Jump to content
LCVG

Photography (hardware & technical discussion thread)


Angry the Clown
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 9/16/2021 at 11:49 PM, Angry the Clown said:

What about Voightlander's 28mm f2 Ultron for M mount?

 

You're going to make me say it, eh?

 

It's all about the looks. The Nikon version looks so cool! The Voigtlander M mount lenses are looking uglier and uglier with each release. I'll even include the 50 APO in that. It's almost perfect in IQ and ergonomics, but it doesn't look cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, xPieter said:

It's all about the looks. The Nikon version looks so cool! The Voigtlander M mount lenses are looking uglier and uglier with each release. I'll even include the 50 APO in that. It's almost perfect in IQ and ergonomics, but it doesn't look cool.

 

I was forgiving until the slur against 50 APO! 😆

 

1768233-2.jpg?width=400

 

 

 

 

I'd agree the 50 lux is probably a touch more exotic in the looks department, but I think the APO is beautiful in its simplicity (certainly more refined than my 50mm Summicron).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently this is the M11 battery:

 

 

 

 

 

Fits in with the rumours of a Q/SL type design following word that the M11 will be the first M to ditch the removable baseplate. I suppose it makes sense that it's not going to actually be the same battery as the one in the Q and SL given the space requirements. I assume the brilliant removal mechanism will be just like that of the Q/SL though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, xPieter said:

 

No, no, no! I meant the VOIGTLANDER 50 APO isn't attractive! Leica's APO is stunning to look at.

 

Ahhhhh. I forgot about that lens. I don't like the front ring of that one, and the body seems to be leaning towards "how close can we get to copying vintage Leica lens design without infringing patents" rather than them going for a more modern design. 

 

OK all is forgiven. :) 

 

 

Zeiss' 28mm 2.8 Biogon is nice:

 

9248834K.webp

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
11 hours ago, xPieter said:

 

Congrats! Did you buy any SL lenses to go with it or just adapting M glass? Those marathon photos were right nice.

 

Just the body for now. I did give serious consideration to getting the 24-70 with it as you make a £500 saving if buying both together which makes the price of the zoom a little more palatable given that it is actually a slight variant of the Sigma optics from their 24-70 DG DN internally (but with Leica's all metal housing, af motors and firmware). I'm of two minds about whether I regret not getting it or not. It balances really well with the camera. I'd sooner have primes but could foresee a situation where the zoom is useful. I'd like to keep an eye out for the 90mm Summicron in good condition used as that might be the first one I go for to use with my 50mm M-Summicron, before then going for the SL 50 Summicron. I'd like the 35 too but if I can swing it next year I might get the Q2 to serve as my wider angle lens option.

 

Thursday was the final day of a two month offer on the SL2/SL2-S where the M mount adapter was included for free, which is a £370 saving. It was particularly appealing not having to pay for it having previously owned one before with my original SL. Just this week, on this side of the Atlantic at least, Leica have also begun an offer of an extra year on top of the standard 2yr warranty cover on the SL, M and Q lineup when you register so I really feel like I lucked out on the timing. They were gracious enough in store last week to give me a heads up on that offer too and told me to hold off registering until the deal went live. 

 

I love the camera. I spent a long time with Leica last Wednesday talking to them about it, and trying things out (I also had a chance to enjoy the No Time to Die behind the scenes exhibition at the gallery in store too). It was actually the best experience I've ever had in their store. They were so accommodating, never pushing me for time or to make a sale. They've basically ironed out the quibbles I had with the original SL with the SL2/2-S. Strangely it feels a bit smaller but I can't imagine it is by more than a few mm. The grip is so much nicer and the LCD is beautiful. The EVF is just godly and was remarkable in assisting my ability to manually focus on marathon runners over the weekend. ISO wise, while I've only done basic tests with it, having something that's damn near clean up to 12,500 and useable up to 50,000 is just a whole new world to me, and the IBIS is just spectacular. I want to make of point of capturing some colour stuff in the coming weeks as even as you push the ISO the sensor seems to retain colour fidelity remarkably well. It really does seem to be the best sensor Leica have put into a camera to date.

