Site Sponsors
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 17 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 350 of 887

Thread: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

  1. #301
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,271
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    A birthday party to follow, with the 35 FLE





    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #302
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    584
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Those are really nice, Ashwin

    Over at FM i begged for a summation of what's known about M lens performance on the SL and got this reply from Steve Spencer:

    "Here is what we know from various tests. The 28 elmarit ASPH shows worse corner performance on the SL than the M240. We know this from 3 sources. Jono Slack has posted images showing this on the Leica Forum. Another poster in the link that Hiep originally posted and I reposted found the same thing, and those who have seen it say Sean Reid has shown the same thing. We also know that the 35 cron ASPH has worse corner performance on the SL than the M240. We know this from the link I reposted earlier and from Sean Reid. We also know than the 28 cron doesn't perform quite as well on the SL as the M from the link I reposted earlier. We also know that the 28 Elmarit ASPH was designed in 1993, the 35 cron ASPH in 1997, and the 28 cron in 2000. All designed more than five years before Leica came out with the M8, so it seems reasonable to assume those lenses were designed with the plan they would be used on a film camera not a digital camera.

    So do we know that the SL has thicker cover glass? There is no source for it yet, but the impaired corner performance on these three lenses compared to the M240 is certainly evidence consistent with the idea that the SL has thicker cover glass. No we don't know this yet, that is why I said it appears to me, and it does appear to me that the SL has thicker cover glass based on its performance with those three lenses.

    In addition to the above we also have evidence from Sean Reid that the new 28 lux ASPH shows notably better performance on the SL than the M240. Several people have commented on the test from Sean Reid and all report seeing fairly clear evidence that this lens performs better on the SL. Given that the 28 Lux ASPH came out this year and performs better on the SL that also came out this year, I don't know what you want to call it but I don't think it is unreasonable to say that it is likely that the 28 Lux ASPH was tested on the SL and that Leica knew it performed better on the SL than the M240. Now maybe you wouldn't call that being designed for the SL, but I would. It certainly appears to me that the 28 Lux ASPH was designed to work with the SL.

    Putting these two lines of thought together it does certainly appear to me that the SL has a bit thicker cover glass (at least optically) and that the 28 Lux ASPH was designed to work with the SL (and its cover glass). That does make me wonder whether as Leica renews the 28 cron ASPH and the 35 cron ASPH (and maybe a slower 28mm) if these lenses won't work much better with the SL. I am optimistic they will, and further I expect the new M to have cover glass much like the SL."

    Leica SL images and specs. Looks somehow familiar... - FM Forums

  3. #303
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Not sure what everyone is talking about regarding the skin tones, profiles, and software. I understand their value, and the SL will benefit from tweaks over time ... but ... just an observation from my own experiences:

    All I see in the little boy/accordion shots is a slightly off WB compounded by a slight underexposure. A minor shift the Photoshop mid-tone color balance slider to the cyan side and tweak of mid-tone exposure fixes it in 3 seconds. No flushed skin tone or red skin shadows, and no crushed reds, better separation of the shirt and accordion with more tonal detail.

    There is no exif data accompanying those shots, so I can't see what ISO or WB setting was used ... but with many of today's energy saving incandescent lights the color temp often falls outside/below the auto WB range of many cameras. I took note of this over time while shooting weddings as venues switched to the new bulb types. In many cases of low light, higher ISO images auto WB wan't enough to counter-act the strong red/yellow cast. Oddly however, manual WB test shots would get it closer ... often much closer.

    BTW, the initial S2 images had a bias to the magenta which produced a pinkish skin tone which was improved in later updates, but the M240 was more complex, and I never could get natural skin-tones (at the time) regardless of PP work ... this SL doesn't seem to be suffering from that sort of interdependent color balance issue as far as I can tell.

    This leads to a key SL question ... how easy/fast is it to set manual WB with a test setting shot for available light work?

    - Marc
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #304
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Posts
    1,084
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    I don't go to FM because of a suspicion that the accuracy level is quite varied there. The response that uhoh7 quotes has some questionable statements. It may be conflating two 28 Elmarits, since when I purchased an M8 in 2006, the Elmarit-asph 28 had just been introduced to the market, and was advertised as the latest design from a renewed team. Its properties are such that it is extremely sharp out to about the radius of the M8's Kodak chip (1.3X). I'd like to know why it was said to be designed in 1993. The SX 28 reached the market this year as a mainline product, but was in reviewer's hands two years previous and sold as part of a collector's kit with a fancy body and three Summiluxes in 2013, so its design began well before the three years ago when "discussions that lead to the SL" are said to have begun.

    A bigger deal is that the differences between the M240, SL, and Sony industry standard chips are not just cover glass thickness (Roger Cicala should get credit for sorting out that factor), but also microlens shape and placement, and well design. Possibly even pixel cell layout, as asymmetric cell layout played a role in the Italian flag syndrome that the M9 encountered.

    So, grain of salt, folks.

    scott
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #305
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by scott kirkpatrick View Post
    I don't go to FM because of a suspicion that the accuracy level is quite varied there. The response that uhoh7 quotes has some questionable statements. It may be conflating two 28 Elmarits, since when I purchased an M8 in 2006, the Elmarit-asph 28 had just been introduced to the market, and was advertised as the latest design from a renewed team. Its properties are such that it is extremely sharp out to about the radius of the M8's Kodak chip (1.3X). I'd like to know why it was said to be designed in 1993. The SX 28 reached the market this year as a mainline product, but was in reviewer's hands two years previous and sold as part of a collector's kit with a fancy body and three Summiluxes in 2013, so its design began well before the three years ago when "discussions that lead to the SL" are said to have begun.

