I've been going through a similar assessment and conclusion myself. I just sold off all my Sony gear to go all in with the L-Mount Alliance starting with the SL3. It's not the fastest camera, but I really enjoy the experience of shooting with it. I also like shooting with M glass on it, more so then with any other mirrorless body that has an adapter. Plus the sensor on the SL3 is supposed to be optimized for adapted M glass. So that plus the diverse choices in L Mount glass sold me on switching over. I just felt more inspired when shooting with the SL system over the Sony Alpha system. I also picked up a Lumix S5IIx as a secondary L Mount body as well as for video work, if any were to come up in my workflow. The S5IIx is a very capable speedy camera and it feels like it compliments very well with the SL3. It's faster, and the AF (especially with the latest firmware) is much more accurate and faster. It almost feels like the S5IIx is basically an SL3-S. Is it as fun to shoot as the SL3? Absolutely not! It actually kind of feels like my old Sony Alpha bodies, which initially put me off. But I've slowly gotten over it. When I need something faster than the SL, this camera is perfect as a general tool. My Fujifilm X kit has remained in my possession, and I've had mixed feeling about it. Fuji was what restarted my stagnant photography career 7 years ago, and so I have a bit nostalgia whenever I pick up the Fujfilm bodies. The X-T5 is by all accounts the perfect X-T body and I even like the ergonomics and feel in the hand the X-H2 and X-H2S bring, feeling almost like a mini Canon RF system. Additionally I love the optics of the Fuji glass when used in photography, and of course the well loved color science it presents. But I always seem to prefer shooting with full frame cameras when it counts, and although I continue to keep the Fuji system around, I still naturally pickup a full frame camera over the Fuji almost every time, I don't exactly know why because Fuji's image capabilities have evolved nicely over time. However it's apparent the system does still have some SERIOUS issues. AF maturity was on a roll, but with recent firmware updates, it feels like the AF performance has devolved and the video AF is practically un-useable. Exposure in their EVF's is often times inaccurate, making it difficult sometimes to expose correctly. Their new LM lenses were supposed to be the solution, and although there are many marked improvements in AF performance in photography, the lenses feel more clinical than their older counterparts, where character is lacking, auto exposure with these lenses are still very "steppy" and not smooth, and it always seems that the lenses are the achilles heal of this system when comparing to other systems. So I'm still at a cross roads of getting rid of all my Fujifilm kit, and just going one and done with Leica, or if I still keep the Fujifilm around for "fun". One thing I do like about the Fuji is it's a great AF walk around system when it comes to size and weight and amazing for travel. But then again I can get a lot better at manual focusing (which I very much enjoy) and shoot with M bodies and glass, and have the ultimate full frame portability. I also have a feeling Lumix is about to release some more compact L Mount body solutions this year, which will compete with Sony on bodies like the A7C series. Lastly on the Medium Format. The Fuji Medium format files have always been incredible, but I don't think the camera experience has been that positive. The lenses are still too slow, I also feel like they lack innovation compared to the more forward thinking Hasselblad body, and although the AF is way better on the Fuji then Hasselblad, it's still Fuji AF, which I generally find unreliable and when you are shooting with such high resolution, missed focus is hard to hide in composition. And I totally agree the GFX100S II would be a lot better in the old GFX 50S button and dials configuration. That's my 2-cents!
Seems like we agree on so many points!- I would be interested to hear about your thoughts in terms of image quality between Leica and Sony! A common misconception is that they share the same sensor, but I am pretty sure that is actually not true (Sony's is made in Asia, Leica's is made in Israel). And yes, in a nutshell, I just..wish..Fuji...was...a bit better on several fronts. Like I would rather save the money and use Fuji, but the SL3 works so much better across those same fronts, and it is equally (or more) enjoyable to use, it's hard to deny Leica is kind of the better choice at this point. In other words, it seems like Fuji has not done enough to change its position as the gateway drug to using Leica cameras!
Personally I think Sony offers the best balance in image quality and feature set. The Sony was my workhorse camera for so long and sometimes I do miss it when I’m working on a fast project where I need reliability and focus. I think the G-Master primes come very close in image quality to the APO primes and are about on par with Summilux lenses. Dynamic range on the Sony to me is superior to anything else I’ve worked on. Highlight recovery is REALLY good and shadow recovery is not too noisy. I think the SL3 is the closest to that performance but still is slightly more sensitive to the highlights compared to the Sony. Where I think the SL3 is superior is in lowlight detail and noise. I’m doing side by side with the SL3 and A7rV, the A7rV is much noisier at high ISO where as the SL3 has a much finer more organic noise pattern making it easier to bump up the ISO! Additionally the color out of camera or how Lightroom interprets the SL3 files is much better than on Sony. The SL3 could be completely left alone when it comes to colors, and you’d be fine where as the skin tones on Sony always have to be corrected. So from an image character perspective I lean heavily towards Leica. But the only thing I miss is the reliability of the Sony. Been thinking about selling the remainder of my Fujifilm kit and getting a small Sony kit as a secondary powerhouse work kit to go alongside the L-Mount kit. But who knows! 😅
Interesting comparison, Marc. I really like the customizability of the GFX 100ii with the addition of the two buttons on the front and the three in front of the sub-monitor. All of these buttons are customizable so it’s easy to set up your exposure triangle - actually I find it just as easy to set it up as the SL3.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment! Yes, you can set it up to reach the exposure triangle. And ithe GFX is still way more fun to use than a Sony or other Japanese FF option. But out of the box, the Leica is already set up without any need for customization (and it is also fully customizable in terms of buttons), plus the SL3 has those gorgeous tactile dials on the top of the camera that, like the X-T5, just make it a joy to use. Like I said in the video, if Fuji makes an X-T5 or X-Pro-like MF camera, then we might really have a contender on our hands. There is a Fuji X-Summit next week...
I am confused, does gfx100II front and rear dials come not assigned by default or something? All my gfx cameras came preset and exposure triangle is there from the start. It takes like a minute or two to make a basic setup of gfx and if you are a simple man you don't need to touch any of the menus except 'format' ever again. But when you want your camera to be more than one thing, you set it up to be a square format b&w camera, and switch between different 'cameras' in a millisecond. Menu on gfx is not the best, and there are some confusing logical bombs there but you cannot blame it for having too many options. It is a benefit, not a problem.
I’m new to the gfx system and I got the 100 ii, I honestly love the aesthetic, I’m glad they didn’t make like the XT line, I like their futuristic kind like of camera, specially without the EVF, which I struggle cause I like the minimal look without it, but I also really like using the evf
@@MarcAdesso No, I meant, i hope the xpro 4 comes with a similar futuristic design, not necessarily taking the same features, I feel like the xpro already has a kind of minimalistic/futureretro design, so I would like them to keep that way but maybe a new design and not another xpro3 body with new sensor, but it doesnt matter cause even if they did that, I would still love it hahaha
@@catbread2585 I hear you! I tend to think they will take the same approach they did with the X100VI- add IBIS, the new sensor, and not change much else, except maybe simplifying the back screen. Which would be just fine with me!!!
I don't know about Fuji but have used Hassy x2d for some time. The X2d blacks out the viewfinder when you take an image . This makes quite a difference when you shoot with a SL-series camera if you shoot portraits. With my SL2-S I feel more connected. I can't comment on the Fuji though.
That makes sense- the X2D's viewfinder's blackout (including the delay when bringing the camera up to your eye) kind of drove me nuts. It's not an issue with the GFX, if that's helpful!
@@FART-REPELLENT I didn't have them to compare, but I could see that being true. I hear the SL2 lasts longer on the new batteries made for the SL3, if that's helpful...
