Modlin wrote:You can buy Canon vs Leica SL2-S....npsame as with:VW vs AudiAudi vs PorscheHouse with siding or bricked houseBose speakers vs Tannoyetc etcyour choice..why do you ask here?....on a Leica forumBecause the OP can!....

For me Leica is all about the M lineup (and also Q as a fan of the fixed lens Ricoh GR cameras). I would rather get a Hasselblad than something from the SL system.

Couldn’t agree more.That grotesque front-end is what stopped me from buying an M4.And that pretty-much leaves me unable to purchase a performance car, because I refuse to buy one that doesn’t have a manual transmission.Porsche 911s and 718s still have manuals; so does the Toyota Supra, or Mazda Miata. Manual transmissions are making a little bit of a come back recently.

PJ711 wrote:Couldn’t agree more.That grotesque front-end is what stopped me from buying an M4.And that pretty-much leaves me unable to purchase a performance car, because I refuse to buy one that doesn’t have a manual transmission.Porsche 911s and 718s still have manuals; so does the Toyota Supra, or Mazda Miata. Manual transmissions are making a little bit of a come back recently.On Sports and Performance cars - run of the mill daily runabouts all come under the Auto heading. My SRT had Paddles as do many other high performance machines. What has this todo with buying a Leica SL2-s?  L

PJ711 wrote:Couldn’t agree more.That grotesque front-end is what stopped me from buying an M4.And that pretty-much leaves me unable to purchase a performance car, because I refuse to buy one that doesn’t have a manual transmission.Porsche 911s and 718s still have manuals; so does the Toyota Supra, or Mazda Miata. Manual transmissions are making a little bit of a come back recently.I don’t particularly like sports cars.  The M4 is definitely a performance car (and a hell of a performance car at that), but I wouldn’t consider it be an outright sports car like the Porsche.

DocS wrote:That being said, there are some things we do actually want for logical reasons. In the case of Leica, the autofocus system is probably what is keeping me from pulling the trigger. And autofocus is one of those things that really do make a difference for most of us. Most features of a camera don’t make a difference to most of us. But AF does.AFs works very good and is very accurate. AFc may not be as good as some competitors, but do you need that?Background: I use an SL2 but from what I understand the SL2-S should be even better...Below is a photo of the the 1st and 2nd place finishers coming around the final corner at the Phoenix Nascar United 500 event; this is the 2nd of a 5 shot burst and is SOOC with a small crop. I had to downsize so I'm not sure how well it will come across, but I used AFs and the cars are tack sharp.For some things like BIF, it would be better to get another system. But as you can see, even for fast action auto sports, I find the SL2 to work fine. Personally, I think most of the comments on the weak AF are not as important as it is made out to be. I traded a Fuji X-T3 system with highly regarded PDAF autofocus and I do not miss it. There are extremely few times when the PDAF auto focus would have been noticeably better - for me and what I photograph.What type of photography do you like? Perhaps the AF of the SL2-S will work just fine for what you like to do.I hope that gives some context for you to consider.

DocS wrote:PJ711 wrote:Couldn’t agree more.That grotesque front-end is what stopped me from buying an M4.And that pretty-much leaves me unable to purchase a performance car, because I refuse to buy one that doesn’t have a manual transmission.Porsche 911s and 718s still have manuals; so does the Toyota Supra, or Mazda Miata. Manual transmissions are making a little bit of a come back recently.I don’t particularly like sports cars. The M4 is definitely a performance car (and a hell of a performance car at that), but I wouldn’t consider it be an outright sports car like the Porsche.Definitely sounds like you're out of luck then!

PJ711 wrote:DocS wrote:PJ711 wrote:Couldn’t agree more.That grotesque front-end is what stopped me from buying an M4.And that pretty-much leaves me unable to purchase a performance car, because I refuse to buy one that doesn’t have a manual transmission.Porsche 911s and 718s still have manuals; so does the Toyota Supra, or Mazda Miata. Manual transmissions are making a little bit of a come back recently.I don’t particularly like sports cars. The M4 is definitely a performance car (and a hell of a performance car at that), but I wouldn’t consider it be an outright sports car like the Porsche.Definitely sounds like you're out of luck then!Yep!  That’s why I drive an SUV.

