Jump to content

APO-Vario-Elmarit-SL 90–280 mm f/2.8–4 —Just the facts please


Guest Nowhereman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Happy with my M9-P and M-Monochrom cameras, the only reason I would buy the new Leica SL would be to use the APO-Vario-Elmarit-SL 90–280 mm f/2.8–4 for an African safari, probably in September or October next year. Because there is so much speculation and so many truly boring and opinionated statements on the SL, I would like to reserve this thread for facts about this lens now and, eventually, user experience with it as well as pointers to interesting reviews of it.

 

Two things that I would like to know now is, What will be the price? and When will the lens be available? Also, having seen the MTF-charts on Kristian Dowling's blog, from my rudimentary understanding, the MTF of the 90–280 looks substantially better than that of the 24-90? Is my understanding of the charts correct?

Edited by not_a_hero
Link to post
Share on other sites

longer focal length MTF's are invariably better so that is no surprise. 

I suspect it will be about the same price ....... as with the T.

Unfortunately there is no comparable S ...... but if anything the longer f/l lenses are technically easier to make even though there may be more glass ..... although the dual focussing elements make it a bit more complex.....  

Link to post
Share on other sites

280 is usable on Safari, but on the short side. 400 is bettter. I normally use an 1.4 Apo-extender for that reason on my 105-280. Given the price of an SL I would suggest that buying a other brand  might be more cost-efffective for one-time use.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap, I was hoping to factor out the cost element by selling the SL and 90-280 afterwards — someone has offered to buy it after the safari. If that offer falls through as we get closer to purchase time, or if I get cold feet, the alternative would be to use the Nikon 70-200VR with the TC14e (1.4x) tele-coverter that I gave to my son and that I can borrow and buy a Nikon D7200 for about US$900+ now. On the D7200 the 200mm end of the 70-200 would give me the FOV of 300mm and the TC14e would bring that to 420mm. This tele-extender works very well with the Nikon 70-200, which is a great lens for DX bodies.

 

If I do go through with the SL and 90-280 caper, I could bring with me the Telyt 400/6.8, for which I would have to get the R tube (ring?), as I have it with the Visoflex III. However, on my last safari to Botswana in 2009, I found that I rarely used or need a FOV beyond 280mm.

 

I did consider (for a few minutes) to go completely retro by using the M9-P and MM with the Visoflex III and the Telyt 400/6.8, as well as my Telyt 200/4, but the latter is not sharp lens, and I would sort feel the lack of a zoom lens when I had to change lenses between 90, 135, 200 and 400.

Edited by not_a_hero
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that the long Telyt's are good enough for today's digital cameras. I have the earlier 400 and 560 f5.6 lenses, with Televit/pistol grip and shoulder stock. I can use these either with a Visoflex III or on the M240 with a Viso replacing extension tube. Whereas they are amusing pieces, other than the dead centre of the image, they are as soft as putty. The problem is chromatic aberration, as they have very little correction for this. I would guess even a cheap modern Sigma or similar long zoom would way out-perform the Telyt's. I also have the long Zeiss lenses, the 300 and 600mm Tele-Tessars, designs dating from the late 1970's. They are a lot better than the Telyts, with reasonable CA correction but still not as good as my cheap modern Olympus 75-300 v.II Micro Four Thirds zoom.

 

Wilson

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap, I was hoping to factor out the cost element by selling the SL and 90-280 afterwards — someone has offered to buy it after the safari. If that offer falls through as we get closer to purchase time, or if I get cold feet, the alternative would be to use the Nikon 70-200VR with the TC14e (1.4x) tele-coverter that I gave to my son and that I can borrow and buy a Nikon D7200 for about US$900+ now. On the D7200 the 200mm end of the 70-200 would give me the FOV of 300mm and the TC14e would bring that to 420mm. This tele-extender works very well with the Nikon 70-200, which is a great lens for DX bodies.