Love the gear talk, Marc! I’m happy for your SL3 journey, although some of my friends have had huge issues with it: camera freezes, images getting deleted… In terms of colors, the best ones in my purely subjective opinion are from the original SL Typ 601. The SL2 colors are good but definitely different from the SL. In terms of ergonomics and overall design, the SL is unbeatable.
PS- I haven’t had those issues with the SL3- only thing I’ve noticed is that occasionally when you turn off the camera, it resets the shooting settings, like ISO or SS.
Im starting to like your channel, Which is better for low light photography past 3200iso in comparison to the SL2, would it be the SL2-S or the new SL3? And how far apart in low light performance difference are the sl2-s and sl3 from each other, thanks!
@@lizlana4200 I think the SL2S is probably still the best for low light (especially if you really want to crank up the ISO), but the SL3 comes fairly close in most reasonable situations. The SL2 is not so good in low light.
I have X-H2S and X100vi. I love handling X-H2s more, if Fuji made 2 changs. 1. Rotating D-Pad. 2. Vertical Front Dial infront of the shutter release button.
@@MarcAdesso and a couple of 'influencers' scream its the best camera in the world;) PS nice video, it helped me decide not to save my money for the GFX, but probably an M-something.
@@hanshomesteading1276 I think it really depends on use case - the SL3 and GFX cameras are more like daily, studio tools- every day work/workhorse cameras; the X100VI and M cameras are more like the sweet classic car you take out on the weekends to enjoy the ride, even if it takes you longer to get there.
I really liked this video. I’m looking for a replacement for my xh2s. Currently dual wielding with q3. Considering sl3 for longer focal lengths. Shooting reportage/documentary style events and sports. Do you think sl3 and q3 would be the way forward?
Hmm, that's a tough one. For documentary, for sure that is an ideal combo! Could also look at the Q3 and Q3 43 as a combo. For sports, I think there are faster, more accurate options, with a better selection of telephoto lenses (such as the Canon R5II, R3 or upcoming R1, or Sony a9iii). And then since you mentioned the XH2s, similarly for video, I would not use that combo. If you wanted to stay in L mount for video, the S5IIX is an excellent option. Hope that helps, and let me know what you end up deciding!
I jumped to GFX 100 II from R5. I kept it for speed, never mind. I totally agree that menu in GFX is horrible, and you can setup things you don’t need to setup and can’t setup what you need (for example in aperture priority you can not tell the desired range of SS and camera doesn’t recognize your zoom values). Need to say a word to defend the landing menu. First of all you may setup it, and it’s not like landing, it’s Q menu, it’s do job (mostly) right after you painly setup it )))
You can customise everything on Fuji, including Q page, but yeah totally agree, I am going nuts trying to do basic things on GFX, so need to spend another few hours setting it up again to simplify.
The SL2 is lousy in low light, and the SL3's video autofocus is currently not good (I am sure it will be fixed in firmware eventually). So at this moment, I would say the S5II or S5IIx is definitely the way to go for lowlight video.
Not quite as good as the SL2-S, but way better than the original SL2. The SL3’s low light performance is in line with other BSI high megapixel sensors, but it still will have worse performance than lower MP, low light optimized shooters like the SL2 or Sony a7siii
@@MarcAdesso Thanks ! would you happen to know if the lower Rez options (36. 18 mp) compare favorably with sl2 S? - sl2s is excellent in low light but I need to shed some of that weight.
@@Laight4work I haven’t tested that a ton, but from the little I have played with, the low res modes doesn’t change the low light performance drastically on the SL3- ie, I don’t think pixel binning to lower res on a high MP sensor does much in terms of low light performance. I don’t have an SL2- S anymore, but if my memory serves, it had considerably better low light performance, as high as 50,000 ISO.
@@MarcAdesso the low light is excellent on the sl2S. it takes on a bit of noise but it has a nice, film grain quality. for my money, that trumps the extra megapixels of the sl2 or 3.
Great video, Marc. Yes, I love my SL APO's. But, "as soon as you put Sigma glass on its regular medium format." I don't know about that. I don't know about Sigma but I'll take my 50mm Voigtlander Nokton f1.0 over the Noctilux every day of the week. And...it's actually affordable.
That’s really interesting- I’ve heard the Voigtlander was good, but hadn’t heard it was Noctilux good. Might need to make a video about that! That said, the Sigma contemporary primes I’m using now are an older formula, so don’t hold a candle to the APOs (same story pretty much with Panny optics). I do plan to make a video comparing Sigma art glass to Leica SL glass, but have a few videos in the pipeline before that one. Stay tuned!
@@MarcAdessoyes turn off the enhanced live view and you’ll be cruising. The SL3 is my first SL and it’s absolutely magic 🪄 coming from many years of Canon, Leica Q & M / Hasselblad blah blah blah, the SL3 is a beast for the daily assignment photographer.
@@HeathHolden so that folks are not misled- that does not fix the problem I described in the video, but glad you are enjoying the camera, it's a beast!
@@MarcAdesso I will rewatch and see what I can find, it could be the "exposure simulation in" option, you can switch this off for manual mode which helps in certain situations such as a studio setting where there is no light until you smash em with flash.
I haven't noticed it as an issue. It's a very cloudy day here, so I can't test it at the moment...I would say if anything, I've had issues shooting with it at night, given the light-up exposure preview issue I mention in the video. Hopefully they can fix that with firmware soon.
I've dabbled with Leica and I can afford an SL3 and some Leica glass but I just don't think the cost is justified. It's subjectively worse than GFX and that keeps me away. I haven't even bought a GFX yet because I'm just not sure if it's really going to be any better than my Nikon Z8. I do still keep my old Leica SL 601 around though because it's fun to use with vintage glass. Even though it's old it still has a better viewfinder than 90% of new cameras on the market.
@@NickDelDuca I think it would depend on what kind of photography you are doing- if you are printing big or need massive DR, the GFX will be a significant improvement. If not, the Z8 is a great camera and it sounds like you’ve got your fun/personal work camera with the 601. And then maybe when you want to treat yourself sometime, you can get a used SL2 or SL3 in the future.
@@MarcAdesso Yeah I've been eying a used SL2-S, it has good DR and it's faster. That's the main issue with the SL601... It takes great pictures but it's kinda slow and laggy.
I got invited to the Leica store here in LA to test it out.. definitely snappier than the SL2. How do you like the IQ compared to the SL2 though? Had to sell mine off since the focusing had issues even after getting it repaired in Wetzlar. I still have my sl2-s and my 24-90 and 90-280 lenses plus a canon R5c with the RF 24-70 + 70-200 combo for my high res photo needs but it’s just so different. I got the canon more for video and I’m debating if I should trade it in just to grab the SL3 and keep everything Leica. Haha 1st world problems we have on here.
I don't have an SL2 to compare it to, but I am pretty sure they used the same color science as the SL2-S (and thus, the SL2 after it got updated firmware to have the same colors as the SL2-S). Going off memory alone, the SL3's IQ is indeed better in other aspects though, especially in terms of low light performance.
Fuji now OUTSELLS all other brands in the formats they manufacture, meaning DX and large format. Why? Because Fuji offers one hell of a great value - - the best cameras for the least money.
Removing the dials is obviously not a cost saving measure when Fuji's most expensive camera (the OG GFX100) didn't have them. Fuji has identified (correctly in my estimation) that professional photographers, who do not just take photos for fun, want to be able to control their cameras quickly, and without taking them away from the eye. Ever since Luigi Colani's influence in Canon camera designs, SLRs and DLSRs were made with such practical purposes in mind. It doesn't make for attractive, fun, or retro-cool cameras, but it does make them more usable, which is what matters for a professional photographer.