    A bigger deal is that the differences between the M240, SL, and Sony industry standard chips are not just cover glass thickness (Roger Cicala should get credit for sorting out that factor), but also microlens shape and placement, and well design. Possibly even pixel cell layout, as asymmetric cell layout played a role in the Italian flag syndrome that the M9 encountered.

    So, grain of salt, folks.

    scott
    I also have some issues with the referred post at FM. I bought my 2/28 ASPH in 2007, it was one of the latest M lens designs by then and supposed to be more than excellent.

    Which BTW it is on a analog, but more importantly also on a digital M, especially the M240 where I tried several times and was always pleasantly surprised. I would be surprised to see it replaced after such short time, especially when one thinks about common Leica M lens lifecycles. IMHO too many people are writing too much B.... about too many products in these days.

    The 1.4/28 may be better, but it for sure is also much larger and heavier, letting the higher price aside. While this is the case, I am sure it was designed mainly with the M in mind, as I am sure we will see in the future a native 28 SL lens providing all benefits of the SL system, especially AF.
    Life is an ever changing journey
    http://photography.tomsu.eu/
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_...tography/sets/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #306
    Senior Member ddanois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    368
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    One with the Zeiss Otus 55 @ 1.4
    Name:  L1000087.jpg
Views: 1467
Size:  297.5 KB

  7. #307
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    584
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by scott kirkpatrick View Post
    A bigger deal is that the differences between the M240, SL, and Sony industry standard chips are not just cover glass thickness (Roger Cicala should get credit for sorting out that factor), but also microlens shape and placement, and well design. Possibly even pixel cell layout, as asymmetric cell layout played a role in the Italian flag syndrome that the M9 encountered.

    So, grain of salt, folks.

    scott
    That's why I make the quote, Scott, folks like you can weigh in on these ideas.

    Do you have sources about the differences in microlens shape and placement, and/or well design in the SL sensor vs 240?

    I agree with you guys on the 28 cron which I use all the time on my M9 and is fantastic on that camera. Apparently it is not quite as good on the SL?

    This may be coming from Sean Reid.

    I find it pretty hard to believe a new M would perform less well than the current M240 with older lenses. Apparently there is evidence the 28 elmarit ASPH and 35/2 ASPH are not quite as good on the SL.

  8. #308
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    ...
    Onto some additional photos, with the R-80-200 f/4 Vario Elmar. A great lens to add some length. Most of these were shot wide open...it's a sharp lens

    - - - Updated - - -




    Do get yourself up to LR 6.3, Ashwin. The profile Adobe has supplied is really very good.

    I like these two photos. The 'sun at horizon' pair didn't seem up to your usual standard. :-)

    G

  9. #309
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Having spoken with lens designers at both Leica and Zeiss ..its not the age of the lens thats the issue . Many of the Leica S lenses were based on existing designs well over 10 even 20 years old .

    At Zeiss the newer lenses for the Sony A7 series have been formulated using the sensor glass as the final element in the design . The computer driven designs then “tweak” the original design to optimize for a given camera . If you want the best from an M lens ...use it on an M ....the sensor/glass was designed to use the M lenses.

    The other factor is the ongoing improvement in lens coatings ..this is how the new ZF/ZE lenses have been improved over the prior versions .

    Of course there are new lens designs that have improved performance overall . The OTUS for example . But don t immediately assume that a newer design is “Better” . Check out the tests at LensRental for examples .

    One very nice aspect of the new Leica M Summiluxes is that they all have a similar aesthetic/color signature . I have the 21/24/28 and 35 wide angles for example ...processing files from any of these is near identical . These are my lenses for M street shooting ....for landscape you would want the 18/21/24 /3.4-3.8 wide angles because of the improved flatness of field and edge sharpness.

    The 28/2 summicron has been a favorite since I used it on the M8 . It has a beautiful color signature and a very smooth bokeh . Terrific lens in high contrast lighting where deep color saturation (without punishing contrast) is desired . Pair it with a pre asph 50/1.4 summilux and you have classic “Leica” look images . I use Manos American Color as my reference if that helps clarify my intent .

    The lenses render differently and it depends on the subject/lighting and desired aesthetic ...which is “best”.

    My guess is that the rumored 28/2 is an upgrade in the lens hood as the original is awful and routinely replaced by either he old 35/1.4 asph hood or a cheap round screw in from eBay.

  10. #310
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by ddanois View Post
    One with the Zeiss Otus 55 @ 1.4
    Name:  L1000087.jpg
Views: 1467
Size:  297.5 KB
    Couple of questions for you.

    1. Were you able to get the Novaflex Nikon to T adapter ?

    2. Have you encountered any difficulty with the EVF brightness when shooting in the Florida sun ? I shot Kite Boarders at sundown with my 90 M lens on the SL and I could see well enough to focus .

  11. #311
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    ...
    This leads to a key SL question ... how easy/fast is it to set manual WB with a test setting shot for available light work?
    The FN button is assigned to custom WB by default, takes just a second to make a setting. They provide two tools as well, whole frame and selected area. Easy as can be.

    G

  12. #312
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Posts
    1,084
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    ...

    Do you have sources about the differences in microlens shape and placement, and/or well design in the SL sensor vs 240?

    I agree with you guys on the 28 cron which I use all the time on my M9 and is fantastic on that camera. Apparently it is not quite as good on the SL?