DocS wrote:I recently purchased a Canon 1DX3, and I love it. I’ve used Canon since 2000.I’m interested in trying something new. I’m looking at a Leica SL2S. I like the design, but the specs just aren’t all that impressive. Plus, the AF system is outright inferior.But I’m just trying to understand what exactly it offers that Canon does not. I suspect the build quality is better, but does it justify that kind of price?Or am I just missing the point? Is the value of a Leica in its uniqueness?You buy the leica, cause you like leica, the colors and the experience of using it... dont buy it expecting it to be a better, (technically better) camera, caue you will be dissapointed, (SL2-s has terrrible autofocus, so so battery life, terrible buffer, limited buttons to configure, some settings seems to have been done by an engineer with no photography experience etc, etc...).Not sure what canon camera you are using, but if you get a r5 with the newer fancy RF lenses, pretty sure leica image quality wont be better, just different, (which one is better will be just a matter of taste).I have the sl2s and do like the camera, but sometimes when i need to shoot fast pace events i fill like throwing it away, why? Cause the autofocus, and some terrible menu ideas that seemed to have been done by someone who never shot a camera, (you cannt assign eye autofocus to a button, it is on or off, you cant use multiple focus modes simultaneoulsy, everything is on or off, and i can give you a long list of things that dont make any sense,.... But for events that dont require fast focusing, nor complicated scenes, its a joy to use.

aiphoto1980 wrote:DocS wrote:I recently purchased a Canon 1DX3, and I love it. I’ve used Canon since 2000.I’m interested in trying something new. I’m looking at a Leica SL2S. I like the design, but the specs just aren’t all that impressive. Plus, the AF system is outright inferior.But I’m just trying to understand what exactly it offers that Canon does not. I suspect the build quality is better, but does it justify that kind of price?Or am I just missing the point? Is the value of a Leica in its uniqueness?You buy the leica, cause you like leica, the colors and the experience of using it... dont buy it expecting it to be a better, (technically better) camera, caue you will be dissapointed, (SL2-s has terrrible autofocus, so so battery life, terrible buffer, limited buttons to configure, some settings seems to have been done by an engineer with no photography experience etc, etc...).Not sure what canon camera you are using, but if you get a r5 with the newer fancy RF lenses, pretty sure leica image quality wont be better, just different, (which one is better will be just a matter of taste).I have the sl2s and do like the camera, but sometimes when i need to shoot fast pace events i fill like throwing it away, why? Cause the autofocus, and some terrible menu ideas that seemed to have been done by someone who never shot a camera, (you cannt assign eye autofocus to a button, it is on or off, you cant use multiple focus modes simultaneoulsy, everything is on or off, and i can give you a long list of things that dont make any sense,.... But for events that dont require fast focusing, nor complicated scenes, its a joy to use.Interesting perspectives... some I agree with others not.For example, I agree that if fast focusing is a primary