 

I really boiled my choice down to either the R5 or the SL2-S and the SL just made more sense for my style of shooting (and the Leica was the cheaper camera which is still a sentence that doesn't make any sense). Yes the resolution and autofocus of the Canon was very appealing, but on balance the ergonomics, controls, menus and set up features on the SL click more with me, not to mention the robust build quality and having two card slots of the same type so I only need to think about SD cards and not CF and SD. I also don't need to worry about overheating on video with the SL and that's something I really am keen to get into exploring next year once I can upgrade my computer. The way the menus are set out to shift between photo and video, and all the thoughtful video settings built into the camera, are just fantastic. Video af is a write off with the SL of course, that much I knew, but it was never a deal breaker for me anyway as I'm happy to manual focus for video.

 

In store I was actually extremely happy with the stills autofocus in af-s mode, and af-c was better than I had been lead to believe (quirky, but I wasn't turned off by it). Both modes are far, far ahead of what they were on the original SL. I definitely suspect that to some degree with me that ignorance is bliss when it comes to my lack of real hands on experience with Sony, Canon and Nikon autofocus. I absolutely think that for the SL3 Leica need to move away from the Panasonic system, but again, for my needs I didn't feel like what the SL2-S could give me was going to harm the quality of stills work that I'd like to produce in future once I actually acquire some af lenses.

 

When considering the R5, Canon's (wonderful) RF lenses actually turned out to be a big turnoff for me due to their size and cost. Their best primes are not too far off from the cost of good quality used SL primes, and with the L mount I also have the benefit of Sigma lenses, notably their latest DG DN models, to choose from and it's quite probable that I may end up with one or two of those before I get round to building up a system of SL primes. There are some lines of work I want to make a shift into that mean, depending on how fast I can make inroads creatively, I am not yet certain of my roadmap for lenses. I need to see how things go but having the reach of the 90mm Cron would be useful (Sigma's 85mm DG DN is also superb at less than half the price too. I hope they do a DG DN variant of their 135mm too as Leica have nothing in that space, and a DG DN 70-200 would be nice to see even though I'd like to resist zooms if I can. I know they've said the latter is in the works, but I'm not sure about a 135). 

 

I'd like to try that dinky little 90mm 2.8 Sigma released recently. I've seen it in stock online but need to check in stores for a demo. If i like it, at £550 it might tide me over for a while and allowing me to money to spare to spend on other things like my computer and accessories to kit the camera out with a rig and external monitor/recorder for video. The baby 'I' primes from Sigma all seem to exhibit focus breathing so would not double up well for video use sadly, so I'd either have to look again at the Leica 24-70 or buy one or two Meike cinema lenses for optimal focus and aperture control.

 

A great appeal of the SL primes is that they're roughly the same size, and all have the same sized filter thread. I've heard the Sigma L mount lenses are good to great speed wise in AF-S, but often hunt badly in AF-C. I'm more of an AF-S user anyway when it comes to autofocus but I'd still be wanting to try any Sigma lens of interest before buying. I really should try the Sigma 35mm f2 and 85mm 1.4. I could stretch to the 50mm SL Summicron (used) now but it would seem a bit irresponsible to do so and would also require my having to to part with my M-Summicron variant to help fund it which I honestly don't feel the need to do that at the moment. One huge difference with the EVF on the SL2/2-S vs the old SL is how clean and stable the image is when you use the zoom focus assist when focusing manually. It doesn't seem to be a knock on benefit of the IBIS as I turned that off just to see if it reduced it to the quality of what I used to deal with on the SL. Here it just seems to be a natural benefit of the improved EVF regardless of whether you set it to 60hz or 120hz refresh rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really loving the SL 50 on my CL. I really want to try an SL 601 as I remember how my 50/1.4 came alive when I went from my crop Canon to a full frame 5D. Now you've got me thinking that won't be enough and I'll have to get an SL2-S! I'm going to hold off as long as I can because I love the compactness of the CL, but some day I'm going to run across an SL/SL2/SL2S deal I can't pass up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, xPieter said:

I'm really loving the SL 50 on my CL. I really want to try an SL 601 as I remember how my 50/1.4 came alive when I went from my crop Canon to a full frame 5D. Now you've got me thinking that won't be enough and I'll have to get an SL2-S! I'm going to hold off as long as I can because I love the compactness of the CL, but some day I'm going to run across an SL/SL2/SL2S deal I can't pass up.