    This may be coming from Sean Reid.
    This stuff is quite scattered about. I pay closest attention to Sean Reid, Jono Slack (who is observant, but doesn't wish not to be thought a techie), and Sandy McGuffog. I've seen comments that Leica has worked on all three elements. Roger Cicala says that the cover glass thickness is 0.5 mm in the M8, 0.8 mm in the M9 and M[240], and he doesn't have ten SLs in house yet, so I don't know what he expects for it. The Sonys and Olympus/Panasonic M4/3 sensors have a 2 mm thick cover glass. He has taken a Sony apart and measured that. Sean has reviewed the 35/2.0 Summicron-asph and the CV35/2.5 on both M[240] and SL, as well as the 28 Elmarit-asph (the tiny one), the 28/1.4 Summilux-asph, and the CV 35/3.5 (which is rather compact). You'll have to read his report but I concluded that when he sees an improvement of the SL over the M[240], it is a small improvement that would be hard to see surviving in my handheld normal exposures. Sean didn't have a 28 Summicron handy -- the SX28 is fast and the EL28 is small, and that pretty much covers his requirements. I think Jono did provide some careful comparisons of corners with the SC 28 on both cameras, but unless Google is indexing him, you will have to crawl through an awful lot of LUF posts to find it now. Maybe the thread of M&R on SL has it.

    scott

  13. #313
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    12,726
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Scott, I have taken the sensors apart in Sony cams to actually measure (unlike Roger, AFAIK) and I can assure you that the total glass thickness in the A7 cams is 2.5mm. Zeiss when they issued the Loxia also said that these lenses were corrected for 2.5mm.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #314
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Probably my last lens testing stint ...

    I was interested in the color shifting behavior*with various R and M lenses after discussions here, and the light in the living room today provided a nice, evenly lit, white wall to work with. So I pulled out four R wide to normal lenses (Elmarit 19, Elmarit 24, Summicron 35, Summilux 50) and four M wide to normal lenses (Elmar 24, Color Skopar 28, Color Skopar 35, Nokton 50). The three Voigtländer lenses I exposed without lens code and then with lens code.

    SL was set to manual exposure, fixed WB, ISO 200. I made three exposures per lens: one at f/4, one at wide open (whatever it might be), and one at fully stopped down (f/16 or f/22) compensating with exposure time to maintain as best possible an even exposure across the series. I picked f/4 as my reference "normal" aperture because, as it turns out, I tend to be shooting at around f/4 a great deal of the time. I could have just as easily picked f/5.6 or f/8, but I don't think it really matters much given what I see in the results.

    Once all the exposures were made, I rolled them into LR and leveled the exposure at the center of*all the exposures to bring them all in line (within .3 stop) with the histogram peak at about 3/4 towards the white side. I also made a cursory WB exposure adjust at the same point for each exposure—in most cases, the changes were trivial to small, but there was some drift as the light varied a bit. This normalizes everything and makes evident the differences between the lenses.

    To me, bad color shifting is when the color shifts polychromatically; in other words, if the whole frame shifts to a little blue or a little magenta, that's easy to manage. It's when the color shift goes blue in the middle and magenta on the edges, or vice versa, or one side green and the other side red, etc, that it's a problem.

    A lot of lens characteristics were borne out by this test, but to cut to the color shifting results ...

    • The only one that I would simply find unusable for color work is the Color Skopar 28mm f/3.5. It color shifts blue on center and magenta red on the edges, both with no profile and with the profile that previous experience has shown works best with it.
    • All of the M-mount lenses shows more and deeper monochromatic color shift than any of the R lenses. Most also show more edge/corner darkening throughout the range, with only the Nokton 50 getting close to the R lenses in terms of even illumination at f/4.
    • The only one of the R lenses that showed much corner/edge darkening is the Elmarit-R 19, and even there it is an acceptable amount given the extreme wide angle nature of the lens.
    • All the Rs and the Elmar-M 24 show only a small amount of monochromatic color shift and both f/4 and fully stopped down are both very even illumination.


    My take on all this: By and large, most M lenses work well enough to use for non-color critical work. But, given the option, I'll pick an R lens over nearly any M lens in the sub-50mm focal length range for the SL and not worry about the extra bulk. They work noticeably better overall. The Summicron-R 35 and Summilux-R 50 @ f/4 and f/16 produce nearly perfect illumination across the entire field with no noticeable color shift.

    I'm done with that. My lenses work well enough, and I'll pick R over M lenses for this camera. From this point on, I'm going to make photographs and let everyone else debate the minutiae of specific lens performance, color shift, cover glass thickness, etc. :-)

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  15. #315
    Senior Member ddanois's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    368
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Couple of questions for you.

    1. Were you able to get the Novaflex Nikon to T adapter ?

    2. Have you encountered any difficulty with the EVF brightness when shooting in the Florida sun ? I shot Kite Boarders at sundown with my 90 M lens on the SL and I could see well enough to focus .
    Actually, I have the Nikon to T adapter on order at B&H but it still hasn't arrived. I used the Novoflex Nikon to M and then the Leica M to T adapter as a work around.

    As for the EVF, I find the brightness of the EVF a bit low as I bring it up to my eye but once I'm looking through it, the brightness is more than sufficient. I was concerned about this as well since I didn't find the Q EVF very usable in the Florida sun but SL is really nice.

  16. #316
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    2,545
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Can one adjust the brightness in the EVF?
    With best regards, K-H.

  17. #317
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Can one adjust the brightness in the EVF?
    The SL EVF and LCD can be adjusted for brightness ... SETUP -> Display Settings -> LCD Brightness
    I believe there are Automatic and six steps from dark to bright to choose from.

    G

  18. #318
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Aptos, California
    Posts
    220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    BTW, for those (like me!) who prefer to use an L-plate to switch between landscape and portrait mode on a tripod, it appears that the RRS Multi-Camera L-Plate fits and works well .

  19. #319
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,222
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Dave,

    I'm seeing excellent skin tones, both direct out of camera and with the LR 6.3 camera profile. I'm not seeing any teething pain here, not like there was with the M typ 240.

    How much better it has to be before you're satisfied, I don't know, but I'm quite satisfied as is. A child, in indoor light, wearing a red shirt and holding a red toy up near his face ... And you want perfect skin tones with no adjustments? I don't think there any camera that can do that. Ever.

