SL3

I have recently shot with top level Nikon (Z9, Z8, Z6III) and Sony (A1, A9II, A7SIII). I was a professional motorsports photographer and my primary weekend kit was 2 Z9's and 2 Z6III's (depending on how much video the client wanted vs photos, more video was Z6III's, more photos or bad weather, Z9's)

Die Frage ist zunächst: Wieso Hasselblad bzw Leica? Für den Look? Für's 'haben'? Technisch gesehen sind diese Kameras zwar sehr gut und überdecken rein rechnernisch den MFT Sensor der OM, allerdings hast du auf Insta und Co nichts davon. Wenn du wirklich in den großformatigen Print gehen möchtest, w

The SL2 was CMOS, but SL2s and SL3 are BSI. Current rumors suggest the 44.3MP sensor will be based on the hardware in the upcoming Panasonic S1R II. Leica does tweaks. Also only mentions of better AF; I want better noise.

I suggest in this case to rent both (get an SL3 from Leica, an S1Rii from Panasonic) and test for yourself. This is a specific question that probably not many have looked into. I assume you will be fine with both and that the lens will matter more.

I've never understood the drive to buy an SL to be honest. I've tried the SL3 with some lenses and it just felt like using a Sony/Canon but with a Leica menu system/UI. Just as heavy (if not more!), and without the drive on technology advancements you get from the big makers either - the likes of th

With Sony the problem is that only A1 is mind blowing… ZF is just not Sony type of small, and looks better than it feels in the hand; the older generation z6/7ii was a bit smaller but performance wasn’t there and especially for manual lenses it was noticeable how bad the viewfinder is. I’d say no im