need, the SL2 or SL2-S may not be for you. Yet, I do shoot events that require fast focusing and find both the menus and the focusing to work just fine for me. Caveat - for me events are usually just for fun and to capture 'behind the scenes' images that the pro photogs won't get, so if you are the primary photog paid to cover events, your needs will differ. Yet there are paid event photographers who use the system, so it does work well. To describe the AF as terrible is an exaggeration. (contrast detect is more accurate than phase detect but can miss when there isn't enough contrast; the saying applies here "a good workman learns his tools", yet you don't use a hammer to cut a board or a saw to hammer a nail... so YMMV)Next, to me, to say the settings were designed by an engineer with no photography experience is utter nonsense. Instead, the menus and handling, to me, are genius in their simplicity and the best implementation out there. Rather than having endless pages of menus for every possible setting that requires reading the manual in order to start shooting, the SL2(s) has a gorgeous and simple menu with just what you need, where you need it. Then, rather than dozens of buttons with miniature labels on them to try to have 'one button' for everything, there are just a few well placed buttons that can tackle the primary shooting needs and be flexible to adapt to each shooting style; this is absolutely brilliant and better than anything else I've experienced. In fact, that was one of the key things that drew me to the system after trying out Sony, Canon and Panasonic.And, yes you can assign AF modes (including eye AF) to a button, in a couple of different ways. And, no AF is not just 'on or off', rather you can tweak the AF modes.Last, profiles are an extremely powerful tool on the SL2(s), as they save every setting, not just a subset like most other brands. This includes AF settings, so careful thought in creating the profiles can easily cover all major changes in a single button. Think of the power of this for a moment; with a change of profile, you can have:-one profile with everything for fast action stills, indoors with another profile for outdoor stills. Maybe one for fast action, another for landscapes, another for low light, etc.-a completely different profile with every setting optimized for video. Or, several different profiles for video.The combination of simple yet genius menus, well placed and flexible buttons, along with extremely powerful profiles makes this a very versatile platform.In case this is helpful, Steve Huff has a new YT video about the SL2-S. (how much you regard his reviews is your choice, but at least he uses the gear he talks about unlike many other YT influencers). He raved about the SL2-S when he first got it a couple years ago, calling it the best Leica camera ever. Then he raved about again it last year after a more long term review. Now, in 2023, he calls it the best camera he's ever had...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=196NCzSntMcBack to the OP questions... I completely agree that the reasons to buy Leica are not from the spec sheet; and I agree that colors and the experience are key reasons to buy. I would encourage the OP to try one out and see if it works for you. I resisted for a very long time, but once I tried it I realized that it would work just fine for me.hth!