    G
    Godfrey, you are putting words in my mouth. Where did I write or say I expect, desire or in your words did I say I want perfect skin tones with no adjustment. Please dont attribute statements to me that I never said nor ever implied. I bring this up because once before you did something similar to something I posted and upon defending what I wrote, you retracted your words.

    I only shoot RAW and I do and expect to adjust every file and have done so since the very 1st digital cameras. Many times I have the task of adjusting more than a 1000-1500 files on a given shoot, in some of the most difficult mixed lighting senario's one can imagine and most have to be painstakenly adjusted for use on national and sometimes international applications.

    My comments although centered around the young boys skin tone, focused more on the reds in general in that series of images and gave my opinion that the reds appeared to be crushed. Again the key word is "appeared". I can't be certain unless I had the actual files to work with or in some cases listen to the opinion of the original photographer's view of their own files (in this case Ashwin and he posted some words regarding his files a few posts above).

    Personally in a general sense I often find images of red flowers with large closely spaced pedals as a decent indicator if a color (such as red in this case) is crushed.

    Lastly permit me to make this perfectly clear. I am not casting aspersions on the SL...on the contrary. Likewise my preference for color output at base ISO of the M9 over the M240 sometimes seems not to sit well with a few. Yet there are some of us who are of this opinion and it sometimes elicits a strong response. Its simply a preference and is based on a number of factors and again its not saying anything negative about the M240. There are sitiations where no matter how much one adjusts a certain camera's files with regards to certain skin tones or certain colors, under some lighting senario's, that it cannot emulate or match those of amother camera....or if it can, requires so much work with the files, that simply its becomes too much of a issue in pratical terms, regardless of profiles or actions in post processing. Thats why there are preferences with regards to output of one high end digital camera vs another.

    Lastly if I feel the SL has some teathing pains , again thats just my opinion. I know of no perfect digital camera, especially when first released as a new model and more times than not there are aspects that are addressed down the road via firmware updates. Whether that be operational, or output or some other factor. My definition of teathing pains may be different than how others characterize it and the word doesn't imply a defect or inadaquacy of the product, but simply that the product could possibly benifit from some tweaking or attention/addition to certain details.

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 26th November 2015 at 08:38.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #320
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    539

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Seems to me that this is the ultimate R series camera that Leica promised back when I was shooting their Leica Digilux cameras. I sincerely hope that those who kept their R lenses vs converting them will take advantage of the platform.

    say what you will about Leica, they get there eventually but is it too late?
    Ylem ...
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #321
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,222
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Seems to me that this is the ultimate R series camera that Leica promised back when I was shooting their Leica Digilux cameras. I sincerely hope that those who kept their R lenses vs converting them will take advantage of the platform.

    say what you will about Leica, they get there eventually but is it too late?
    Very much agree although the facial tones in your avitar pic are very metalic like in nature. Hope it wasn't taken with the SL .

    Seriously though I had extensive play with the camera last week and there is a tremendous amount of things to like about the platform.

    Dave (D&A)

  22. #322
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinrao1 View Post
    SL/24-90


    Hi Ashwin,
    I see you also own the 24-90 now.
    In your first impressions you wrote the lens size to be quite big/heavy (I share this feeling).
    After having used the lens a bit now, how do you feel about it?
    Have you got used to its size?

  23. #323
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Hi Ashwin,
    I see you also own the 24-90 now.
    In your first impressions you wrote the lens size to be quite big/heavy (I share this feeling).
    After having used the lens a bit now, how do you feel about it?
    Have you got used to its size?
    Not Ashwin, but I had the 24-90 out for a bit earlier. It is still big and heavy, but once you get used to dealing with larger lenses (R system lenses tend to be heavy and some are quite large), it's not so extreme as it feels at first coming from an M or E-M1. A bit more time and the 24-90 will just feel a bit big, to me :-)

    G

  24. #324
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    So far I'm not a fan of the SL + zoom.

    I'll need to use it more to determine it's worth to me. I sure wish that Leica had released the 50LuxL. It probably would have made me feel better about my purchase.

    As far as IQ is concern. The S-system (006/007) still beats the pants off of anything I've used. And I'd suggest if you don't need fast AF and high ISO, to get a S-006 over a SL.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #325
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    So far I'm not a fan of the SL + zoom.

    I'll need to use it more to determine it's worth to me. I sure wish that Leica had released the 50LuxL. It probably would have made me feel better about my purchase.

    As far as IQ is concern. The S-system (006/007) still beats the pants off of anything I've used. And I'd suggest if you don't need fast AF and high ISO, to get a S-006 over a SL.
    So you bought a SL?
    Why are you not a fan?
    IF I get the SL I decided to not gibe up the S-system. The SL would be for faster pace, zoom, video(evf)
    My decision for the SL would be easier if the 24-90 was smaller/lighter.
    I realy like the SL though from an initial inspection at the store.

  26. #326
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    So you bought a SL?
    Why are you not a fan?
    IF I get the SL I decided to not gibe up the S-system. The SL would be for faster pace, zoom, video(evf)
    My decision for the SL would be easier if the 24-90 was smaller/lighter.
    I realy like the SL though from an initial inspection at the store.

    There really isn't anything wrong with the camera. Or the speed of the AF, or the accuracy and ability to hit focus in lower light. The problem is the lens. It really doesn't scream LEICA. I've used tons of R-zooms/primes and M/S primes and I just don't really see anything great about the zoom, at all.
    If I mount my M lenses to the SL, IMHO it's better then an A7 series camera (but not for the IQ, mainly the handling benefits).
    I'm going to keep the setup until I get to test the S-adapter. I feel the SL with S-adapter will be a good backup body to the S-system. And later when the 50LuxL comes out, I'll test it and see if it's what I want out of a lens. In the meantime, if I don't feel like using my M, I'll grab my SL+M-adapter and have at it.. I doubt I'll use the zoom very much. Maybe for events when I can't be bothered to shoot with primes. But at this point, I won't be selling my Nikon setup until there are a few more SL primes out in the market.

