From Leica to 5DIII

[StephenPatterson]

Wow. Stunned. Amazed...

I've been a Leica guy for a very long time, but I needed another camera to address some of the M9's shortcomings which were only exaggerated since my move to China. While the IQ of the M9 is absolutely fantastic I found myself struggling in very low light, even with fast glass, because I couldn't push the ISO up beyond 1250 without causing a snowstorm. I also realized that a weather sealed camera would be a plus (it rains a lot in SE Asia), along with a faster buffer and faster fps continuous shooting. Autofocus was something I really didn't want, as the last one I used (Canon D60 ten years ago) really struggled and I didn't like fighting to achieve my focus point.

So last week I was in Hong Kong to shoot a charity squash tournament and the organizer offered me the use of his extensive Canon kit (1Dx, 5DIII, 24-105L, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 300/2.8). Well I told him that I was sure I could capture what he wanted with my M9s, but heck he offered and here was all this new and lovely gear and I had several days to get familiar with it before the event and...well, I just ran out of excuses not to try.

Color me amazed...autofocus that works like it's supposed to; fast and accurate. And the high ISO. WOW. I thought I was "king of the night" with the Noctilux at ISO1250, but using the 5DIII with a 35/1.4 or 50/1.2 is a whole other experience.

Before leaving Hong Kong I had purchased a 5DIII with 24-105L kit, the new Sigma 35/1.4 and the 85/1.2L II. The 35 and 85 are very "Leica like", and the 24-105 is a great walk around lens. At this point I am most comfortable with prime lenses, and the IQ does seem superior, but I know there are several other outstanding zoom lenses out there. I don't shoot wildlife or sports, mainly because every forest creature here in China has been eaten and the only organized sports is professional baijiu drinking, but the 70-200 IS II was one of my favorite lenses for capturing portraits, so I might have to find one for the kit. Far and away the 85/1.2L II was the lens that sold me on Canon glass being every bit the equal of Leica, at least where this lens is concerned.

I have no plans to stop using the Leica, but I cannot believe how far Canon has come.

OK, time to take more images. Here are a few of my captures that "pushed me over the edge". The first three are with the 85/1.2L and the last two are with the 70-200 2.8 IS II

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Saving up for one myself. After all these years a canon full frame camera in a small form factor which does pretty much all, pro AF, pro build, a good amount of megapixels. No the DR isn't as good as the Nikons ditto the prices but the colour, tonality and resolution are good. Looking forward for mine.

 

[Paratom]

So I am not alone adding a 5d to my Leica equipment. I felt like I was the only one choosing a 5diii over a D800. I got my 5dIII one week ago.
Great AF, great viewfinder, very good colors.
In my case not the 85/1.2 but the 50/1.2, 135/2.0 and the 24-70.
So far I really like it. There are things when a fast AF and good high ISO make life much easier. Specially with 2 small kids.
And I agree that some of those L lenses are really very good.

 

[StephenPatterson]

Tom, I had a chance to shoot briefly with a friend's 135/2L on my last day in Hong Kong, and when I had a chance to review the images I was blown away by the IQ. This is definitely a lens that will find it's way into my bag.

I had originally thought I would get the 50/1.2L, as I shoot quite a bit with the Noctilux for portraits, but once I tried the 85/1.2L that was it. The new 35/1.4 Sigma was the lens that came closest to giving me that 35 Summilux ASPH look, although as many have pointed out the bokeh isn't as nice. It is however tack sharp and the colors are very nice. It's also an amazing lens for shooting in the evening, combined with the ultra high ISO capabilities of the 5DMIII. When the sun goes down this lens goes on.

I'm off to Thailand and Cambodia in a week, so the new Canon is going to get a workout alongside the Leica. At this point I don't have anything for the Canon like my 21 Super Elmar M or 15/4.5 Heliar, so the Leica will be doing most of the temple duty. Of course those are the hardest lenses to frame with the rangefinder, so perhaps I will have to find a solution at a Canon shop in Bangkok. I realize the 16-35 or 17-40 will not perform like the 21SEM wide open, but stopped down the results I've seen look pretty nice.

 

[pophoto]

Stephen, congratulations on the new gear! I used to be a Nikon and then Leica owner, and now the only gear I feel I really need are my Canons! That said the OMD and the Sigma DP2M, have been fun to shoot with for that something light.

I own mostly primes with the exception of the 70-200L II, however, I'm very interested to learn how you feel about the new Sigma 35mm Art series. Also I can highly recommend the 50L f1.2, if that focal length captures your fancy, it stays on my camera 95% of the time!

 

[Paratom]

Tom, I had a chance to shoot briefly with a friend's 135/2L on my last day in Hong Kong, and when I had a chance to review the images I was blown away by the IQ. This is definitely a lens that will find it's way into my bag.

I had originally thought I would get the 50/1.2L, as I shoot quite a bit with the Noctilux for portraits, but once I tried the 85/1.2L that was it. The new 35/1.4 Sigma was the lens that came closest to giving me that 35 Summilux ASPH look, although as many have pointed out the bokeh isn't as nice. It is however tack sharp and the colors are very nice. It's also an amazing lens for shooting in the evening, combined with the ultra high ISO capabilities of the 5DMIII. When the sun goes down this lens goes on.