 

If I do go through with the SL and 90-280 caper, I could bring with me the Telyt 400/6.8, for which I would have to get the R tube (ring?), as I have it with the Visoflex III. However, on my last safari to Botswana in 2009, I found that I rarely used or need a FOV beyond 280mm.

 

I did consider (for a few minutes) to go completely retro by using the M9-P and MM with the Visoflex III and the Telyt 400/6.8, as well as my Telyt 200/4, but the latter is not sharp lens, and I would sort feel the lack of a zoom lens when I had to change lenses between 90, 135, 200 and 400.

Botswana is a case apart, as the animals in those up-market camps are quite habituated. In more wild circumstances, you might feel more challenged
Link to post
Share on other sites

............ Because there is so much speculation and so many truly boring and opinionated statements on the SL, I would like to reserve this thread for facts .......................

 

An interestingly rude way to introduce a request for information. But it seems to be working. A lesson for us all perhaps to be a bit more rude in future when asking for help.

 

There are very few pertinent facts available yet and you probably have the best of them by now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not mean to be rude, and don't think I was. All I wanted to do was to head off philosophical discussions on how many angels could stand on the head of a 70-280 lens. Though I am not of the school that inserts smileys to show I don't mean to be rude, or address someone as "my friend" when we're at daggers drawn in a photo forum discussion. Seems to me that polite discussion can be fairly candid. In any case, as you kindly suggest, I've learned more than I knew when I started this thread — and hope others interested in this lens have as well.

 

I suppose Leica has not given any indication of the price of this lens...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was rude because it wasn't just a request for information but a swipe at the way people you are addressing have been expressing opinions in other threads.

 

But I accept that you didn't mean it to be rude. I agree with your "my friend" point and the underlying attitude which I also find absurd and unpleasant, but you sort of did the equivalent didn't you? Never mind, no lasting damage!

 

Anyway, Leica have not announced a price yet, but there will be many opinions on the subject....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, rudeness vs oversensitivity — who is to tell where the dividing line falls? And these are cultural aspects that differ in various societies. 

 

Jaap, thanks for the link to the interesting article: incidentally, I like the first picture of the school children a lot. I could only do the Visoflex III caper if I envisaged many trips to Africa in the future, which is not the case. As I mentioned, in terms of telephoto, I have the Macro-90/4, 135/4, 200/4 and the 400/6.8. I would have to replace the weak link, the 200/4 with a 280/4.5(?).

 

As for black and white, when in Botswana, I was inspired by Nicolas Bruant's wonderful B&W book, "Wild Beasts", unfortunately out of print. I ended up using only B&W versions of my shots for a chapter in an unpublished photo book. The dea was to depict the harshness and the stress on both predators and prey of the environment in which these animals live. That includes human encroachment, poaching and hunting in some areas, prolonged seasonal drought, and interaction with cattle and ranchers. Expressive B&W fit this concept well, as Nicolas Bruant shows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...I would have to replace the weak link, the 200/4 with a 280/4.5(?)...

 

Are you thinking of the 280mm f/4.8 for Visoflex?  I've had two samples of the last version (bayonet mount) of this lens, one flared any time the sun was in the sky, the other was immune to flare, go figure.  Neither was a really stellar lens, the image detail and color saturation was not up to modern standards.  

 

You might want to look into the Canon FD 300mm f/4 L.  I realize this isn't a Leica lens but it will work on the M(240) or SL and with digital correction for lateral chromatic aberration it's quite sharp.  Note that the correction for lateral chromatic aberration won't help on a monochrome camera.  At current market value you could sell it at the end of the trip and you'd be out only a few $$.

Edited by wildlightphoto
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug is quite right about the versions 1 and 2 of the Telyt-V 280/4.8. However, version 3 is considerably improved and matches well with the Monochrom. Not an optimal lens for colour imo.

I too had good experiences with the Canon lens. No match for the Apo-Telyt 280/4.0 though. (and I hope, but do not expect that the SL zoom will reach that level)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug is quite right about the versions 1 and 2 of the Telyt-V 280/4.8. However, version 3 is considerably improved and matches well with the Monochrom. Not an optimal lens for colour imo.

