The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Two different views on the Leica SL

Now what is Lloyd crowing about? Can someone who subscribes enlighten us?

Lobbing grenades from behind a paywall is a bit unsporting.

scott
Lloyds claims to have found two major faults:
-Consistent AF error as large as 2m front focus at 10m distance with the 24-90 @90mm
-Massive focus shift to the foreground at 49 and 90mm using MF (because the AF is unreliable as stated above)

I have not done any test myself, but I am using the 24-90 on the SL since the beginning of December and I have not detected any focussing problem during my normal shooting.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
I'm not sure if I'm lacking stamina, or I'm too polite. Inconsistent at any rate!

Focus Shift

I contacted Ming and asked him how he had checked for it, and I've done lots of shots in the same way (f8, 90mm). Samples on request.

I could not duplicate it. Focus was nailed on the chosen point in each case.
There were some changes in firmware from 1.0 to 1.1, so there are 2 possibilities

1. There is a sample variation
2. It was fixed in firmware

Test images were taken both vertically and horizontally
Thank you Jono for being inconsistent :) Appreciated :thumbs:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Lloyds claims to have found two major faults:
-Consistent AF error as large as 2m front focus at 10m distance with the 24-90 @90mm
-Massive focus shift to the foreground at 49 and 90mm using MF (because the AF is unreliable as stated above)

I have not done any test myself, but I am using the 24-90 on the SL since the beginning of December and I have not detected any focussing problem during my normal shooting.

Thank you Ario. I find this amazing, whether Lloyd is correct or not.
This effect should be easy to confirm - unless Lloyd has a bad copy or it's user error.
 

harmsr

Workshop Member
Lloyds claims to have found two major faults:
-Consistent AF error as large as 2m front focus at 10m distance with the 24-90 @90mm
-Massive focus shift to the foreground at 49 and 90mm using MF (because the AF is unreliable as stated above)

I have not done any test myself, but I am using the 24-90 on the SL since the beginning of December and I have not detected any focussing problem during my normal shooting.
I have to say that I have NOTHING of that issue. To be honest, I thought the 24-90 was going to be too HUGE for me to enjoy using initially. Since then, I have come to the conclusion that it appears to be the BEST zoom I have ever used. It basically covers the 3 primes I would use 90% of the time without having to change lenses and with the same IQ as a prime.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Lloyd Chambers can be pedantic but he is very astute in his analysis of lenses. It was Lloyd, for example, that uncovered the flare issue with the 50/2.0 APO M lens.


"In April, I reported on a damaging flare issue with the Leica 50mm f/2 APO ASPH back in April. As I noted with conviction then: “The results are jaw-dropping, in a bad way”.

I had a few private conversations between then and now. My initial examples were rejected by the experts as not unusual and within the bounds of normal behavior. That this was patently false was obvious, but the M-veil exerts such a strong cognitive committment reality warp that the possibility was not admittable as evidence to most all M users. But the actual facts were 100% accessible to anyone willing to look objectively, which some of my readers did.

I then documented the issue with initial examples, as well as cross checking a variety of other M lenses, and documenting those too in my Guide to Leica.

LeicaRumors.com now reports that Leica's CEO Alfred Schopf has acknowledged a flare issue with their flagship 50mm f/2 APO ASPH and that current owners should send their lens to Leica for REPAIR. Which is where mine is, so I hope it comes back with improved behavior.

That's doesn't matter really, but I don’t review lenses and make flippant claims:

In the face of (private) criticism from “experts” who dismissed my findings, I stood my ground and just showed the FACTS. Which is what I do in all my work."


Link: diglloyd: Leica 50mm f/2 APO-Summicron-M ASPH Update on the Flare Issue
I think the flare issue, who was experienced by many users, was a real issue.
So the problem with Loyds findings is that it is hard to judge if it is just a minor issue or a big issue, and if it is seldom or a systematic problem. It is just the case the I have experienced at least three times lenses/system were Loyd stated big problems and I was just fine with the lenses in real world: Nikon 24TSE, Leica S AF and now the SL focus shift.

On the other side I have read some of his reviews and also have sunscriped a couple of times, but the more I read such reviews based on analysing maybe 10 or 20 images with a lens/system (some users just static test images in boring light) the more I feel that I find review from people who use a camera for some time in various conditions (like Jonos report for example) are more useful for me. In the end the best thing is to use / check out the equipment yourself and rely on own findings, but thats not allways possible.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
You're probably right, Bob. Works fine for stationary objects no doubt.
Still, I can't imagine this is what most people have in mind in regard to AF.

Kind regards.
Focus shift should be the same with static or dynamic subjects.

