every way" camera that I just don't like will never get used. I think my order was (all for over a year, some for over 5 years) Canon, Leica M, Phase One and Sony A7, Leica S and SL, Hassy X1D, and most recently, the Fuji GFX100 and X-H1.

All that remains are the Leica S and the Fuji X-H1. A few of the above manufacturers are in my "never again" list, but most of the systems just didn't click. Of course, there are capabilities missing from my current setup. If I ever need great AF tracking, I'll get whatever is second best to the Sony .

 

[aksclix]

Preferences don't need justification. A "better in every way" camera that I just don't like will never get used. I think my order was (all for over a year, some for over 5 years) Canon, Leica M, Phase One and Sony A7, Leica S and SL, Hassy X1D, and most recently, the Fuji GFX100 and X-H1.

All that remains are the Leica S and the Fuji X-H1. A few of the above manufacturers are in my "never again" list, but most of the systems just didn't click. Of course, there are capabilities missing from my current setup. If I ever need great AF tracking, I'll get whatever is second best to the Sony .

Lol.. not a fan of Sony I guess.. I have a Leica S007 that I intend to hold on to as a keepsake camera.. it’s heavy for my delicate wrist so it will be used sparingly

 

[PeterA]

The Fuji is a different camera to the Leica SL2 - I don't use them to make the same shots they aren't interchangeable I don't understand the premise of the OP.

but happy shooting with whatever you like in hand is my philosophy - nothing wrong with the SL2 - I have one.