koweb wrote:aiphoto1980 wrote:DocS wrote:I recently purchased a Canon 1DX3, and I love it. I’ve used Canon since 2000.I’m interested in trying something new. I’m looking at a Leica SL2S. I like the design, but the specs just aren’t all that impressive. Plus, the AF system is outright inferior.But I’m just trying to understand what exactly it offers that Canon does not. I suspect the build quality is better, but does it justify that kind of price?Or am I just missing the point? Is the value of a Leica in its uniqueness?You buy the leica, cause you like leica, the colors and the experience of using it... dont buy it expecting it to be a better, (technically better) camera, caue you will be dissapointed, (SL2-s has terrrible autofocus, so so battery life, terrible buffer, limited buttons to configure, some settings seems to have been done by an engineer with no photography experience etc, etc...).Not sure what canon camera you are using, but if you get a r5 with the newer fancy RF lenses, pretty sure leica image quality wont be better, just different, (which one is better will be just a matter of taste).I have the sl2s and do like the camera, but sometimes when i need to shoot fast pace events i fill like throwing it away, why? Cause the autofocus, and some terrible menu ideas that seemed to have been done by someone who never shot a camera, (you cannt assign eye autofocus to a button, it is on or off, you cant use multiple focus modes simultaneoulsy, everything is on or off, and i can give you a long list of things that dont make any sense,.... But for events that dont require fast focusing, nor complicated scenes, its a joy to use.Interesting perspectives... some I agree with others not.For example, I agree that if fast focusing is a primary need, the SL2 or SL2-S may not be for you. Yet, I do shoot events that require fast focusing and find both the menus and the focusing to work just fine for me. Caveat - for me events are usually just for fun and to capture 'behind the scenes' images that the pro photogs won't get, so if you are the primary photog paid to cover events, your needs will differ. Yet there are paid event photographers who use the system, so it does work well. To describe the AF as terrible is an exaggeration. (contrast detect is more accurate than phase detect but can miss when there isn't enough contrast; the saying applies here "a good workman learns his tools", yet you don't use a hammer to cut a board or a saw to hammer a nail... so YMMV)Next, to me, to say the settings were designed by an engineer with no photography experience is utter nonsense. Instead, the menus and handling, to me, are genius in their simplicity and the best implementation out there. Rather than having endless pages of menus for every possible setting that requires reading the manual in order to start shooting, the SL2(s) has a gorgeous and simple menu with just what you need, where you need it. Then, rather than dozens of buttons with miniature labels on them to try to have 'one button' for everything, there are just a few well placed buttons that can tackle the primary shooting needs and be flexible to adapt to each shooting style; this is absolutely brilliant and better than anything else I've experienced. In fact, that was one of the key things that drew me to the system after trying out Sony, Canon and Panasonic.And, yes you can assign AF modes (including eye AF) to a button, in a couple of different ways. And, no AF is not just 'on or off', rather you can tweak the AF modes.Last, profiles are an extremely powerful tool on the SL2(s), as they save every setting, not just a subset like most other brands. This includes AF settings, so careful thought in creating the profiles can easily cover all major changes in a single button. Think of the power of this for a moment; with a change of profile, you can have:-one profile with everything for fast action stills, indoors with another profile for outdoor stills. Maybe one for fast action, another for landscapes, another for low light, etc.-a completely different profile with every setting optimized for video. Or, several different profiles for video.The combination of simple yet genius menus, well placed and flexible buttons, along with extremely powerful profiles makes this a very versatile platform.In case this is helpful, Steve Huff has a new YT video about the SL2-S. (how much you regard his reviews is your choice, but at least he uses the gear he talks about unlike many other YT influencers). He raved about the SL2-S when he first got it a couple years ago, calling it the best Leica camera ever. Then he raved about again it last year after a more long term review. Now, in 2023, he calls it the best camera he's ever had...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=196NCzSntMcBack to the OP questions... I completely agree that the reasons to buy Leica are not from the spec sheet; and I agree that colors and the experience are key reasons to buy. I would encourage the OP to try one out and see if it works for you. I resisted for a very long time, but once I tried it I realized that it would work just fine for me.I like Steve Huf, he is very passinanote about his hobbies.Lets say you are shooting a wedding... you dont want to rely in eye detect all the time cause sometimes you need to shoot details, also eye detect in this camera has a mind of its own when you have multiple subjects on the frame, it jumps from one face to another and there is no way to lock it in one face...By assigning it to one button i mean that if you press focus button it uses eye detect, if you press back button it uses single focus button for example, none of this can be achieved with this camera unless you play with profiles which means you need to press a button to change profiles. So yes when you need a fast way to do it is not possible.For example with a canon 5d mark 4 you could set at least 3 different focus actively without the need of having to change profiles. Shutter button would be afs, back shutter afc and the other back button tracking... good luch achieving that with the sl, by the time you change profiles you lost the moment.Another limitation of this camera is how back focus button was implemented in the camera, basically, it doesn't work unless you shoot multiple shots in a row given how the focusing works... also you cant disable the front focus button you need to set the lens in manual to be able to shoot back focus... yes i have tons of other small issues which kind of tell me the camera was designed by someone who never really had the need to shoot profesionally.

