SL3 owner here. I would characterize the SL3 as a Sony A7RV with improved build quality and less capable autofocus. Low light performance is a huge improvement over the SL2. I think the Leica SL3 is a great art camera. It's great for portraits, studio work, landscapes, city scapes, etc. The SL3 has insane rolling shutter. But that cleans up considerably when shooting in APSC mode. Leica has done a few things with both the Q3 and SL3 that bother me. Both the Q3 and SL3 are thinner and slightly lighter than their predecessors. However, the paint quality doesn't seem as high. And the bodies have a more plasticky feel to them. The insane build quality was a clear differentiator between them and the competition, so seeing them bias towards lighter/cheaper is kind of disappointing. Sony and Nikon (in particular) have improved their build quality, and now produce glass that performs as well as Leica. So if Leica goes cheap with their builds, then you might as well buy a camera from a Japanese brand that is technologically superior. The biggest thing that drives me nuts about the SL3 is how expensive the accessories are. The camera does not ship with a batter charger. And the Leica branded battery chargers are way, way too expensive. I'm not sure if I will continue to invest in the SL system. I had an A7RV that I sold to buy the SL3, and I think I rather own the A7RV.
Pinned! Really appreciate your comment specially sharing your insights as SL3 owner. I am glad to hear also that at apsc rolling shutter is mitigated, shooting at 8k definitely comes with a cost even in other brands. Regarding the paint and build quality I am surprised to hear that. As Q3 was my first Leica camera, I was impressed with its build ( coming from Canon that has that magnesium alloy) so maybe my bar was lower 😂 but I definitely see your point. If Leica doesn't give much else and cheaps out on things that sets them apart, the competition looks more attractive for sure. Let's see, I have hopes the SL line will get better and better and become a series that matchrs M and Q line up (in terms of advancement)
I have a Q3 and a SL2-s and actually the SL line is the most versatile camera, sexy, professional and quailty/price camera I ever used. I love using manual focus cameras and SL system allow me to do it in the better way. I tested the SL3 also, and even if It is less "sexy", with that second wheel, than the SL2/SL2-s line.. well, It's a really great camera that with firmware updates can become Perfect.
I have the SL3 along with a 21,35,50,75,24-90 and 90-280 SL Lenses. It is much slower than the SL2S. Feel very much like a medium format camera. The IQ is absolutely incredible. Colors are soooooo good especially the blues and reds. AF for photos is excellent but for video is there just yet. I honestly believe Leica hasn't flipped the switch yet for phase detect for video just yet. Lucky they are good with firmware updates so we'll probably see this camera become more of a beast in a couple months. You won't be filming action sports on a 60MP camera. Go with a FX3 for that sort of stuff.
Guys, I like most of your content because you are usually trying things and shooting them and showing results. This is pure regurgitated information and speculation from and quite disappointing that you would put this out. Pick it up, use it, then give us your opinion. You understand the philosophy of the M but can’t wrap your head around the idea that that same company makes an SL system the way it is. And as Leica shooters you know Leica are continuously updating firmware (I say this about your Nikon example). Your comment about L glass is correct but incorrect, Leica made SL glass is limited, but honestly what more do you want with that size/weight and IQ want a 5kg telephoto 600mm? Plus you have great Panasonic/Sigma lenses that you can use on your SL (ok admittedly then you ask why get the SL at all and just get a Sony/Panasonic/Nikon etc…). If you look at any camera produced by Leica M, CL, SL, S etc.. and compare it to the big manufacturers specs and price, nobody in their right mind would buy a Leica from a pure logical perspective. Yet They are having their best years as a company… All this being said I do tend to agree with a lot of what you stated in the video but would really love to see you guys do an actual test and then talk about a camera and not just summarize your internet findings.
Appreciate your feedback! As you mentioned we tend to try our best to get hands on review when possible and will continue to do so. Our intention with this new format is to supplement our existing format while sharing our reaction to new product announcements (with due research ) and that we didn't have opportunity to get our hands on yet. Note most of the units we get are either self funded or we try to find a store in HK that has it that we can test it out. If you also go through our comments section you will see SL3 owners sharing their insights which adds great insight to us! And hopefully to others who are looking to buy an SL3. Our opinion was simply from owning Q3 and M where we see Leica moving at great pace while SL line seems to lag behind from other lines. We definitely see the benefit of SL from existing M shooters, hence even considering purchasing an older SL camera for such use on the lenses I wouldn't say no to faster primes from Leica😁 We hope to keep improving on this format and comments like yours that help us improve and do better 🙏🏻🙏🏻
The main reason to shoot the SL system is really the lenses, in my opinion. The SL2 and the apo primes come really close to the x2d system. I've owned both and sold the x2d because the leica felt better to shoot and has better zoom options. I got an SL3 to have two bodies for commercial use... all that to say. The best of Canon, Sony, and Nikon crush the Leica in specs and tech. But end image quality, I still think the SL is a notch above. I can't see this for other than high-end art and commercial applications, though; the price is just too prohibitive for other shooters.
I have Leica and Hasselblad. The SL Apo lenses outperform the xcd lenses, already been tested. The Leica’s have zero chromatic aberrations and the xcd will show purple fringing on extremely high contrast edges such as the car metal bumper as shown in the test.
Nice talk, thanks for sharing. But wouldn’t you say that considering the competition; it is actually the M and Q that would offer professionals something unique? The SL-system obviously has a lot more competition, and (I’m only guessing), more targeted towards wealthy amateurs?
I tried leica SL2-S last few months , it is great build quality compare to other manufacturer but the price holds me back and the battery, that`s why I didn`t buy it, and leica SL3 is near that time but still leica SL3 is not great update for two problems that holds me back not to buy it, the battery is new but battery life is not good same on the SL2 series, don`t get me wrong I owned leica Q2 monochrome before and now Leica M11, I love leica but SL is not yet for me.
Unfortunately you don’t know your history when it comes to Leica and innovation. Please study the company’s history, before making so many stupid statements. I really “love” guys who review cameras without ever using them. 😂
You guys bring out great points. I got mine, and I have to agree that this camera is nowhere in comparison with other cameras. But I think this camera has been aimed mainly for current Leica shooters that new users to hybrid mirrorless. I shoot with M systems and I have several M Lenses, and I'm glad to finally have a seamless mirrorless with great EVF that matches my lenses so well. I think if you look at the SL3 as someone's first camera you will be missing out on cheaper and more robust alternatives but as a prior Leica Shooter this camera is a step forward. I neither blown away from some of the non APO Leica SL lenses. They don't seem to resolve well the 60MP.