I'm off to Thailand and Cambodia in a week, so the new Canon is going to get a workout alongside the Leica. At this point I don't have anything for the Canon like my 21 Super Elmar M or 15/4.5 Heliar, so the Leica will be doing most of the temple duty. Of course those are the hardest lenses to frame with the rangefinder, so perhaps I will have to find a solution at a Canon shop in Bangkok. I realize the 16-35 or 17-40 will not perform like the 21SEM wide open, but stopped down the results I've seen look pretty nice.

I first wanted to get the 16-35 +50 + something longer.
I was a little concerned about the 16-35 IQ wide open. And for the beginning 24mm of the 24-70 is wide enough.
I also do not plan to replicated all focal length I have for Leica.
I want to keep it flexible and simple. And I dont want to add manual focus lenses. If 24 wasnt wide enough I would probably give the 16-35 a try even though the repuatation is not as consistent as some other L-lenses.
The only MF lens I could think of was a TS-lens. But I find 24mm not wide enough and 17mm too wide.

I would be interested how the 85/1.8 holds up against the 85/1.2. Have you tried both?

How do you get along with the 5diii IQ compared to Canon?
Do you use lightroom for convertion?
Cheers,Tom

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Of course those are the hardest lenses to frame with the rangefinder, so perhaps I will have to find a solution at a Canon shop in Bangkok.

Stephen, if you need to buy gear in Bangkok, I can recommend very warmly AV Camera, Home. They have an amazing selection of gear in the little shop and you'll be taken very good care of. Talk with the owner, Khun Mana, who sits at a desk at the bottom of the store, and say that Jorgen sent you there. The easiest way to get there is to take BTS Sky-train to Saphan Taksin (Taksin Bridge). The shop is in a small back street to the left of Robinson Department Store around 50 meters north of the station.

 

[JMaher]

Tom,

The 85 1.8 is an excellent lens and can hold its own with the 1.2. Of course that assumes you don't need 1.2 or 1.4. I have shot a friends 1.2 and I own the 1.8.

I wasn't impressed with the 16-35 when I borrowed it.

Jim

 

[robertwright]

the 16-35 and the 17-40 are essentially equal, if you don't need the speed of the 2.8 then save the money and get the 17-40. At f8-11 they are identical. At f4 they are also really close and the defining characteristic is not aperture but focal length, they both perform differently wide open at different focal lengths, the weakest usually being the long end.

I found the 16-35 a little short sometimes, with the 17-40 you can get away with not having a 50 in the bag. And the extra stop is not really missed. Depends on how you shoot, but having a little more dof at f4 is sometimes a blessing compared to fast lenses. Unless you have a subject dead center in the frame nothing much is in focus wide open on the 16-35.

As for the 85, altho the L is really in a category of its own, the 1.8 is every bit as good from f2 on down. And again, nothing is in focus at 1.2- you get tired very quickly of that when 2.8 usually is sufficiently thin dof for portraiture for example. And the slower lens goes in the bag so much easier....I bought the 100 f2 after comparing them all, finding the 85 was a little wide when you got in tight. Distorted. Its more of a three quarter to bust portrait lens whereas the 100 is bust to head type lens, possibly the 135 is better even still for rendering naturally.

 

[pophoto]

I had returned my copy of the 16-35L II just after a day of testing. I just wasn't crazy about IQ and for the money I felt all it does is offer you the versatility of the range and very little in IQ to be desired. I have the 24L II and the 24L TSE II but unfortunately let this one go! Both primes simply had better IQ, despite lacking the obvious range, I kept the one with AF!

The 85L II, is sharp from Wide open, and although criticized to have slow focus, the is only true from one extreme to another, it's not a gun down lens, it is in a class of its own portrait lens. The 85L II is a super sharp lens, I'm sure the is helped by the sheer amount of glass and further being in tele category!

The 50L can be considered soft at f1.2, although nothing a slight sharpening in Lightroom won't dramatically improve with next to nothing lost! Fast focusing, it the lens I love most, and find the crop perfect for indoors and outdoors, chasing after kids etc (AF speeds).

 

[ptomsu]

As already said many times, the 1.2/85 II is maybe the best lens of the Canon system at all! It is so good that it would be a reason for me to buy into Canon again - this time either with 5DIII or 1DX.

BTW, I really liked my 16-35II but maybe the 17-40 would be more versatile.

 

[Paratom]

Tom,

The 85 1.8 is an excellent lens and can hold its own with the 1.2. Of course that assumes you don't need 1.2 or 1.4. I have shot a friends 1.2 and I own the 1.8.

I wasn't impressed with the 16-35 when I borrowed it.

Jim

I never felt my 90/2.8 Elmarit was too slow... so f1.8 would be fine for me for a 85mm lens. Plus I would have the 50/1.2 when it is really dark.