dont get me wrong, i love the sl but thats cause i no longer shoot profesionally and can as well use my m lenses, i shoot for fun, but as a profesional system i woudnt recommend it at all...better go canon or z9... (I guess sony as well, but i really dislike sony handling).

aiphoto1980 wrote:koweb wrote:aiphoto1980 wrote:DocS wrote:I recently purchased a Canon 1DX3, and I love it. I’ve used Canon since 2000.I’m interested in trying something new. I’m looking at a Leica SL2S. I like the design, but the specs just aren’t all that impressive. Plus, the AF system is outright inferior.But I’m just trying to understand what exactly it offers that Canon does not. I suspect the build quality is better, but does it justify that kind of price?Or am I just missing the point? Is the value of a Leica in its uniqueness?You buy the leica, cause you like leica, the colors and the experience of using it... dont buy it expecting it to be a better, (technically better) camera, caue you will be dissapointed, (SL2-s has terrrible autofocus, so so battery life, terrible buffer, limited buttons to configure, some settings seems to have been done by an engineer with no photography experience etc, etc...).Not sure what canon camera you are using, but if you get a r5 with the newer fancy RF lenses, pretty sure leica image quality wont be better, just different, (which one is better will be just a matter of taste).I have the sl2s and do like the camera, but sometimes when i need to shoot fast pace events i fill like throwing it away, why? Cause the autofocus, and some terrible menu ideas that seemed to have been done by someone who never shot a camera, (you cannt assign eye autofocus to a button, it is on or off, you cant use multiple focus modes simultaneoulsy, everything is on or off, and i can give you a long list of things that dont make any sense,.... But for events that dont require fast focusing, nor complicated scenes, its a joy to use.Interesting perspectives... some I agree with others not.For example, I agree that if fast focusing is a primary need, the SL2 or SL2-S may not be for you. Yet, I do shoot events that require fast focusing and find both the menus and the focusing to work just fine for me. Caveat - for me events are usually just for fun and to capture 'behind the scenes' images that the pro photogs won't get, so if you are the primary photog paid to cover events, your needs will differ. Yet there are paid event photographers who use the system, so it does work well. To describe the AF as terrible is an exaggeration. (contrast detect is more accurate than phase detect but can miss when there isn't enough contrast; the saying applies here "a good workman learns his tools", yet you don't use a hammer to cut a board or a saw to hammer a nail... so YMMV)Next, to me, to say the settings were designed by an engineer with no photography experience is utter nonsense. Instead, the menus and handling, to me, are genius in their simplicity and the best implementation out there. Rather than having endless pages of menus for every possible setting that requires reading the manual in order to start shooting, the SL2(s) has a gorgeous and simple menu with just what you need, where you need it. Then, rather than dozens of buttons with miniature labels on them to try to have 'one button' for everything, there are just a few well placed buttons that can tackle the primary shooting needs and be flexible to adapt to each shooting style; this is absolutely brilliant and better than anything else I've experienced. In fact, that was one of the key things that drew me to the system after trying out Sony, Canon and Panasonic.And, yes you can assign AF modes (including eye AF) to a button, in a couple of different ways. And, no AF is not just 'on or off', rather you can tweak the AF modes.Last, profiles are an extremely powerful tool on the SL2(s), as they save every setting, not just a subset like most other brands. This includes AF settings, so careful thought in creating the profiles can easily cover all major changes in a single button. Think of the power of this for a moment; with a change of profile, you can have:-one profile with everything for fast action stills, indoors with another profile for outdoor stills. Maybe one for fast action, another for landscapes, another for low light, etc.-a completely different profile with every setting optimized for video. Or, several different profiles for video.The combination of simple yet genius menus, well placed and flexible buttons, along with extremely powerful profiles makes this a very versatile platform.In case this is helpful, Steve Huff has a new YT video about the SL2-S. (how much you regard his reviews is your choice, but at least he uses the gear he talks about unlike many other YT influencers). He raved about the SL2-S when he first got it a couple years ago, calling it the best Leica camera ever. Then he raved about again it last year after a more long term review. Now, in 2023, he calls it the best camera he's ever had...