    One quick thing to note.. The SF-24D works better on the SL then it does on the M/S/Q. This is good news, as it's a bitch of a flash on anything else. If it works well on the SL, chances are the SF-40 and SF-63 (which I will use with the S-system) will be leagues better
    The SF-26 doesn't fit on the SL.. It won't go on.. I don't know why. The SF-58 I haven't even bothered with, it's to big and not worth mounting onto the SL.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #327
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    So far I'm not a fan of the SL + zoom.

    I'll need to use it more to determine it's worth to me. I sure wish that Leica had released the 50LuxL. It probably would have made me feel better about my purchase.

    As far as IQ is concern. The S-system (006/007) still beats the pants off of anything I've used. And I'd suggest if you don't need fast AF and high ISO, to get a S-006 over a SL.
    Candor regarding initial user reactions like this is much appreciated.

    Like with most new launches, I think you will come to be more of a fan as time passes. However, Leica doesn't make it easy to be an early adopter because they are so slow in rolling out the "system".

    Case in point was the S system. Initially, the S2/S2P had 2 lenses readily available, the S-70 and S-180 (which today are my 2 least used S optics). One of the major defining features of the S camera is the dual shutter, but it was an agonizingly looooong wait before the CS lenses were made available (we're talking years here folks, not months).

    IMO, there are two interesting aspects about the SL beyond fast AF and higher ISO capability: Both have directly to do with lenses (which to me is still the priority over camera platform).

    Use of the S lenses, and whether the AF will be faster with S lenses than on the S cameras? The notion of using my S100/2 on an SL is intriguing, (it was a major downer to read that the SL wouldn't support the leaf-shutter CS function).

    The other point of interest is use of R lenses, which I sadly abandoned when I sold my DMR. I simply loved the R35/1.4, R80/1.4, R100/2.8 Macro, and almost any long Leica R lens. Those who have R optics now have a great platform to use their lenses.

    - Marc

    BTW, I agree with you about the S(006) ...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #328
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    I wonder why Leica didn't offer the amazing R 28-90/2.8-4.5 zoom in SL mount? THAT lens did have the Leica look and was the best mid-range zoom I've used to date. The size seems perfect for this new platform. Maybe it is too expensive to manufacture these days, or people may want a fast max aperture at the long end (not really needed IMO)?

    - Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #329
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I wonder why Leica didn't offer the amazing R 28-90/2.8-4.5 zoom in SL mount? THAT lens did have the Leica look and was the best mid-range zoom I've used to date. The size seems perfect for this new platform. Maybe it is too expensive to manufacture these days, or people may want a fast max aperture at the long end (not really needed IMO)?

    - Marc
    The 24-90 has more WA and a bit more speed at 90, I think this is the simple reason why they tried to widen their boundaries, as they can maybe sell (market) this design better. Also you might be right that the 28-90 in the new AF design would have been too expensive to manufacture.

    Anyway, when I tried the new 24-90 I found it pretty well balanced with the SL and also reasonably sharp over the complete range. So I do actually not understand most of the complaints about this lens. Sure a fast 90 or 80 prime would have been smaller, but I am almost sure these will follow over time (whatever this time means in Leica land)

  30. #330
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    "Here is what we know from various tests. The 28 elmarit ASPH shows worse corner performance on the SL than the M240. We know this from 3 sources. Jono Slack has posted images showing this on the Leica Forum."
    Hmm - I thought I posted pictures comparing it with the Sony A7ii (which the SL is considerably better than) - I'm not certain I didn't post an M240 comparison (I do have one), but pretty sure.

    FWIW I agree with Sean Reid about the relative performance, but in my opinion these lenses only suffer in the corners, and they're all perfectly serviceable on the SL (unless you happen to shoot landscapes set to infinity wide open - in which case the M240 doesn't do well with all of them either!).

    all the best

    - - - Updated - - -

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	L1020060.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	837.2 KB 
ID:	114544
    Morning Glory
    SL with 24-90

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 10 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #331
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I wonder why Leica didn't offer the amazing R 28-90/2.8-4.5 zoom in SL mount? THAT lens did have the Leica look and was the best mid-range zoom I've used to date. The size seems perfect for this new platform. Maybe it is too expensive to manufacture these days, or people may want a fast max aperture at the long end (not really needed IMO)?

    - Marc
    I dont doubt what people post, but for some reason I am not sure that from the few images we have seen one could say that the new 24-90 would not have the "Leica look".
    I guess once one brings IS, AF and weather-sealing into the 28-90 it would probably not be that much smaller than the 24-90.
    And I asume Leica did want a lens starting with the same focal length like the ones from Canon/Nikon/Sony.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hmm - I thought I posted pictures comparing it with the Sony A7ii (which the SL is considerably better than) - I'm not certain I didn't post an M240 comparison (I do have one), but pretty sure.

    FWIW I agree with Sean Reid about the relative performance, but in my opinion these lenses only suffer in the corners, and they're all perfectly serviceable on the SL (unless you happen to shoot landscapes set to infinity wide open - in which case the M240 doesn't do well with all of them either!).

    all the best

    - - - Updated - - -

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	L1020060.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	837.2 KB 
ID:	114544
    Morning Glory
    SL with 24-90
    That looks good.
    Do you use more the Zoom or more the M-lenses on the SL so far?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #332
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I wonder why Leica didn't offer the amazing R 28-90/2.8-4.5 zoom in SL mount? THAT lens did have the Leica look and was the best mid-range zoom I've used to date. The size seems perfect for this new platform. Maybe it is too expensive to manufacture these days, or people may want a fast max aperture at the long end (not really needed IMO)?