 

[jonoslack]

Shhhhhhhhhh

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Stephen,
Did you ever consider the 6D? To me, that camera seems closer to a Leica in functionality:

- It's slightly smaller and lighter
- Has exchangeable focusing screens, making manual focusing of wide aperture lenses easier
- Has, from what has been shown so far, better high ISO (it's a different sensor)

In addition, it adds a couple of goodies, like built in GPS and WiFi.

 

[StephenPatterson]

Stephen,
Did you ever consider the 6D? To me, that camera seems closer to a Leica in functionality:

- It's slightly smaller and lighter
- Has exchangeable focusing screens, making manual focusing of wide aperture lenses easier
- Has, from what has been shown so far, better high ISO (it's a different sensor)

In addition, it adds a couple of goodies, like built in GPS and WiFi.

Hi Jorgen,

I did consider the new Canon 6D, but opted for the 5DIII for several reasons. Again my choices were based upon a Canon dSLR to supplement my Leica M9, not replace it, so that definitely influenced my decision making process.

The strongest factor for me in selecting the 5DIII was the autofocus system, as it is the same as the 1Dx and is simply stunning. It has already shown that I can capture sharp images, especially moving subjects, which would be very difficult with the Leica.

Next was the construction and weather sealing of the 5DIII, which I feel fall between the top of the line 1Dx and 6D. I have never felt comfortable using my M9 in the rain, which can go on for weeks at a time here. And while the new Leica M body is weather sealed my very expensive lenses are not, so I wanted a weather sealed "system", and an S2 was not in the budget.

The interchangeable focus screens of the 6D is nice, but so is the LCD overlay on the 5DIII viewfinder. If I use MF lenses with the 5DIII they will most likely be at the wide end, where I am setting hyper focal distance, so perfect MF is not as much of an issue.

GPS was not really an issue, as the maps for remote parts of China are terrible, but WIFI would have been a welcome feature for the remote shooting via an iPhone. Being able to rig the camera on a boom while focus and shutter are controlled from an iPad is brilliant, and no doubt this feature will show up on the 5DIV. It's too bad Canon does not offer an inexpensive WIFI module like Nikon has for the D800.

I did also consider the D800, and there were many things I liked about the camera, but the huge RAW files were a negative and I preferred the lens choices from Canon.

The 6D has such an outstanding price point I think many people will find it an excellent second camera to go along with a 5DIII.

 

[StephenPatterson]

I never felt my 90/2.8 Elmarit was too slow... so f1.8 would be fine for me for a 85mm lens. Plus I would have the 50/1.2 when it is really dark.

Tom, I love the 90 Elmarit-M, and it's a great portrait lens at f/2.8, although it doesn't really sharpen up until f/4.

As for the 85/1.2 vs 85/1.8, well, it's all about the shallow DOF and how it's used, but I think you would find the 1.2 an amazing portrait lens.

I tested the 50/1.2L vs the 85/1.2L II and felt the 85 was definitely the sharper lens, especially wide open. The 35/1.4 was my choice for really dark situations, simply because I can hand hold the focal length at much slower shutter speeds.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

The 6D has such an outstanding price point I think many people will find it an excellent second camera to go along with a 5DIII.

I even consider the 6D to go along with a D600, as a platform for alternative glass (I have several F-mount bodies and lenses for my day-to-day work), a kind of OM-6D

Where are you going in Thailand and Cambodia?

 

[StephenPatterson]

Flying into Bangkok on the 10th, seeing friends and shooting for a few days there, then Siem Reap and Battambang before heading down to Phnom Penh on the 18th through 29th. Home for New Year. Like most Chinese my wife is Buddhist and Christmas is some weird holiday created by shopping malls. Just another day at the office for her.

We have a small group of expat photographers from around SE Asia who are all meeting up to enjoy the sunshine and fantastic shooting opportunities in Cambodia.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Cambodia is really something. I go there several times every year. Back there again later this month.

Flying into Bangkok on the 10th, seeing friends and shooting for a few days there, then Siem Reap and Battambang before heading down to Phnom Penh on the 18th through 29th. Home for New Year. Like most Chinese my wife is Buddhist and Christmas is some weird holiday created by shopping malls. Just another day at the office for her.

We have a small group of expat photographers from around SE Asia who are all meeting up to enjoy the sunshine and fantastic shooting opportunities in Cambodia.

 

[robsteve]

Stephen:

Even though I am not a Canon shooter anymore, there are a few of the Canon lenses that can provide Leica quality images. I used my Canon 1D and 1D MkII shooting sports so the criteria may be a bit different, but as you have discovered some of the Canon lenses are stellar. The best bang for the buck is probably the 85mm f1.8. In my case the 85mm f1.2 was too slow focusing, though there may be a new version of it with a better AF motor, I just haven't followed Canon lately.

The 135mm F2 L probably has to be the most Leica like of the lenses, being very sharp wide open, great colours and fast AF.

The latest 400mm f2.8 is pretty stellar too, with lighting fast AF.

I haven't used it, but the Canon 35mm f1.4 is supposed to be as good as the Leica R 35mm f1.4.

If I had to buy just one lens of the above, I would probably go with the 135mm f2 L.