I hear you, but according to Fuji’s own marketing stuff (including last night’s X-summit), they want to capture the pro and enthusiast market even with their GFX line. So they should do both an XH style body AND a retro body, which, given the X100V/VI’s success, is clearly what the market really wants. My concern is they are trying to be the Sony of MF, which will of course backfire the moment Sony decides to enter MF. Fuji will have no real differentiator at that point.
@@MarcAdesso That assumes that Sony is going to enter medium format, and that Fuji will not release the fixed-lens medium format 'X100 like' that has been rumoured. I agree that Fuji has abandoned the retro dials of the GFX 50s and 50R to its detriment, and really needs to provide something updated in that niche, although I do think it more appropriate for GFX to be button+scroll dial focussed than the X system, as the latter's smaller size makes it more suited for street and travel photography, where a more fashion-conscious retro-style camera is appropriate.
@@Bayonet1809 That all makes sense, but I think Fuji missed an opportunity to differentiate between those two segments with the GFX line- keep the 100 II like a Sony camera for fast-shooting pros, but then they could have made the 100S II more like the fashion-conscious camera you mention. Fuji folks have said the goal of the S line of GFX cameras is squarely aimed at getting more enthusiast-level shooters into medium format, so I feel like making the camera more fun to use (and look at) would help attract even more people in that segment. At its current pace, Fuji could do 2 more X-summits this year; one can only hope that X-T5 style GFX camera (with the SS and ISO top dials) that has been shown on rumor sites might be released toward the end of the year!
Yes- I have several videos on that topic, check out my Camera Talk playlist. I also plan to make an update video about the X2D vs. the GFX 100IIs...in part from comparing the SL3 to the Sony a7R5, my viewpoint has changed somewhat.
@@marleenvandam6931 Start with a Voigtlander M Lens. That’s how I started with my SL2 even though it’s manual it’s a great way to learn the camera. 40mm 1.2 is a beast
Talking about lenses that have the "retro/manual" aesthetics... I bought the blue Nikon Zf, and could not bare getting one of those plastic "special edition" Z lenses to go along with it. Yes, they are light and are convenient, but I really hate all that poor build-quality lenses. Fuji had those beautifully built older lenses. I only wish when camera OEMs release a retro-styled camera, they make an effort with a set of lenses to that follow a similar build and aesthetics.
I own Leica and Sony. The sl3 is a less capable, twice the price a7r5. I like both, but there should be more than just a slightly different user experience for that kind of difference.
I hear you- I think you’re also paying for the build quality (solid block of aluminum) and the superb color science. That said, value is in the eye/pocketbook of the beholder- in a number of interviews filmed around the SL3’s launch, Leica engineers acknowledged that FF image quality and features are getting so good, that Leica’s primary focus/differentiator has to be a unique/better shooting experience. Don’t think you will keep shooting both brands, or eventually sell your Leica stuff?
@MarcAdesso Build quality for sure, color science not so much anymore. Hasselblad has the best colors over everyone, also with a great shooting experience. I will always keep my Leica m gear, but I'm not sure about the sl. After trying out the x2d, I might trade it for that, I need to do more testing. I use Sony for work. It never misses, but Leica is my choice for my own things. I love all thing camers. Half the fun is trying new gear.
@@tonyselwah6420 Amen! Camera gear is just fun to play with! And yes, Hasselblad's color science is the best in the biz (at least until Leica comes out with its own modern MF system, they will have to update their colors from the S3 to compete)- it shows that they developed their colors for MF (and the wider gamuts available on that format), and didn't just port over their formulas from a smaller sensor format. Just wait until you get to try a H6D-100! I'm also still trying to get a Phase One to try out, but haven't found a way to get one for rental here in Austin. If helpful, I also think the X2D and SL3 are really different cameras, with generally use cases. You can only go slow with the X2D, whereas now you can go pretty darn fast with the SL3 (but of course not Sony fast!). So if your personal stuff is very planned out, and you can go slow, the X2D is probably the better camera between the two. If you need focus tracking, quick shooting, serious mobility, etc., then I'd say stick with the SL3...or just buy both haha! One more tip on the X2D- don't buy it new here in the US, they are not controlling quality as well as they should (I have a video about this). Buy it used from a Japanese retailer that has had the camera checked by Hassy Japan. I tried 4-5 X2Ds here in the US, and all had some QC issue (lens mount wobble, dead pixels), whereas the one I just got from Japan was perfect, with no issues. Map Camera has one such body listed on eBay right now for under $7k, if that's helpful.
I think the real reason why the Fujifilm GFX100 II was so easily available on launch day up until today is because of the bad reputation of the original Fujifilm GFX 10O. Just my opinion and I could be wrong. Not that the Leica SL3 is exactly a saint in the camera world, especially with it STILL BEING PLAGUED by a mediocre battery that forces the customer to shell out even more money for an extra battery, and it still has focusing issues. The only companies that seem to listen are Fuji and Sony. Talking to Canon is like talking to the walls, they JUST DON’T LISTEN. And Nikon, with the exception of the Z9 and Z8 seems to have enemies working in their design and technology departments. The Nikon Zf would have been a huge hit had the megapixel count been 45MP or higher, because in this rare instance the design team got the retro design oh-so- right. But then their Z50mm f1.2 is such a giant lens that you will not leave the house with it, besides it not being aesthetically pleasing to look at. PEOPLE WANT TO SHOW OFF THEIR GEAR. On the other hand the Fujifilm XT-5 is such a gorgeous high megapixel camera you just wonder why they can’t make one in full frame. Sony DOES listen on many many levels which is why they are so far ahead, but their camera bodies are so industrial looking. I’d say if there was a beauty contest between cameras the Leica SL3, the Fujifilm XT-5 and the Nikon Zf would be clear winners all around. The retro design of the Nikon Zf and the Fujifilm XT-5 would tie for second place while the Leica SL3 and it’s luxurious looks would win. I’m a Canon shooter from the days of the 1DX Mark II, now using the Nikon Z9
Lots of good points in there! I wish Fuji would make a retro full frame, or at this point, even a MF X-T5 body. I was surprised at the end when you said you are a Z9 shooter these days- how did you decide on that camera? Anything else tempting you?
It was Sony that set the stupid trend for Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras to have bodies with linear and hard edge design elements which makes their cameras look crap, unfortunately Cannon and Nikon adopted these atrocious design elements for their low-mid range cameras. Compare the beautiful curves of Nikon D850, D500, and Cannon Eos 5D MKIV with the linear and hard edges of Sony cameras?
Except for the price tag Leica glass is nothing special. Their SL lenses, and especially their APOs are well corrected, but other manufacturers make well corrected lenses too. If you are seeing any differences in resolution compared to the best Sony/Nikon/Canon/Fuji/Sigma lenses then you are not conducting rigorous enough testing, and are letting biases cloud your judgment. If it is the rendering you prefer, then that is a matter of taste, and there are nearly infinite potential preferences in rendering, depending on the mixes of aberrations in a lens.
@@lizlana4200 In terms of its specific parameters, yes, it has no equal, because it is the only 90-280mm f/2.8-4 lens available. But in terms of roughly similar lenses, the Sony 70-200/2.8 GMII, Nikon Z 70-200/2.8, and Canon RF 100-300/2.8 are all as well corrected.
@@Bayonet1809 I agree I was referring in terms of image quality it has no equal. It is nearly a perfect lens. Even in comparison to the Otus series. The APO lenses are not only sharp but have 3d pop. I will say though that the lenses you just mentioned are also top tier and we are at a time where top notch glass have reached an apex varying among each other subtle differences. You’re right as a matter of taste
Either you missed the point or haven’t used the camera- the issue I describe is a known issue across several Leica and Panasonic that cannot be fixed using menu settings.
I'm thinking about renting a Z8 to compare it to the SL3. I think the SL3's image quality will be better, but the Z8 will a much faster, snappier camera.