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=196NCzSntMcBack to the OP questions... I completely agree that the reasons to buy Leica are not from the spec sheet; and I agree that colors and the experience are key reasons to buy. I would encourage the OP to try one out and see if it works for you. I resisted for a very long time, but once I tried it I realized that it would work just fine for me.I like Steve Huf, he is very passinanote about his hobby, but if thats your recommendation, there is no sense in replying.Lets say you are shooting a wedding... you dont want to rely in eye detect all the time cause sometimes you need to shoot details, also eye detect in this camera has a mind of its own when you have multiple subjects on the frame, it jumps from one face to another and there is no way to lock it in one face...By assigning it to one button i mean that if you press focus button it uses eye detect, if you press back button it uses single focus button for example, none of this can be achieved with this camera unless you play with profiles which means you need to press a button to change profiles. So yes when you need a fast way to do it is not possible.For example with a canon 5d mark 4 you could set at least 3 different focus actively without the need of having to change profiles. Shutter button would be afs, back shutter afc and the other back button tracking... good luch achieving that with the sl, by the time you change profiles you lost the moment.Another crazy limitation of this camera is the fact how back focus button was implemented in the camera, basically, it doesn't work unless you shoot multiple shots in a row given how the focusing works... also you cant disable the front focus button you need to set the lens in manual to be able to shoot back focus... yes i have tons of other small issues which kind of tell me the camera was designed by someone who never really had the need to shoot profesionally.LOL, I was just waiting to see what someone might say about Steve Huff. Nowhere did I say it was my recommendation, in fact I qualified it to suggest the opposite.Thank you for clarifying your issues with how you use AF settings. But, you will note in my earlier comments that I urged caution if someone's use case was as a paid pro for events. I imagine it would be a bold photographer that would use the SL system as their primary system for weddings (yet some do and love the system for that; many posts on LUF from pro event photographers who rave about using only the SL system - perhaps they know how to use the system better than you?)As to back button focus; either I am confused by what you describe, or you are incorrect. Let me explain how I use it in practice...-you do not have to set the lens in manual mode to shoot back focus; you can assign the joystick press to BBF lock in any of the AF modes, with separate settings for MF mode. ie, it works in both.-also, while in an AF mode, you can lock focus by pressing the joystick button, then rotate the focus ring to both zoom and do a manual tweak with highlight peaking to assist.-I most commonly use AFs with single shots and the BBF method above; I'm not a 'spray and pray' photographer. I recently used that method at a Nascar event. When I took multiple shots it was to capture the action not due to any AF limitations; and it nailed focus the majority of the time, even on single shots... I experienced no 'crazy limitation'(Note, the above works for Leica and Sigma lenses that I have used; whether they work for Panasonic lenses I don't know)This video explains the process I use:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsR0PCpMJdoTo be clear, I am not seeking your approval on any YT videos I link to. If they are helpful, fine; if not, anyone is free to move on.You seem to be trying to prove a point using questionable examples. "Shooting professionally" includes a lot of genres for which the SL system is absolutely ideal. You've harped on only one genre, the one which is a known weakness of the system. And, as noted, others happily overcome any weaknesses to use the system in the scenarios you describe.Whether the SL2(s) is right for anyone, including the OP, is up to them and their intended use. But, my recommendation is to check it out for themselves and allow time to learn how the systems work.