    - Marc
    Hi Marc
    I think I know why:
    1. by the time you add an SL mount (and the extra distance required) then it's pretty much the same size
    2. if you then add AF motors it may even be bigger
    3. All the 'pro' quality lenses from Canon and Nikon now start at 24mm
    4. Starting from scratch is often easier than working with something older.

    . . . . . and from a personal point of view (having owned both) I'd say that the new lens is better as well. Whether it has the Leica 'look' I'm not sure.

    Hi Tom - I use them about equally, but I use the 60mm macro elmarit R a lot too.

    best

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #333
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    Candor regarding initial user reactions like this is much appreciated.
    Absolutely.

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    ...
    The other point of interest is use of R lenses, which I sadly abandoned when I sold my DMR. I simply loved the R35/1.4, R80/1.4, R100/2.8 Macro, and almost any long Leica R lens. Those who have R optics now have a great platform to use their lenses.
    I bought the SL primarily for use with R lenses, which I could finally afford once people started pitching them for low prices after Leica cancelled R system development. Much as I might like an S system, it's out of my pay grade by way too much to jump onto, never mind any of its technical capabilities even. The SL is, in fact, almost exactly the camera that I have wanted since 2000, and I was 'stupid' enough to pick up all those orphaned R lenses (a lot of people told me I was crazy to spend so much money on them... they seemed a bargain to me at an average of $450 apiece, same price as a Voigtländer for a Leica quality lens).

    In my week and half experimenting/learning with the SL, I've concentrated almost exclusively on using the R lenses I've got. I am delighted with what I see out of it. I have used the SL 24-90 only trivially to test and learn certain aspects of the camera that are AF/OIS centric; it will take me a while to warm up to it because a) it is pretty large and heavy for my druthers, and b) I'm not really much of a zoom user anyway. But having it out yesterday for a bit, it was not so much of a burden this time as it was the first time: I'm more used to carrying a couple of fairly heavy R lenses again. Time will tell.

    My experience from testing it with my R lenses shows it to have better imaging qualities than the other cameras I've used them on (very very close in fact to how they appear on film with the R8 and Leicaflex SL) and I am very happy with the SL's control design. A couple of niggles there, but I can enjoy it just as is.

    So I'm pretty good with the Leica SL ... it meets what I had in mind very closely and seems worth what I paid for it. The 24-90 lens probably is too, but it will take me a while to see that.

    I'm waiting to see the dedicated R adapter SL, and hoping that they pull out their engineering mojo and make it the device that turns the SL into a full-function digital R8. It will be all right if they don't quite meet that desire because it works fine as is with the two adapter stack, but it would be nice.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #334
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I wonder why Leica didn't offer the amazing R 28-90/2.8-4.5 zoom in SL mount? ...
    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    The 24-90 has more WA and a bit more speed at 90, I think this is the simple reason why they tried to widen their boundaries, as they can maybe sell (market) this design better. Also you might be right that the 28-90 in the new AF design would have been too expensive to manufacture. ...
    Based on the info in LFI, a lot of the work going into the 24-90 and 90-280 was to make it possible for the SL to AF at speeds right up there with the best of existing PDAF systems while sticking with CDAF, which inherently has fewer potential problems (lens-body system calibration being the biggest of them). That inspired completely different optical designs to keep the focusing elements to a minimum for light weight, improving speed and precision in operation (the 24-90 focuses through moving one lens element, the 90-280 through moving two).

    That implies completely different optical formula versus the R lenses and is probably the largest reason why they didn't bring forward an R lens design.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #335
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Based on the info in LFI, a lot of the work going into the 24-90 and 90-280 was to make it possible for the SL to AF at speeds right up there with the best of existing PDAF systems while sticking with CDAF, which inherently has fewer potential problems (lens-body system calibration being the biggest of them). That inspired completely different optical designs to keep the focusing elements to a minimum for light weight, improving speed and precision in operation (the 24-90 focuses through moving one lens element, the 90-280 through moving two).

    That implies completely different optical formula versus the R lenses and is probably the largest reason why they didn't bring forward an R lens design.

    G
    if 35m lenses get the size of medium format lenses (or S lenses) -and the 2490 does imo- then one big advantage of 35mm (or called ff today) is gone. I thought mirrorless and evf were a chance to reduce lens size, but Leica seems to habe a different approach. but why are T lenses smaller than comparable dx slr lenses and then the SL are biggee than comparable SLR lenses, nearly as bis as S lenses?
    the size of the body is perfect for my taste

  36. #336
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jerusalem, Israel
    Posts
    1,084
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    I've been reading all these comments, even trying to parse the manual, but I haven't held an SL yet. When I get my own copy in a little over a week, I'll do some of these experiments myself, but I have a pretty good picture already. It seems that often the SL can get a little more resolution. both center and edges, with the latest (big) lens designs, but the differences are small enough that I doubt I would really see them unless shooting from a tripod. I already know which lenses to avoid when edge-to-edge sharpness is important. So it comes down to finding which lenses I am comfortable shooting on which platform. Like Godfrey, I have some R lenses, both classic (Mandler) and super-sharp (Wetzlar) that I can't wait to try out. The latest and best wide and very wide lenses come in M mounts and I will be interested in whether full frame focusing in the SL's EVF feels better than the RF focus-recompose that I use with the M. I am sure that both can work well from 28 on down. I don't have the asph-elmarit-R 15, which still sells at over $7k on EBay and which Sean Reid found jaw-droppingly sharp and contrasty back in 2006. I was hoping to find a BlackFriday special where one of those would be discounted 50% or more, but no luck... I would have thought that is a truly unnecessary focal length, but I've been enjoying a 14mm-eff lens with my Olympus m5.2 lately, especially when focusing close, so...