@@Bollywoodhollywood2023More Mpixels and more viewfinder dots does not equal a better camera. The Z8 is better in ever other way and it’s half the price! Let’s see if DPreview’s initial review turns into a full review...
I don't understand why you criticise Fuji for not having retro dials on their GFX cameras, and some of their X cameras, when the very Leica you are praising in comparison also doesn't have retro dials. At least be consistent by praising the Q3 or M11, and criticising the SL3.
@@MarcAdesso It has dials, but not very retro, as they aren't marked at all, meaning one has to use the top display, which is decidedly non-retro and is less direct.
IF image quality is what you strive for, you need to try Phase One. I sold all my Fuji(s), Leica(s), Hasselblad(s) and never looked back. But if you are deciding between those two. Go with Fuji. You want the 16bit color.
Yes, the 16-bit color does make a big difference, especially with editing. I am going to make another video about this, but I think the Hassy X2D has certain technology/filters that make more use of it as compared to the Fuji so still leaning toward that for those times when I would need that 16 bit color. And then I would love to hear more about how you use the Phase One- I want to try Phase One, especially for fashion shooting in the studio, but there is no place here in Austin that rents them (and the one guy on Share Grid with one hasn't responded to me). I took the GFX 100ii to a Phase One demo days, and they seemed pretty comparable, but it was super rushed and I didn't get to try everything I wanted to.
@@MarcAdesso Closest rental house is: Hoeber Productions, 2655 Myrtle Springs Ave, Dallas, Texas, 75220. Schneider lenses are nothing like you ever worked with. Leica/Fuji should learn from them. Precise and so sharp your eyeballs are at risk of cuts. You can adapt Hasselblad V or Pentax 67 lenses, if you are into that vintage look. My workflow is one that works for me and everyone needs to find their own. I shoot tethered to Capture One (match made in heaven) and have preview on eyes at all times. Other than that pretty much the same as any camera. Fun fact! Capture One Does NOT support Hasselblad. You'll be stuck with Phocus which is pretty much garbage.
ISO is not real, the exposure triangle is a lie. A new simplified menu/control schema for modern digital cameras should ignore ISO for anything except a toggle for high/low gain (for cameras with the Aptina developed dual gain implementation).
@@MarcAdesso I am completely unfamiliar with guitar amps, but I suppose your analogy is appropriate. Only it would have just two positions, so could be much like the movie-stills toggle on the current GFX cameras. Of course, for the purposes of JPEGs one may wonder how brightness is controlled if ISO is not controllable in full manual, which is where I would suggest use of 'exposure compensation', which would serve only to boost the brightness of the JPEG (and so might be better termed 'brightness compensation'), but would not touch the raw data, and so would leave greater dynamic range than would have been available at any ISO setting other than the base ISOs.
The reason I came to this realisation is because I shoot my GFX 100 at only ISO 100 and ISO 640, which is respectively the point of low and high gain. I am only ever switching between ISO 100 and ISO 640, but frustratingly have to scroll past so many pointless settings in between. These intermediate ISOs only reduce the raw dynamic range, and effect the JPEG engine, which is also stupidly coupled to the image preview brightness on the viewfinder and display, and even more annoyingly to the histogram, which therefore is completely ignorant of the raw pixel clipping! This all seems like such a suboptimal system to me, and yet every manufacturer (except Phase One) uses it.
@@Bayonet1809 Agree about shooting at 100/640. How does Phase One do it? I am so interested in that camera system, but have been unable to find one to rent near me.
Fuji production is cheap chain style production so the product is. Leica is hand made assembly line high end product. Not a question of market demand at all. You are wrong.
The SL3 is assembled in Germany from Chinese made parts. The GFX100 II is assembled in Japan from a mix of Japanese and Chinese made parts. Leica prices their cameras to gatekeep, Fujifilm doesn't.
@@RealCelticGamerCurrent Leica prices border on the obscene. Yes Leica very good but. A lot of emphasis on brand boasting rights and eye candy. In my opinion, the Japanese have closed the gap in recent years and Fuji in particular are equal or better in performance for a fraction of the price. I own Fuji APSC gear and found the bodies and lenses top notch. I do not believe a Leica full frame sensor will out perform a Fuji GFX 100 mk2 in either dynamic range or resolution. PS I use Leica R lenses on my excellent Canon R5 from the film era - so I do have a lot of respect for the brand and always buy used.
@@brianrowland9993 I gotta be honest: I’m REALLY tired of hearing people crap-talk Leica prices. They really aren’t THAT far off from the flagship offerings of Sony (A1 - 6500.00), Canon (R1 6300.00), or Nikon (Z9 - 5500.00) While I admit that the tech isn’t cutting edge it’s solid and reliable.
Simple menu is all we want and nothing else. Get a Sony if you like loosing your time in menu settings. Leica and Hasselblad are not for amateurs like you.
I’m surprised at how little the X2D was mentioned in relation to these two. I get it was a duo comparison but there are clearly three options at this price point. I was dead set on a Hasselblad until I started reading QC issues out the wazoo for the Swede. It’s such a brutal choice with no clear favorite. Unless you shoot video. (By the way I had been in video for decades and never ever used autofocus. Because focus pullers)
@@f.kieranfinney457 I have a bunch of videos about the X2D and its quality problems- basically, that camera is great, but it’s really only for hobbyists (or pros with several other options as a fun add-on) in the studio because of the QC issues, terrible customer support, relative scarcity of their products if something did go down, lack of video, etc. This video was meant to compare the hybrid (photo-video) options at the high end of the market that you can use in a wider variety of situations. Hope that helps, and check out my X2D videos!
Not at all- in fact, I ended up keeping the GFX, not the SL3. But besides the medium format sensor, what feature does the GFX have that the SL3 doesn’t?
You can also swipe from right to left on the SL3 screen to switch between photo and video
Yep!
I've been going through a similar assessment and conclusion myself. I just sold off all my Sony gear to go all in with the L-Mount Alliance starting with the SL3. It's not the fastest camera, but I really enjoy the experience of shooting with it. I also like shooting with M glass on it, more so then with any other mirrorless body that has an adapter. Plus the sensor on the SL3 is supposed to be optimized for adapted M glass. So that plus the diverse choices in L Mount glass sold me on switching over. I just felt more inspired when shooting with the SL system over the Sony Alpha system.
I also picked up a Lumix S5IIx as a secondary L Mount body as well as for video work, if any were to come up in my workflow. The S5IIx is a very capable speedy camera and it feels like it compliments very well with the SL3. It's faster, and the AF (especially with the latest firmware) is much more accurate and faster. It almost feels like the S5IIx is basically an SL3-S. Is it as fun to shoot as the SL3? Absolutely not! It actually kind of feels like my old Sony Alpha bodies, which initially put me off. But I've slowly gotten over it. When I need something faster than the SL, this camera is perfect as a general tool.
My Fujifilm X kit has remained in my possession, and I've had mixed feeling about it. Fuji was what restarted my stagnant photography career 7 years ago, and so I have a bit nostalgia whenever I pick up the Fujfilm bodies. The X-T5 is by all accounts the perfect X-T body and I even like the ergonomics and feel in the hand the X-H2 and X-H2S bring, feeling almost like a mini Canon RF system. Additionally I love the optics of the Fuji glass when used in photography, and of course the well loved color science it presents.
But I always seem to prefer shooting with full frame cameras when it counts, and although I continue to keep the Fuji system around, I still naturally pickup a full frame camera over the Fuji almost every time, I don't exactly know why because Fuji's image capabilities have evolved nicely over time. However it's apparent the system does still have some SERIOUS issues.