If you are interested in dynamic AF an CAF - I have done some images of my kids with snow sports. Not all images where spot on but in allmost each series of 3-4 images there were some in focus.
For me its the first contrast AF I have used which on can use for such things. The results with my 5dIII which I had 2 years ago were not really better, and the 5dIII shares the AF-system of the 1dx.
Overall I have a very good hit rate with the AF of the SL and with hit I mean nailing focus.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Thank you Ario. I find this amazing, whether Lloyd is correct or not.
This effect should be easy to confirm - unless Lloyd has a bad copy or it's user error.
Hi There Karl-Heinz
It's very weird . . I really tried hard to duplicate the problem - and I'll do more work when I have some time - but the idea of 2m front focus at 10m is completely bizarre - I've taken thousands of photos with the combination and never been disappointed with anything except the size! Apart from Ming Thein I've not seem anyone else complaining about it either.

Best
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Hi There Karl-Heinz
It's very weird . . I really tried hard to duplicate the problem - and I'll do more work when I have some time - but the idea of 2m front focus at 10m is completely bizarre - I've taken thousands of photos with the combination and never been disappointed with anything except the size! Apart from Ming Thein I've not seem anyone else complaining about it either.

Best
Thanks jono. I agree, bizarre is the appropriate term for this! Lloyd should have his gear checked by Leica.
BTW, based on your experience I got the 35-70/4. I like that lens a lot and use it more than my 28-90/2.8-4.5. :D
 

algrove

Well-known member
Thank you Ario. I find this amazing, whether Lloyd is correct or not.
This effect should be easy to confirm - unless Lloyd has a bad copy or it's user error.
I remember when Lloyd complained about the Q and then found he had made beginner mistakes. He is no beginner, but made the mistake and put it all over his site prematurely.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Thanks jono. I agree, bizarre is the appropriate term for this! Lloyd should have his gear checked by Leica.
BTW, based on your experience I got the 35-70/4. I like that lens a lot and use it more than my 28-90/2.8-4.5. :D
Hi There K-H
I'm glad you're enjoying it. I guess it isn't quite as good as the 28-90, but it's much lighter!
It's a great lens isn't it - small, perfectly formed and very useful. I love mine.
All the best
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Hi There K-H
I'm glad you're enjoying it. I guess it isn't quite as good as the 28-90, but it's much lighter!
It's a great lens isn't it - small, perfectly formed and very useful. I love mine.
All the best
Thanks. I agree jono. It makes very sharp images, sharper than my 28-90. :D
May be it's time for a CLA. :facesmack:
 

erlingmm

Active member
I remember when Lloyd complained about the Q and then found he had made beginner mistakes. He is no beginner, but made the mistake and put it all over his site prematurely.
Digilloyd has what I regard as a fairly aggressive commercial tactic: He cries wolf over early observations on his public site, but often nuances when he checks further, but then behind the paywall. He is not without points and has found faults, but he is too trigger-happy. I don't like his tactics and don't subscribe anymore.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Digilloyd has what I regard as a fairly aggressive commercial tactic: He cries wolf over early observations on his public site, but often nuances when he checks further, but then behind the paywall. He is not without points and has found faults, but he is too trigger-happy. I don't like his tactics and don't subscribe anymore.
Ever since he was invited to Germany by Zeiss he is even more strongly in their camp. Don't get me wrong I like and use Zeiss lenses, but now they can apparently do no wrong with Digilloyd.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Ever since he was invited to Germany by Zeiss he is even more strongly in their camp. Don't get me wrong I like and use Zeiss lenses, but now they can apparently do no wrong with Digilloyd.
The other invitee was MT. ;)

PS: I wonder why Huff isn't favored over the other 2? He did choose the SL as his best of 2015!
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Politics?
My thought is that he plays very subjective emotive type of reviews without much objective comparison.

And much of it is not to the level of MT or Lloyd ... perhaps Zeiss reserved their imprimatur for the two invitees
to avoid association with Huff's approach to equipment.

Speculation all.

Bob
 
V

Vivek

Guest
AFAIK, he has always been very consistent with his choices and preferences and is a Leica fan (and buys and promotes more Leica gear than many online).
 

bradhusick

Active member
I know Steve Huff. He's genuine and honest. His style is very enthusiastic and positive and that shows in his writing. Sometimes he seems a little too positive about the latest gear, but if you read him carefully, he does talk about the negatives. It's just that overall he's an optimist and the negatives are too easy to skip over.

I often don't agree with him, but he's always civil, fair and friendly - like most of the folks here on GetDPI. He doesn't tolerate personal attacks, and I like that about his site.

Back to the original topic, he's much more enthusiastic about the SL than I can get, but I can see why this "jack of many trades" can appeal to many. In the long run if cameras like the SL keep Leica in business and they keep innovating then I am pleased.
 

jonoslack

Active member
AFAIK, he has always been very consistent with his choices and preferences and is a Leica fan (and buys and promotes more Leica gear than many online).
Hi Vivek
I also like Steve, and I reckon he's really honest as well (and capable of changing his mind too), added to which his reviews are always entertaining to read.
 
Top