 

As much as I love the M camera bodies, I think I am better suited to using an SL2/2-S which, when you account for the EVF and IBIS, is effectively an M on steroids when you match it with M lenses, and on top of all that a camera that also carries with it the benefits of af lenses and superb video functionality. It's a very versatile tool for red dot obsessives. Don't get me wrong, I'd love another M some day. They're still cameras I want in my life, but the SL2-S seems to be the one I need right now (and, new, is Leica's cheapest full frame camera). If I can get anywhere with some of the things I want to do over the coming year then I can foresee ending up with two as circumstances might require me to have a backup (whether I would opt for another 2-S or go with the debut SL2 to have the higher megapixels I'm not sure. There's different colour science between the SL2 and 2-S sensors and I'd need to know how easy they are to match at the computer). Again, I need to think carefully about my roadmap for expanding my kit. I want to be flexible but at the same time still retain some sense of minimalism in not wanting to lug too much around at any one time.

 

If rumours are true that the M11 is going to receive an unpleasant price increase then I really would love to see Leica marry the SL2-S sensor with the M10 body and sell that as a "cheaper" M-E option. That would be amazing. 

 

If I get the chance today I will try to visit a store to demo the Sigma 85mm 1.4 and 35mm f2 DG DN lenses. Honestly I don't think I would have seriously considered an SL again had Sigma not seriously ramped up their L lens lineup over the past eighteen months, and I couldn't keep sitting around waiting to see if Sigma could ever get anything going for the Canon RF mount. They're not only filling some gaps that exist between the focal lengths of Leica's own lens offerings, but also offering stellar optics on models that do match or come close to some of the native SL glass focal lengths. So, tempted as I am to lust for the SL primes I do think that if the Sigmas prove satisfactory I'll be smarter in the short to medium term to go with those to free up budget to spend elsewhere on other items.

 

It's really only in colour, rendering and af performances where I think the Leica lenses will have an edge, and maybe in corner to corner uniform sharpness. I would expect stricter standards of manufacturing between copies of the same lens from Leica compared to other manufacturers, so you'd be less likely to find yourself with a dud out of the box or on the used market, but in the age where all of these companies are reliant on computing for designing their glass I doubt there is much in it between Leica's lenses, and the best from Canon, Sony or Sigma, when it comes to central sharpness these days. As I've said before though, I'm more interested in character than I am sharpness, but right now I know I'd be smarter to play it safe financially with some of Sigma's primes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Angry the Clown said:

I'm more interested in character than I am sharpness

 

Same! So tell me, which lenses from any brand do you think have character?

 

I did think the usual Fuji suspects have character. The 16/1.4, the 35/1.4, the 56/1.2, and maybe the 90/2. Most of the M lenses I've used have character. The 50/1.4, the 50/2 DR, the 35/2 "Bokeh King," the VM 50/1.2, and the 28/1.7 on the Q.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, xPieter said:

 

Same! So tell me, which lenses from any brand do you think have character?

 

I did think the usual Fuji suspects have character. The 16/1.4, the 35/1.4, the 56/1.2, and maybe the 90/2. Most of the M lenses I've used have character. The 50/1.4, the 50/2 DR, the 35/2 "Bokeh King," the VM 50/1.2, and the 28/1.7 on the Q.

 

I'd agree with you on those really, and add Zeiss' M lenses into the mix too. Of modern af lenses a number of the Fuji's definitely have something, though I also wonder how much is also down to their unique X-Trans sensor. Canon RF and Nikon Z are superb, but rather clinical (particularly Canon). I think a lot of that really is down to lenses being designed at a computer now in pursuit of perfection, but I'm not really sure I want perfection. Those smaller Nikon primes that Starhawk wrote about recently seemed to have something nice about them, and that monstrous Canon RF 28-70 F2 seems to have something really special about it. Some Canon EF lenses render in quite a unique fashion like the 50 and 85 1.2 L primes which are flatteringly soft and rather dreamy, and then if we start delving into the history of older manual focus lenses from Canon, Nikon, Olympus...etc we're spoilt for choice.