aiphoto1980 wrote:dont get me wrong, i love the sl but thats cause i no longer shoot profesionally and can as well use my m lenses, i shoot for fun, but as a profesional system i woudnt recommend it at all...better go canon or z9... (I guess sony as well, but i really dislike sony handling).I can't argue with that, at least if by professional we are talking being paid to do weddings or paid events. R5 or Z9 get rave reviews for that.BTW, I have admired your work for awhile now; I love the saturated colors and the dramatic looks you achieve. You have a great eye!

koweb wrote:aiphoto1980 wrote:dont get me wrong, i love the sl but thats cause i no longer shoot profesionally and can as well use my m lenses, i shoot for fun, but as a profesional system i woudnt recommend it at all...better go canon or z9... (I guess sony as well, but i really dislike sony handling).I can't argue with that, at least if by professional we are talking being paid to do weddings or paid events. R5 or Z9 get rave reviews for that.BTW, I have admired your work for awhile now; I love the saturated colors and the dramatic looks you achieve. You have a great eye!thanks!!!

I tried editing my initial response, given i thought it might have come out as rude... but seems you replied before the editing took place.I dont have anything against Steve I actually used to really enjoy his blog given how passionate he was about photography and also somehow miss his posts, (I am not into audio so I stopped following) .Perhaps i didnt express myself clear, i will try to clarify my points below:the issue with backfocus button is the following:- you cant disable the shutter button and use only back focus button, unless you set the lens to manual. Basically you dont have the option to disable the shutter focus button. This works with many lenses, but with pana lenses who have the clutch it doesnt, because you cant the lens to manual.- the other issue, is that due to how contrast detect works, you cant use back focus as with any phase detect camera given how contrast detect works, it needs to pulse front to back, and when you stop pressing the back focus thinking its in focus, the camera decides to stop in one of those out of focus movements.I know I might sound very negative about the sl2, and sometimes really think of getting rid of it... But I am a Leica fan can't deny itPerhaps when the Q3 comes.... I will end replacing it for the Q

aiphoto1980 wrote:I tried editing my initial response, given i thought it might have come out as rude... but seems you replied before the editing took place.I dont have anything against Steve I actually used to really enjoy his blog given how passionate he was about photography and also somehow miss his posts, (I am not into audio so I stopped following) .Perhaps i didnt express myself clear, i will try to clarify my points below:the issue with backfocus button is the following:- you cant disable the shutter button and use only back focus button, unless you set the lens to manual. Basically you dont have the option to disable the shutter focus button. This works with many lenses, but with pana lenses who have the clutch it doesnt, because you cant the lens to manual.- the other issue, is that due to how contrast detect works, you cant use back focus as with any phase detect camera given how contrast detect works, it needs to pulse front to back, and when you stop pressing the back focus thinking its in focus, the camera decides to stop in one of those out of focus movements.I know I might sound very negative about the sl2, and sometimes really think of getting rid of it... But I am a Leica fan can't deny itPerhaps when the Q3 comes.... I will end replacing it for the QThanks for more info... so maybe I am using it differently, or maybe I don't understand your issue...-yes you can't disable the shutter button, but that doesn't matter the way I use it. The key is that the joystick is not an "AF ON" button, it only focuses as long as you press and hold it down. So, I hover over the area of focus, press and hold the joystick button, then I can press the shutter as many times as I need without any refocusing. So, to me, that 'disables' the shutter button trying to refocus, but only as long the joystick button is pressed. This is by design.-I thought I had heard that the BBF and manual focus tweaking doesn't work with Panasonic lenses due to their focus clutch. But, I've never tried a Pana lens to know for sure how it works.-yes contrast detect is a weaker system than PDAF if the focus range changes a lot, or if there is low contrast. I've found that since I've formed the habit of using the joystick BBF press for AF, I avoid a lot of that racking back and forth. For example, if the area of focus changes only slightly, the AF only moves that little bit and won't rack back and forth. But when using the shutter button it seems easier to start to focus on an area that is a lot further away, then realize you want to focus closer - in those cases I do know what you mean and any CDAF system can be prone to racking all the way in and out. I find using the joystick press helps reduce how often this is an issue.Also, when you have enough time to get ready, and can anticipate where the action will be, I use the BBF to focus on an area close to where the action will be; I used this a lot at a recent Nascar event, where I pre-focused on the track, then waited for the cars. By doing this, the focus on the car was almost immediate and tack sharp; no racking at all. Out of about 1000 shots, I had less than a dozen that mis-focused completely, and a few that were focused on the wrong thing; but the last was my fault as I was addicted to shooting the 90-280 wide open with very shallow DOF.Phoenix Nascar United 500, last turn with 1st and 2nd place cars. SOOC jpg.I'm hopeful that a new SL3 will come out with PDAF. I think the clue is that Panasonic (after years of saying their DFD contrast AF was good enough) has now implemented PDAF in the new S5 ii. Rumor has it that a new S1H with PDAF will be announced shortly. If an SL3 has PDAF and a better low light sensor, I will definitely be interested in that.