AF maturity was on a roll, but with recent firmware updates, it feels like the AF performance has devolved and the video AF is practically un-useable. Exposure in their EVF's is often times inaccurate, making it difficult sometimes to expose correctly. Their new LM lenses were supposed to be the solution, and although there are many marked improvements in AF performance in photography, the lenses feel more clinical than their older counterparts, where character is lacking, auto exposure with these lenses are still very "steppy" and not smooth, and it always seems that the lenses are the achilles heal of this system when comparing to other systems. So I'm still at a cross roads of getting rid of all my Fujifilm kit, and just going one and done with Leica, or if I still keep the Fujifilm around for "fun". One thing I do like about the Fuji is it's a great AF walk around system when it comes to size and weight and amazing for travel. But then again I can get a lot better at manual focusing (which I very much enjoy) and shoot with M bodies and glass, and have the ultimate full frame portability. I also have a feeling Lumix is about to release some more compact L Mount body solutions this year, which will compete with Sony on bodies like the A7C series.
Lastly on the Medium Format. The Fuji Medium format files have always been incredible, but I don't think the camera experience has been that positive. The lenses are still too slow, I also feel like they lack innovation compared to the more forward thinking Hasselblad body, and although the AF is way better on the Fuji then Hasselblad, it's still Fuji AF, which I generally find unreliable and when you are shooting with such high resolution, missed focus is hard to hide in composition. And I totally agree the GFX100S II would be a lot better in the old GFX 50S button and dials configuration.
That's my 2-cents!
Seems like we agree on so many points!- I would be interested to hear about your thoughts in terms of image quality between Leica and Sony! A common misconception is that they share the same sensor, but I am pretty sure that is actually not true (Sony's is made in Asia, Leica's is made in Israel). And yes, in a nutshell, I just..wish..Fuji...was...a bit better on several fronts. Like I would rather save the money and use Fuji, but the SL3 works so much better across those same fronts, and it is equally (or more) enjoyable to use, it's hard to deny Leica is kind of the better choice at this point. In other words, it seems like Fuji has not done enough to change its position as the gateway drug to using Leica cameras!
Personally I think Sony offers the best balance in image quality and feature set. The Sony was my workhorse camera for so long and sometimes I do miss it when I’m working on a fast project where I need reliability and focus.
I think the G-Master primes come very close in image quality to the APO primes and are about on par with Summilux lenses.
Dynamic range on the Sony to me is superior to anything else I’ve worked on. Highlight recovery is REALLY good and shadow recovery is not too noisy. I think the SL3 is the closest to that performance but still is slightly more sensitive to the highlights compared to the Sony.
Where I think the SL3 is superior is in lowlight detail and noise. I’m doing side by side with the SL3 and A7rV, the A7rV is much noisier at high ISO where as the SL3 has a much finer more organic noise pattern making it easier to bump up the ISO! Additionally the color out of camera or how Lightroom interprets the SL3 files is much better than on Sony. The SL3 could be completely left alone when it comes to colors, and you’d be fine where as the skin tones on Sony always have to be corrected. So from an image character perspective I lean heavily towards Leica. But the only thing I miss is the reliability of the Sony. Been thinking about selling the remainder of my Fujifilm kit and getting a small Sony kit as a secondary powerhouse work kit to go alongside the L-Mount kit. But who knows! 😅
@@petereprice thanks for the great responses! Agreed about low light performance and colors being better on the SL3!
Interesting comparison, Marc. I really like the customizability of the GFX 100ii with the addition of the two buttons on the front and the three in front of the sub-monitor. All of these buttons are customizable so it’s easy to set up your exposure triangle - actually I find it just as easy to set it up as the SL3.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment! Yes, you can set it up to reach the exposure triangle. And ithe GFX is still way more fun to use than a Sony or other Japanese FF option. But out of the box, the Leica is already set up without any need for customization (and it is also fully customizable in terms of buttons), plus the SL3 has those gorgeous tactile dials on the top of the camera that, like the X-T5, just make it a joy to use. Like I said in the video, if Fuji makes an X-T5 or X-Pro-like MF camera, then we might really have a contender on our hands. There is a Fuji X-Summit next week...
I am confused, does gfx100II front and rear dials come not assigned by default or something? All my gfx cameras came preset and exposure triangle is there from the start. It takes like a minute or two to make a basic setup of gfx and if you are a simple man you don't need to touch any of the menus except 'format' ever again. But when you want your camera to be more than one thing, you set it up to be a square format b&w camera, and switch between different 'cameras' in a millisecond. Menu on gfx is not the best, and there are some confusing logical bombs there but you cannot blame it for having too many options. It is a benefit, not a problem.
I’m new to the gfx system and I got the 100 ii, I honestly love the aesthetic, I’m glad they didn’t make like the XT line, I like their futuristic kind like of camera, specially without the EVF, which I struggle cause I like the minimal look without it, but I also really like using the evf
I also hope the xpro4 comes with a similar design
I’m curious what you mean with the x-pro? You mean the grip material? Or the evf?
@@MarcAdesso No, I meant, i hope the xpro 4 comes with a similar futuristic design, not necessarily taking the same features, I feel like the xpro already has a kind of minimalistic/futureretro design, so I would like them to keep that way but maybe a new design and not another xpro3 body with new sensor, but it doesnt matter cause even if they did that, I would still love it hahaha
@@catbread2585 I hear you! I tend to think they will take the same approach they did with the X100VI- add IBIS, the new sensor, and not change much else, except maybe simplifying the back screen. Which would be just fine with me!!!
@@MarcAdesso definitely, but I would love to have a more premium body, but i still love the original body as well, so i'm taking whatever it comes
You TH-camrs are something else !
Hahaha
@@MarcAdesso I love the fact that that you find this funny.
@@gerardblackman237Well, you’re not even saying anything. What else is he supposed to do?
I don't know about Fuji but have used Hassy x2d for some time. The X2d blacks out the viewfinder when you take an image . This makes quite a difference when you shoot with a SL-series camera if you shoot portraits. With my SL2-S I feel more connected. I can't comment on the Fuji though.
That makes sense- the X2D's viewfinder's blackout (including the delay when bringing the camera up to your eye) kind of drove me nuts. It's not an issue with the GFX, if that's helpful!
Great video. I love your enthusiasm. I have an Sl2 and I think it's sensational (apart from battery life).
Thanks- and I agree, the SL2 is a great camera!
The battery life of the SL3 is worse than on the SL2.
@@FART-REPELLENT I didn't have them to compare, but I could see that being true. I hear the SL2 lasts longer on the new batteries made for the SL3, if that's helpful...
@ My comment was based on CIPA standards info on both cameras.
Love the gear talk, Marc! I’m happy for your SL3 journey, although some of my friends have had huge issues with it: camera freezes, images getting deleted… In terms of colors, the best ones in my purely subjective opinion are from the original SL Typ 601. The SL2 colors are good but definitely different from the SL. In terms of ergonomics and overall design, the SL is unbeatable.
I’ve heard the SL is the closest to Kodak Portra 400…maybe have to rent one/pick one up to compare! Thanks for the great idea!
PS- I haven’t had those issues with the SL3- only thing I’ve noticed is that occasionally when you turn off the camera, it resets the shooting settings, like ISO or SS.
@@MarcAdesso I hope they will address that soon!
@@MarcAdesso You won't be disappointed :)
Im starting to like your channel, Which is better for low light photography past 3200iso in comparison to the SL2, would it be the SL2-S or the new SL3? And how far apart in low light performance difference are the sl2-s and sl3 from each other, thanks!
@@lizlana4200 I think the SL2S is probably still the best for low light (especially if you really want to crank up the ISO), but the SL3 comes fairly close in most reasonable situations. The SL2 is not so good in low light.
@@MarcAdesso Thank you Marc, cheers to your channel, great info
@@lizlana4200 thank you too!