I too had good experiences with the Canon lens. No match for the Apo-Telyt 280/4.0 though. (and I hope, but do not expect that the SL zoom will reach that level)

 

The bayonet version that I used is version 3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyway, Leica have not announced a price yet, but there will be many opinions on the subject....

 

there is a price for this new lense - anounced by Leica Switzerland!

 

There you found the 90-280 SL for 6.395 SFr (invl. VAT) - the 24-90 costs 5.445 Sfr, which means 17% more for the tele lens.

 

Greetings

 

 

thomas

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a price for this new lense - anounced by Leica Switzerland!

 

There you found the 90-280 SL for 6.395 SFr (invl. VAT) - the 24-90 costs 5.445 Sfr, which means 17% more for the tele lens.

 

Greetings

 

 

thomas

 

So assuming Swiss pricing parity with UK pricing, that would put it a little above the price of the 28mm Summilux M and roughly the same as the Summarit-S 70mm, for comparison purposes.

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug is quite right about the versions 1 and 2 of the Telyt-V 280/4.8. However, version 3 is considerably improved and matches well with the Monochrom. Not an optimal lens for colour imo.

 

My experiences with the 280 Telyt were slightly different. I had series 2 and 3. My Series 3 was an odd one as it had had an anti-flare flock lining put in (it looked totally professionally done). When I got it I was rather disappointed in it, as it seemed little if any better than my series 2. I sent it to Will van Manen for a clean and check. It came back better and certainly it was far less flare prone than the series 2 and generally had considerably higher contrast but in the centre of the image it was not as sharp as the series 2. In the end as I now had the M240, I sold both of them and bought the Zeiss Contax 300/4 Tele Tessar, which was considerably better than both of the Telyt's. I already had a Novoflex Contax to Leica M adapter.

 

If you can live with a slower lens the Zeiss Contax 100-300/f4.5 is a wonderful lens, one of the last of the Zeiss designs for Contax from around 1998. It might be one of the finest manual focus zooms ever made. It is small and light for its range as well, at only 925 grams. You can pick up a very good one for around £500, as they were popular with Contax film users. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experiences with the 280 Telyt were slightly different. I had series 2 and 3. My Series 3 was an odd one as it had had an anti-flare flock lining put in (it looked totally professionally done). When I got it I was rather disappointed in it, as it seemed little if any better than my series 2. I sent it to Will van Manen for a clean and check. It came back better and certainly it was far less flare prone than the series 2 and generally had considerably higher contrast but in the centre of the image it was not as sharp as the series 2. In the end as I now had the M240, I sold both of them and bought the Zeiss Contax 300/4 Tele Tessar, which was considerably better than both of the Telyt's. I already had a Novoflex Contax to Leica M adapter.

 

If you can live with a slower lens the Zeiss Contax 100-300/f4.5 is a wonderful lens, one of the last of the Zeiss designs for Contax from around 1998. It might be one of the finest manual focus zooms ever made. It is small and light for its range as well, at only 925 grams. You can pick up a very good one for around £500, as they were popular with Contax film users. 

 

Hmm. Given the conversation here, I was a little concerned as to how well this old Telyt-R 250mm f/4 v1 would image on the digital sensor, so I pulled it out and fitted it to the M-P with the R Adapter M. I sampled four targets, two in the near-field focus range and two at distance, through all lens openings. 

 
22798466591_109e478c5e_o.jpg
 
My fears were ungrounded. Sharpness has a minor improvement from f/4 to f/5.6, it plateaus there edge to edge, and there's very little diffraction degradation even at f/22. A small amount of lateral CA is completely cleaned up by the standard LR Lens Correction tools. 
 
The handling is a bit clumsy when fitted to the M-P as the body has insufficient purchase and the electronic viewfinder is a little weak. It feels tight and balanced on the R8 and Leicaflex SL. I suspect it will work beautifully on the SL.
 
G
  • Like 1
Link to post
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...