 

I got to try the 85 DG DN Sigma this afternoon. It's razor sharp to be sure, but also has some nice micro-contrast. It mounts well with the SL and seemed to focus OK but it did exhibit a pulsing effect in the EVF and LCD which I thought was odd. I need to read up on that. It's quite possible it was down to user error and not having set up my camera optimally for AF lenses. It's £999 which is very reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FM2's are classics. Can't go wrong with those, and Nikon's film era glass is particularly lovely. 

 

Welcome to Club SL! Which did you get? The original?

 

I can get the 75mm Summicron used like new for a very good price. I'm tempted but need to give it a little more thought as it may be a case of want vs need. I'm still not sure what my lens roadmap should be just yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/11/2021 at 3:12 AM, xPieter said:

Ideally I would get the 35 & 90, but I can only justify one so I'm glad I have the 50 as a middle of the road option.

 

Funny. For me I'd love the 50mm and the 90mm, which makes the 75mm the appealing compromise if I can only afford one lens. On the wider end a Q2 makes more sense as a companion to my SL2-s as its 35mm crop is the equivalent of 35mm at f2 (and would be around 30mp).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So going back to having seen the APO 75mm Summicron SL lens for a really great price used...... 

 

I now have that lens sitting on my desk beside me. I have to confess, when I ordered it I almost felt the deal on the price was too good to be true. Listed as boxed in "like new condition," even though it was coming from a very reputable camera store, I just couldn't help but have my doubts. It wasn't being held at a branch of the dealer near to me either so I couldn't go and examine it in person and took the risk ordering it blindly online (not only was it priced a good £500 below what I typically see A++ condition copies of the 75mm sell for used, the dealer also had a sale on used items and I was able to get another £200 off! The chances of my seeing the lens again for a similar price anytime soon seemed remote). So it now sits, mounted onto my SL2-S and it is PRISTINE. I'm just dumbfounded. New, the lens is typically selling for more than the camera, but I've now acquired one in as good as new condition for less than the cost of a Canon RF Prime. 

 

I think 75mm is going to cover me very nicely. I wanted something with more telephoto reach, but even at used prices the 90mm is just too expensive for my taste and a bit limiting to serve as my one and only af SL lens. 75 is an unconventional focal length, and I wonder if that's why I was able to get such a good copy of the lens "cheap" as perhaps it's a lens some users buy, find it's not for them, and opt to part with in favour of the 90. For me, it really does feel like a nice middle ground between the 50 and the 90 combination that I'd possibly have were money no object, giving me quite a versatile single prime (it's going to have that nice compression for portraiture, yet at the same time still be wide enough in smaller spaces, whereas 85mm and above I think would start to feel to limiting for my needs in the months ahead), and longer term combined with a possible Q2 purchase I think I will have covered my focal length bases nicely. The latest camera firmware ran a firmware update on the lens when I mounted it too. The af seems insanely snappy to me. 

 

I need to get up to speed with the af settings...etc but will hopefully get out with it at the weekend (even if just to run off some test shots on local landscapes). I'm keeping my 50mm Summicron M lens for the time being, even though the focal length between that and the 75 are pretty close. I can envision scenarios where I can still find use for the M lens, especially when out on the street to keep the camera profile low (although the SL primes marry so perfectly to the SL body and don't look intimidating at all really), and I also think the M lens is going to be a good keeper for future video projects once I begin budgeting for those.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How exciting that you got an SL lens. I find 50mm on crop bodies to be a wonderful focal length in the right conditions so I bet you'll come to really like the 75mm. You are going to have a unique focal length that will set your photos apart from the crowd. That can be a very good thing. I bet you're right too about that unique focal length being a reason for the price you were able to find.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...