I have X-H2S and X100vi. I love handling X-H2s more, if Fuji made 2 changs. 1. Rotating D-Pad. 2. Vertical Front Dial infront of the shutter release button.
The Fujifilm X100VI is also unavailable. I am sure it is artifically created by Fuji.
yep, they want to make sure they don't overproduce the camera...so they are underproducing instead, which of course keeps demand high.
@@MarcAdesso and a couple of 'influencers' scream its the best camera in the world;)
PS nice video, it helped me decide not to save my money for the GFX, but probably an M-something.
@@hanshomesteading1276 I think it really depends on use case - the SL3 and GFX cameras are more like daily, studio tools- every day work/workhorse cameras; the X100VI and M cameras are more like the sweet classic car you take out on the weekends to enjoy the ride, even if it takes you longer to get there.
I really liked this video. I’m looking for a replacement for my xh2s. Currently dual wielding with q3.
Considering sl3 for longer focal lengths.
Shooting reportage/documentary style events and sports. Do you think sl3 and q3 would be the way forward?
Hmm, that's a tough one. For documentary, for sure that is an ideal combo! Could also look at the Q3 and Q3 43 as a combo. For sports, I think there are faster, more accurate options, with a better selection of telephoto lenses (such as the Canon R5II, R3 or upcoming R1, or Sony a9iii). And then since you mentioned the XH2s, similarly for video, I would not use that combo. If you wanted to stay in L mount for video, the S5IIX is an excellent option. Hope that helps, and let me know what you end up deciding!
Hardly anyone shoots documentary/reportage with lenses longer than 50mm let alone 300mm.
I jumped to GFX 100 II from R5. I kept it for speed, never mind. I totally agree that menu in GFX is horrible, and you can setup things you don’t need to setup and can’t setup what you need (for example in aperture priority you can not tell the desired range of SS and camera doesn’t recognize your zoom values). Need to say a word to defend the landing menu. First of all you may setup it, and it’s not like landing, it’s Q menu, it’s do job (mostly) right after you painly setup it )))
That’s true- to the extent the options are available, you can put them in the Q menu on your own. Thanks for the comment!
You can customise everything on Fuji, including Q page, but yeah totally agree, I am going nuts trying to do basic things on GFX, so need to spend another few hours setting it up again to simplify.
Exactly!
If you have the s5iix and use it for video/lowlight, would you still get the sl3? Or go for the sl2
The SL2 is lousy in low light, and the SL3's video autofocus is currently not good (I am sure it will be fixed in firmware eventually). So at this moment, I would say the S5II or S5IIx is definitely the way to go for lowlight video.
@@MarcAdesso sorry i meant which of the two would you use to Compliment the s5iix for purely stills?
well done. how is the low light performance on the sl3? is it as good as the sl2s?
Not quite as good as the SL2-S, but way better than the original SL2. The SL3’s low light performance is in line with other BSI high megapixel sensors, but it still will have worse performance than lower MP, low light optimized shooters like the SL2 or Sony a7siii
@@MarcAdesso Thanks ! would you happen to know if the lower Rez options (36. 18 mp) compare favorably with sl2 S? - sl2s is excellent in low light but I need to shed some of that weight.
@@Laight4work I haven’t tested that a ton, but from the little I have played with, the low res modes doesn’t change the low light performance drastically on the SL3- ie, I don’t think pixel binning to lower res on a high MP sensor does much in terms of low light performance. I don’t have an SL2- S anymore, but if my memory serves, it had considerably better low light performance, as high as 50,000 ISO.
@@MarcAdesso the low light is excellent on the sl2S. it takes on a bit of noise but it has a nice, film grain quality. for my money, that trumps the extra megapixels of the sl2 or 3.
Great video, Marc. Yes, I love my SL APO's. But, "as soon as you put Sigma glass on its regular medium format." I don't know about that. I don't know about Sigma but I'll take my 50mm Voigtlander Nokton f1.0 over the Noctilux every day of the week. And...it's actually affordable.
That’s really interesting- I’ve heard the Voigtlander was good, but hadn’t heard it was Noctilux good. Might need to make a video about that! That said, the Sigma contemporary primes I’m using now are an older formula, so don’t hold a candle to the APOs (same story pretty much with Panny optics). I do plan to make a video comparing Sigma art glass to Leica SL glass, but have a few videos in the pipeline before that one. Stay tuned!
SL3 and the 50 SL APO is all you need, APO's smoke the 1.4 beast IMO.
Yeah that combo is INSANE!!!
SL Lux 50mm f1.4 has a nice control
over CA
Sure does!!
There is an option to turn that exposure adjustment I’ll see if I can find it
Please do! I could only find ‘enhanced live view,’ which ironically turns off live view.
@@MarcAdesso enhanced live view is a screen brightness for night time exposures
@@MarcAdessoyes turn off the enhanced live view and you’ll be cruising. The SL3 is my first SL and it’s absolutely magic 🪄 coming from many years of Canon, Leica Q & M / Hasselblad blah blah blah, the SL3 is a beast for the daily assignment photographer.
@@HeathHolden so that folks are not misled- that does not fix the problem I described in the video, but glad you are enjoying the camera, it's a beast!
@@MarcAdesso I will rewatch and see what I can find, it could be the "exposure simulation in" option, you can switch this off for manual mode which helps in certain situations such as a studio setting where there is no light until you smash em with flash.
Marc, how to do you find the ease of viewing the LCD of the SL3 in direct sunlight? I hear that is one criticism of the camera.
I haven't noticed it as an issue. It's a very cloudy day here, so I can't test it at the moment...I would say if anything, I've had issues shooting with it at night, given the light-up exposure preview issue I mention in the video. Hopefully they can fix that with firmware soon.
It’s pretty dim. I’ve got one and there are quite a few issues with the SL3 but it’s an amazing camera for the most part.
I've dabbled with Leica and I can afford an SL3 and some Leica glass but I just don't think the cost is justified. It's subjectively worse than GFX and that keeps me away. I haven't even bought a GFX yet because I'm just not sure if it's really going to be any better than my Nikon Z8. I do still keep my old Leica SL 601 around though because it's fun to use with vintage glass. Even though it's old it still has a better viewfinder than 90% of new cameras on the market.
@@NickDelDuca I think it would depend on what kind of photography you are doing- if you are printing big or need massive DR, the GFX will be a significant improvement. If not, the Z8 is a great camera and it sounds like you’ve got your fun/personal work camera with the 601. And then maybe when you want to treat yourself sometime, you can get a used SL2 or SL3 in the future.
@@MarcAdesso Yeah I've been eying a used SL2-S, it has good DR and it's faster. That's the main issue with the SL601... It takes great pictures but it's kinda slow and laggy.
I got invited to the Leica store here in LA to test it out.. definitely snappier than the SL2. How do you like the IQ compared to the SL2 though? Had to sell mine off since the focusing had issues even after getting it repaired in Wetzlar. I still have my sl2-s and my 24-90 and 90-280 lenses plus a canon R5c with the RF 24-70 + 70-200 combo for my high res photo needs but it’s just so different. I got the canon more for video and I’m debating if I should trade it in just to grab the SL3 and keep everything Leica. Haha 1st world problems we have on here.
I don't have an SL2 to compare it to, but I am pretty sure they used the same color science as the SL2-S (and thus, the SL2 after it got updated firmware to have the same colors as the SL2-S). Going off memory alone, the SL3's IQ is indeed better in other aspects though, especially in terms of low light performance.
@@MarcAdesso Thanks Man! Definitely will try to get one for myself. The low light performance alone is such a great upgrade from the SL2!
Fuji now OUTSELLS all other brands in the formats they manufacture, meaning DX and large format.
Why? Because Fuji offers one hell of a great value - - the best cameras for the least money.
@@scotthullinger4684 very true!
Removing the dials is obviously not a cost saving measure when Fuji's most expensive camera (the OG GFX100) didn't have them. Fuji has identified (correctly in my estimation) that professional photographers, who do not just take photos for fun, want to be able to control their cameras quickly, and without taking them away from the eye. Ever since Luigi Colani's influence in Canon camera designs, SLRs and DLSRs were made with such practical purposes in mind. It doesn't make for attractive, fun, or retro-cool cameras, but it does make them more usable, which is what matters for a professional photographer.
I hear you, but according to Fuji’s own marketing stuff (including last night’s X-summit), they want to capture the pro and enthusiast market even with their GFX line. So they should do both an XH style body AND a retro body, which, given the X100V/VI’s success, is clearly what the market really wants. My concern is they are trying to be the Sony of MF, which will of course backfire the moment Sony decides to enter MF. Fuji will have no real differentiator at that point.
@@MarcAdesso That assumes that Sony is going to enter medium format, and that Fuji will not release the fixed-lens medium format 'X100 like' that has been rumoured.
I agree that Fuji has abandoned the retro dials of the GFX 50s and 50R to its detriment, and really needs to provide something updated in that niche, although I do think it more appropriate for GFX to be button+scroll dial focussed than the X system, as the latter's smaller size makes it more suited for street and travel photography, where a more fashion-conscious retro-style camera is appropriate.
@@Bayonet1809 That all makes sense, but I think Fuji missed an opportunity to differentiate between those two segments with the GFX line- keep the 100 II like a Sony camera for fast-shooting pros, but then they could have made the 100S II more like the fashion-conscious camera you mention. Fuji folks have said the goal of the S line of GFX cameras is squarely aimed at getting more enthusiast-level shooters into medium format, so I feel like making the camera more fun to use (and look at) would help attract even more people in that segment. At its current pace, Fuji could do 2 more X-summits this year; one can only hope that X-T5 style GFX camera (with the SS and ISO top dials) that has been shown on rumor sites might be released toward the end of the year!
Did you consider the Hasselblad x2d?
Yes- I have several videos on that topic, check out my Camera Talk playlist. I also plan to make an update video about the X2D vs. the GFX 100IIs...in part from comparing the SL3 to the Sony a7R5, my viewpoint has changed somewhat.
What lens do you advise as a starter SL3 set?
@@marleenvandam6931 Start with a Voigtlander M Lens. That’s how I started with my SL2 even though it’s manual it’s a great way to learn the camera. 40mm 1.2 is a beast
Talking about lenses that have the "retro/manual" aesthetics...
I bought the blue Nikon Zf, and could not bare getting one of those plastic "special edition" Z lenses to go along with it. Yes, they are light and are convenient, but I really hate all that poor build-quality lenses.
Fuji had those beautifully built older lenses. I only wish when camera OEMs release a retro-styled camera, they make an effort with a set of lenses to that follow a similar build and aesthetics.
Aaaaamen! Could not agree more!!! Check out my video about how Fuji used to lenses when they launched the X system, I say the same thing there too!
I own Leica and Sony. The sl3 is a less capable, twice the price a7r5. I like both, but there should be more than just a slightly different user experience for that kind of difference.
I hear you- I think you’re also paying for the build quality (solid block of aluminum) and the superb color science. That said, value is in the eye/pocketbook of the beholder- in a number of interviews filmed around the SL3’s launch, Leica engineers acknowledged that FF image quality and features are getting so good, that Leica’s primary focus/differentiator has to be a unique/better shooting experience. Don’t think you will keep shooting both brands, or eventually sell your Leica stuff?
@MarcAdesso Build quality for sure, color science not so much anymore. Hasselblad has the best colors over everyone, also with a great shooting experience. I will always keep my Leica m gear, but I'm not sure about the sl. After trying out the x2d, I might trade it for that, I need to do more testing. I use Sony for work. It never misses, but Leica is my choice for my own things. I love all thing camers. Half the fun is trying new gear.
@@tonyselwah6420 Amen! Camera gear is just fun to play with! And yes, Hasselblad's color science is the best in the biz (at least until Leica comes out with its own modern MF system, they will have to update their colors from the S3 to compete)- it shows that they developed their colors for MF (and the wider gamuts available on that format), and didn't just port over their formulas from a smaller sensor format. Just wait until you get to try a H6D-100! I'm also still trying to get a Phase One to try out, but haven't found a way to get one for rental here in Austin. If helpful, I also think the X2D and SL3 are really different cameras, with generally use cases. You can only go slow with the X2D, whereas now you can go pretty darn fast with the SL3 (but of course not Sony fast!). So if your personal stuff is very planned out, and you can go slow, the X2D is probably the better camera between the two. If you need focus tracking, quick shooting, serious mobility, etc., then I'd say stick with the SL3...or just buy both haha! One more tip on the X2D- don't buy it new here in the US, they are not controlling quality as well as they should (I have a video about this). Buy it used from a Japanese retailer that has had the camera checked by Hassy Japan. I tried 4-5 X2Ds here in the US, and all had some QC issue (lens mount wobble, dead pixels), whereas the one I just got from Japan was perfect, with no issues. Map Camera has one such body listed on eBay right now for under $7k, if that's helpful.
The 100 II is the far superior Video camera.
I think the real reason why the Fujifilm GFX100 II was so easily available on launch day up until today is because of the bad reputation of the original Fujifilm GFX 10O. Just my opinion and I could be wrong. Not that the Leica SL3 is exactly a saint in the camera world, especially with it STILL BEING PLAGUED by a mediocre battery that forces the customer to shell out even more money for an extra battery, and it still has focusing issues. The only companies that seem to listen are Fuji and Sony. Talking to Canon is like talking to the walls, they JUST DON’T LISTEN. And Nikon, with the exception of the Z9 and Z8 seems to have enemies working in their design and technology departments. The Nikon Zf would have been a huge hit had the megapixel count been 45MP or higher, because in this rare instance the design team got the retro design oh-so- right. But then their Z50mm f1.2 is such a giant lens that you will not leave the house with it, besides it not being aesthetically pleasing to look at. PEOPLE WANT TO SHOW OFF THEIR GEAR. On the other hand the Fujifilm XT-5 is such a gorgeous high megapixel camera you just wonder why they can’t make one in full frame. Sony DOES listen on many many levels which is why they are so far ahead, but their camera bodies are so industrial looking. I’d say if there was a beauty contest between cameras the Leica SL3, the Fujifilm XT-5 and the Nikon Zf would be clear winners all around. The retro design of the Nikon Zf and the Fujifilm XT-5 would tie for second place while the Leica SL3 and it’s luxurious looks would win. I’m a Canon shooter from the days of the 1DX Mark II, now using the Nikon Z9
Lots of good points in there! I wish Fuji would make a retro full frame, or at this point, even a MF X-T5 body. I was surprised at the end when you said you are a Z9 shooter these days- how did you decide on that camera? Anything else tempting you?
It was Sony that set the stupid trend for Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras to have bodies with linear and hard edge design elements which makes their cameras look crap, unfortunately Cannon and Nikon adopted these atrocious design elements for their low-mid range cameras. Compare the beautiful curves of Nikon D850, D500, and Cannon Eos 5D MKIV with the linear and hard edges of Sony cameras?
Except for the price tag Leica glass is nothing special. Their SL lenses, and especially their APOs are well corrected, but other manufacturers make well corrected lenses too. If you are seeing any differences in resolution compared to the best Sony/Nikon/Canon/Fuji/Sigma lenses then you are not conducting rigorous enough testing, and are letting biases cloud your judgment.
If it is the rendering you prefer, then that is a matter of taste, and there are nearly infinite potential preferences in rendering, depending on the mixes of aberrations in a lens.
😂
The APO 90-280 has no equal, as an example
@@lizlana4200 In terms of its specific parameters, yes, it has no equal, because it is the only 90-280mm f/2.8-4 lens available. But in terms of roughly similar lenses, the Sony 70-200/2.8 GMII, Nikon Z 70-200/2.8, and Canon RF 100-300/2.8 are all as well corrected.
@@Bayonet1809 I agree I was referring in terms of image quality it has no equal. It is nearly a perfect lens. Even in comparison to the Otus series. The APO lenses are not only sharp but have 3d pop. I will say though that the lenses you just mentioned are also top tier and we are at a time where top notch glass have reached an apex varying among each other subtle differences. You’re right as a matter of taste
@@lizlana4200 As well as sl24-90. It‘s the best standard zoom in terms of image quality.
Study your Leica set up, there is a set up for exposure permanent.
Either you missed the point or haven’t used the camera- the issue I describe is a known issue across several Leica and Panasonic that cannot be fixed using menu settings.
@@MarcAdesso english is not my first language but i did not miss your point.
Nikon Z8, best balance of IQQ and money and lenses!
I'm thinking about renting a Z8 to compare it to the SL3. I think the SL3's image quality will be better, but the Z8 will a much faster, snappier camera.
I also want to compare it to a Sony a7R5, and a Canon R5ii...if Canon would release it already!
😂😂😂 no SL3 is in a different league
@@Bollywoodhollywood2023More Mpixels and more viewfinder dots does not equal a better camera. The Z8 is better in ever other way and it’s half the price! Let’s see if DPreview’s initial review turns into a full review...
It really is being slept on. Does pretty much everything right.
An the winner are... Fuji GFX100SII and Sony A7RV !!!
True story haha
On the SL3 turn off enhancement live view.
That doesn’t fix it, that just turns off live view/expoaure preview…which sort of defeats the purpose of an EVF altogether!
I don't understand why you criticise Fuji for not having retro dials on their GFX cameras, and some of their X cameras, when the very Leica you are praising in comparison also doesn't have retro dials. At least be consistent by praising the Q3 or M11, and criticising the SL3.
Huh? The SL3 does have the retro dials
@@MarcAdesso It has dials, but not very retro, as they aren't marked at all, meaning one has to use the top display, which is decidedly non-retro and is less direct.
IF image quality is what you strive for, you need to try Phase One. I sold all my Fuji(s), Leica(s), Hasselblad(s) and never looked back. But if you are deciding between those two. Go with Fuji. You want the 16bit color.
Yes, the 16-bit color does make a big difference, especially with editing. I am going to make another video about this, but I think the Hassy X2D has certain technology/filters that make more use of it as compared to the Fuji so still leaning toward that for those times when I would need that 16 bit color. And then I would love to hear more about how you use the Phase One- I want to try Phase One, especially for fashion shooting in the studio, but there is no place here in Austin that rents them (and the one guy on Share Grid with one hasn't responded to me). I took the GFX 100ii to a Phase One demo days, and they seemed pretty comparable, but it was super rushed and I didn't get to try everything I wanted to.
@@MarcAdesso Closest rental house is: Hoeber Productions, 2655 Myrtle Springs Ave, Dallas, Texas, 75220. Schneider lenses are nothing like you ever worked with. Leica/Fuji should learn from them. Precise and so sharp your eyeballs are at risk of cuts. You can adapt Hasselblad V or Pentax 67 lenses, if you are into that vintage look. My workflow is one that works for me and everyone needs to find their own. I shoot tethered to Capture One (match made in heaven) and have preview on eyes at all times. Other than that pretty much the same as any camera. Fun fact! Capture One Does NOT support Hasselblad. You'll be stuck with Phocus which is pretty much garbage.
ISO is not real, the exposure triangle is a lie. A new simplified menu/control schema for modern digital cameras should ignore ISO for anything except a toggle for high/low gain (for cameras with the Aptina developed dual gain implementation).
Interesting- so it would be like a guitar amp dial?
@@MarcAdesso I am completely unfamiliar with guitar amps, but I suppose your analogy is appropriate. Only it would have just two positions, so could be much like the movie-stills toggle on the current GFX cameras.
Of course, for the purposes of JPEGs one may wonder how brightness is controlled if ISO is not controllable in full manual, which is where I would suggest use of 'exposure compensation', which would serve only to boost the brightness of the JPEG (and so might be better termed 'brightness compensation'), but would not touch the raw data, and so would leave greater dynamic range than would have been available at any ISO setting other than the base ISOs.
The reason I came to this realisation is because I shoot my GFX 100 at only ISO 100 and ISO 640, which is respectively the point of low and high gain. I am only ever switching between ISO 100 and ISO 640, but frustratingly have to scroll past so many pointless settings in between.
These intermediate ISOs only reduce the raw dynamic range, and effect the JPEG engine, which is also stupidly coupled to the image preview brightness on the viewfinder and display, and even more annoyingly to the histogram, which therefore is completely ignorant of the raw pixel clipping! This all seems like such a suboptimal system to me, and yet every manufacturer (except Phase One) uses it.
@@Bayonet1809 Agree about shooting at 100/640. How does Phase One do it? I am so interested in that camera system, but have been unable to find one to rent near me.
Fuji production is cheap chain style production so the product is. Leica is hand made assembly line high end product. Not a question of market demand at all. You are wrong.
The SL3 is assembled in Germany from Chinese made parts. The GFX100 II is assembled in Japan from a mix of Japanese and Chinese made parts. Leica prices their cameras to gatekeep, Fujifilm doesn't.
@@RealCelticGamerCurrent Leica prices border on the obscene. Yes Leica very good but. A lot of emphasis on brand boasting rights and eye candy.
In my opinion, the Japanese have closed the gap in recent years and Fuji in particular are equal or better in performance for a fraction of the price. I own Fuji APSC gear and found the bodies and lenses top notch.
I do not believe a Leica full frame sensor will out perform a Fuji GFX 100 mk2 in either dynamic range or resolution.
PS I use Leica R lenses on my excellent Canon R5 from the film era - so I do have a lot of respect for the brand and always buy used.
@@brianrowland9993 I gotta be honest: I’m REALLY tired of hearing people crap-talk Leica prices. They really aren’t THAT far off from the flagship offerings of Sony (A1 - 6500.00), Canon (R1 6300.00), or Nikon (Z9 - 5500.00) While I admit that the tech isn’t cutting edge it’s solid and reliable.
Simple menu is all we want and nothing else. Get a Sony if you like loosing your time in menu settings. Leica and Hasselblad are not for amateurs like you.
I agree simple menus are nice, but there are other things I want beyond that - like Leica’s medium format refresh!
I’m surprised at how little the X2D was mentioned in relation to these two. I get it was a duo comparison but there are clearly three options at this price point.
I was dead set on a Hasselblad until I started reading QC issues out the wazoo for the Swede.
It’s such a brutal choice with no clear favorite. Unless you shoot video.
(By the way I had been in video for decades and never ever used autofocus. Because focus pullers)
@@f.kieranfinney457 I have a bunch of videos about the X2D and its quality problems- basically, that camera is great, but it’s really only for hobbyists (or pros with several other options as a fun add-on) in the studio because of the QC issues, terrible customer support, relative scarcity of their products if something did go down, lack of video, etc. This video was meant to compare the hybrid (photo-video) options at the high end of the market that you can use in a wider variety of situations. Hope that helps, and check out my X2D videos!
Sorry GFX has menus because it has way more features
You basically had an agenda to trash the GFX from the start
Not at all- in fact, I ended up keeping the GFX, not the SL3. But besides the medium format sensor, what feature does the GFX have that the SL3 doesn’t?