    And I can accept that for kids and kitties, AF is a big help.

    scott

  37. #337
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    The 24-90 has more WA and a bit more speed at 90, I think this is the simple reason why they tried to widen their boundaries, as they can maybe sell (market) this design better. Also you might be right that the 28-90 in the new AF design would have been too expensive to manufacture.

    Anyway, when I tried the new 24-90 I found it pretty well balanced with the SL and also reasonably sharp over the complete range. So I do actually not understand most of the complaints about this lens. Sure a fast 90 or 80 prime would have been smaller, but I am almost sure these will follow over time (whatever this time means in Leica land)

    I have no problems with the size of the lens. I just feel if they're going to make something that isn't "special" they might as well have made it a 24-70/2.8 like everyone else.

  38. #338
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    if 35m lenses get the size of medium format lenses (or S lenses) -and the 2490 does imo- then one big advantage of 35mm (or called ff today) is gone. I thought mirrorless and evf were a chance to reduce lens size, but Leica seems to habe a different approach.
    (bolded) I can't help but believe that is a mistaken notion. Just look at the *only other* FF mirrorless system out there (the Sony A7 series) and its lenses. There are only a couple of those lenses that are "small", and they're relatively slow and modest focal lengths. The fact is that fast lenses which cover a 35mm FF format properly tend to be a bit larger than small, and the optical designs to optimize them for digital sensors generally put them into the same size class as top quality lenses designed for SLRs and FF digital sensors.

    Look at the Fuji X system lenses, too. They're designed for an APS-C sensor, yet they're not particularly small. Micro-FourThirds system lenses can be quite small, on a quarter size sensor format, but the fast, pro-quality lenses even there tend to grow in size quite a bit.

    The major advantages of 'mirrorless' and EVF are really a short mount register, making room for better optimized lens designs for a digital capture sensor (regardless of size), the removal of the mechanical reflex mirror mechanism for lower vibration and again more lens design versatility, and the promise of a suitably high resolution, high performance EVF to out-perform an optical reflex viewfinder in terms of features and tools. I think with the latest generation of EVFs (Olympus OM-D series, Fuji X-T1, Sony Alpha, and now Leica SL) that promise is being fulfilled and the other advantages have been there from the first 'mirrorless' introduced, the Panasonic G1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    .. but why are T lenses smaller than comparable dx slr lenses and then the SL are biggee than comparable SLR lenses, nearly as bis as S lenses?
    the size of the body is perfect for my taste
    Most DX SLR lenses are derivative of 35mm FF designs and don't benefit much from the smaller sensor in overall size. The T lenses are being designed from scratch specifically for a compact camera system and are showing some size benefits from that ... but also notice that they are not*all ultra-fast and the focal length range is relatively limited as yet:

    APO Macro-Emarit-TL 60mm f2.8 ASPH
    Summilux-TL 35mm f1.4 ASPH
    APO Vario-Elmar-T 55–135mm f3.5–4.5 ASPH
    Super-Vario-Elmar-T 11–23mm f3.5–4.5 ASPH
    Summicron-T 23mm f2 ASPH
    Vario-Elmar-T 18–56mm f3.5–5.6 ASPH



    Only the 23mm is truly small in that set, the others are middling sized (for scale, remember that the flange diameter they mount on is 50mm diameter). When a 18-56/2.8-4 appears, if it ever does, the equivalent of the SL's 24-90 for DX format, I would not be surprised to see that it was quite large.

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #339
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Out scouting an area for some long lens work when the sun plopped under the horizon. But I made a few exposures anyway. Quite liked this one:


    Leica SL + Telyt-R 250mm f/4 v1
    ISO 3200 @ f/8 @ 1/60 second

    enjoy!

    G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #340
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    584
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    I have no problems with the size of the lens. I just feel if they're going to make something that isn't "special" they might as well have made it a 24-70/2.8 like everyone else.
    Fair point. The Canon vII is constant aperture and weighs 800ish gram

    The Leica slows as you zoom and weighs 1140 gram

    Is the Leica alot better across the frame?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #341
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)


    Leica SL + Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8 v2
    ISO 3200 @ f/4.5 @ 1/125



    Leica SL + Telyt-R 250mm f/4 v1
    ISO 3200 @ f/8 @ 1/30 second

    enjoy, G
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #342
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    Fair point. The Canon vII is constant aperture and weighs 800ish gram

    The Leica slows as you zoom and weighs 1140 gram

    Is the Leica alot better across the frame?

    I guess this is where all the landscape photographers would jump in and defend the Leica. For me, I'd rather something with a unique rendering and signature, as I'm mostly shooting wide open close up. Rarely stopped down and at infinity.

    It just doesn't scream awesome like the 21SEM or 28Elmarit-asph. And there is no magic like the 21Lux or 28Cron (maybe due to speed). But with speed taken into consideration, it doesn't even have the interesting rendering of the 90 macro-elmar. Maybe I'm just spoiled with my M and S glass.. Maybe I'm not use to the lens yet. It took me a while to warm up to the 100S (now I love it), but the 45S was love at first snap, so who knows.

    Performance wise, I haven't taken any bad photos with the zoom. I haven't noticed anything to terrible and it seems sharp enough across the frame. A few people have commented it fails at the tele end. I don't really notice it all that much, but I'd say that maybe 70mm is the sweet spot if you wanted to split hairs. It takes good images, it does. It just doesn't scream Leica.

    All in all, I'm not thrilled with the lens. And the sensor has a few quirks that almost makes me worried for the system. Leica really needs to get those adapters ASAP. And the 50LuxL needs to be delivered 6 months ahead of schedule!