koweb wrote:Also, when you have enough time to get ready, and can anticipate where the action will be, I use the BBF to focus on an area close to where the action will be; I used this a lot at a recent Nascar event, where I pre-focused on the track, then waited for the cars. By doing this, the focus on the car was almost immediate and tack sharp; no racking at all. Out of about 1000 shots, I had less than a dozen that mis-focused completely, and a few that were focused on the wrong thing; but the last was my fault as I was addicted to shooting the 90-280 wide open with very shallow DOF.Phoenix Nascar United 500, last turn with 1st and 2nd place cars. SOOC jpg.I’ve already seen you posting this picture a couple of times, and I am not sure why. Maybe you just like the photo, then it’s OK, I don’t want to offend you personally, and there wouldn’t even be a reason as the photo is good as it is. But taking the context into account, it feels to me like you would like to proof with this photo that the Leica’s AF is good enough even for professional sports events, and I think this is misleading. The subject is miles away (I know it’s not miles, but you get the point), and as you already mentioned for this type of photo you can pre-focus, and then just snap away. But this is something that also my small P&S Canon PowerShot G5 X Mark II is capable of.Unless you start comparing the AF in situations where you really need good AF the whole comparison is becoming increasingly moot. If the Leica can’t AF like a Nikon Z9, I think it is safe to say that the Leica is lacking in this department (see this videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXax73G27kat the 3:40 mark, but there are many more examples for close-up panning shots where you would need a great AF engine to keep your results in focus).And if you like the Leica, and can get around its limitations, then it is also OK to just like the Leica

Shooters on My Squad wrote:koweb wrote:Also, when you have enough time to get ready, and can anticipate where the action will be, I use the BBF to focus on an area close to where the action will be; I used this a lot at a recent Nascar event, where I pre-focused on the track, then waited for the cars. By doing this, the focus on the car was almost immediate and tack sharp; no racking at all. Out of about 1000 shots, I had less than a dozen that mis-focused completely, and a few that were focused on the wrong thing; but the last was my fault as I was addicted to shooting the 90-280 wide open with very shallow DOF.Phoenix Nascar United 500, last turn with 1st and 2nd place cars. SOOC jpg.I’ve already seen you posting this picture a couple of times, and I am not sure why. Maybe you just like the photo, then it’s OK, I don’t want to offend you personally, and there wouldn’t even be a reason as the photo is good as it is. But taking the context into account, it feels to me like you would like to proof with this photo that the Leica’s AF is good enough even for professional sports events, and I think this is misleading. The subject is miles away (I know it’s not miles, but you get the point), and as you already mentioned for this type of photo you can pre-focus, and then just snap away. But this is something that also my small P&S Canon PowerShot G5 X Mark II is capable of.Unless you start comparing the AF in situations where you really need good AF the whole comparison is becoming increasingly moot. If the Leica can’t AF like a Nikon Z9, I think it is safe to say thatthe Leica is lackingin this department (see this videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKXax73G27kat the 3:40 mark, but there are many more examples for close-up panning shots where you would need a great AF engine to keep your results in focus).Andif you like the Leica, and can get around its limitations, then it is also OK to just like the LeicaIf you read what I was responding to when I posted the photo above you will note it was specifically about using BBF, and not at all was it a commentary to 'prove' that an SL2 can be used for all professional sporting events. So, not sure how you took it to mean something it didn't.Your last sentence nailed it. I think if you re-read my earlier posts you will see that I have explained that this is the key in whether the AF of the Leica SL2 will work for your type of photography or not. I never said the SL2 AF is as good as a Z9, in fact I said the opposite.I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here; just sharing what works for me and how I use the SL2 for 'professional sporting events' (the example was as an attendee at Nascar, but I get paid to shoot desert racing).I will state this - my replies to this thread are intended to share my experiences that may be helpful to the original question; my apologies if it has come across differently than that.