    IF the S-adapter focuses the lenses faster then the 007 and more accurately then the 006, I'll buy a second SL body and use the 45/100 combo happily. And just keep the zoom for when I need a wide lens, or a very fast lens (it's fast to focus). But by no means will I sell the S-bodies..

  43. #343
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    These are all very interesting discussions with my thanks to everybody who contributed.

    Owning M, S and T glass but no R glass I have to say that right now I see little to no compelling reason to buy into the SL platform.

    That could and most likely will change further along the road when native primes become available.

    But right now, and apologies to early adopters and defenders, not really...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #344
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,940
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hmm - I thought I posted pictures comparing it with the Sony A7ii (which the SL is considerably better than) - I'm not certain I didn't post an M240 comparison (I do have one), but pretty sure.

    FWIW I agree with Sean Reid about the relative performance, but in my opinion these lenses only suffer in the corners, and they're all perfectly serviceable on the SL (unless you happen to shoot landscapes set to infinity wide open - in which case the M240 doesn't do well with all of them either!).

    all the best

    - - - Updated - - -

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	L1020060.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	837.2 KB 
ID:	114544
    Morning Glory
    SL with 24-90
    Jono, sorry to ask a completely nerdish question but was that handheld or on a tripod?

    Either way it is awesome but as someone primarily interested in landscape if that was a handheld shot it is even more awesome. Great colour and ambience and a bit of a surprise for a zoom lens.

    LouisB
    -----
    My new book "Whitechapel in 50 BUildings", Flikr Stream, www.louisberk.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #345
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Jono, sorry to ask a completely nerdish question but was that handheld or on a tripod?

    Either way it is awesome but as someone primarily interested in landscape if that was a handheld shot it is even more awesome. Great colour and ambience and a bit of a surprise for a zoom lens.

    LouisB
    Hi Louis
    I never shoot with a tripod (unless I'm testing lenses) - this was shot at 1/800th at f7.1 and ISO 50 . . . . . don't need no tripod

    The minute I put a camera on a tripod all my creativity seems to disappear in a puff of logic . . . I'd rather have blurry than boring!

    A bit of background to this (in case you're interested) -
    I needed to get the dogs exercised, it was nearly dark and very foggy when I left home - any normal person would have left the camera behind (but I NEVER do that). I had to brave a very big pile of pig poo (which the dogs didn't roll in) to get the shot - it'll be spread on the stubble later.

    I used the brush and raised the exposure in the foreground by nearly 2 stops - then I added about 30 points clarity in the sky to bring the clouds out a bit . . . and that's it, no cropping, no overall exposure changes.

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #346
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    67
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hmm - I thought I posted pictures comparing it with the Sony A7ii (which the SL is considerably better than) - I'm not certain I didn't post an M240 comparison (I do have one), but pretty sure.
    Can you point us to these comparisons, pls? Why do you prefer the Leica over the Sony, eg?
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  47. #347
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    I guess this is where all the landscape photographers would jump in and defend the Leica. For me, I'd rather something with a unique rendering and signature, as I'm mostly shooting wide open close up. Rarely stopped down and at infinity.

    It just doesn't scream awesome like the 21SEM or 28Elmarit-asph. And there is no magic like the 21Lux or 28Cron (maybe due to speed).
    I remember when the 28 Elmarit Asph was release ( a lens I also love ) everybody was REALLY rude about it (clinical, too sharp, blah blah). I haven't tried the 21'lux or the 21 SEM, as I continue my enduring love affair with the WATE. The 28 'cron has always seemed like a 'blah' lens to me, with several vices and no real virtue (poor microcontrast, sloppy corners, big curvature of field and no zing). Spending hours and hours in Venice comparing all the 28's together I came out absolutely certain that the 28 'lux is the one to have - on every level - it's as sharp as the elmarit, but not so brutal . . . but I suspect that these characteristics are the same as the 21 'lux?

    I've had the 24-90 on two separate occasions now, and I've come to love it's reliable lack of vices . . it's a modern lens, but it certainly seems to me to have the Leica 'feel' about it. . . . but I've sat in front of an enthusiastic Peter Karbe discussing the design of the new zoom lenses, and everything colours one's opinion of a lens.

    Perhaps time is needed

    Just this guy you know
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #348
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,704
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by jrp View Post
    Can you point us to these comparisons, pls? Why do you prefer the Leica over the Sony, eg?
    This is why
    These are all shot at f4, on a tripod, from a distance of a couple of km - this is a 100% crop from the bottom left corner of the images.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	50lux asph at f4.jpg 
Views:	57 
Size:	25.6 KB 
ID:	114558
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	35 cron at f4.jpg 
Views:	45 
Size:	22.6 KB 
ID:	114559
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	28 elmarit at f4.jpg 
Views:	34 
Size:	22.5 KB 
ID:	114560
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	35 lux at f4.jpg 
Views:	48 
Size:	24.5 KB 
ID:	114561

    There will be more later (I'm doing an article on it) , but this probably answers your question

    Just this guy you know
    Thanks 4 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #349
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    688
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    That's certainly a clear (and on the other hand, fuzzy) answer.

    Makes me wonder how a 35mm R lens would look in comparison.

    Kirk

  50. #350
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Texas/California/North Carolina
    Posts
    2,775
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

    Quote Originally Posted by thompsonkirk View Post
    That's certainly a clear (and on the other hand, fuzzy) answer.

    Makes me wonder how a 35mm R lens would look in comparison.

    Kirk
    In reality there shouldn't be much differences with R (or any SLR) lenses when mounted on mirrorless systems when compared to their native bodies. You'll have the benefit of EXIF on the SL, M, or T though.
    Priolite Ambassador | Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •