Jump to content

90-280/2.8-4


cpclee

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I assumed it was going to be near the size of the 105-280/4.2 R but in this picture seems closer to the 80-200/4 R which isn't bad at all.  I had the 80-200 but it wasn't the easiest lens to manual focus without support and my copy was quite soft at the long end.  

 

Very interested in the 90-280  especially if it performs on the same level as the 24-90.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by cpclee
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

24-90 for comparison

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was constant length, but I have to read again carefully to be sure.

At 280mm, closest distance is only 1.4m, which makes it very useful.

I am also eagerly waiting for it, but I do not know how far away from the start of the waiting list I am.

 

Stephan 

 

Yes, found the text:

A special feature of this is that the overall length of the lens does not change when either focusing or zooming.

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The length of the R 80-200 is 165mm, the weight 1020g .

The 24-90 has a length of 138mm at 24, and of 182mm at 90 (without hood), the weight is 1140g .

I did not (yet) find any numbers for the 90-280, but from the fotos I guess it is quite a bit longer and maybe also heavier than the 24-90.

So i'm afraid it is probably not very close to the R 80-200 in length, but maybe in weight.

I hope it has less weight than the Apo R 70-180, which has a weight of 1870g and a length of 189.5mm.

 

Stephan

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can try to ask for Catalog-Leica+(Typ 601)_us.pdf and could find a good descripition of new 90-200. Don't ask me when and where I found it.

 

Sorry if I'm late and you have it.

 

Francisco

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had the chance to use the 90-280 during a workshop in Wetzlar. Unfortunately I wasn't allowed to take the test shots home. The lens is quite long (no surprise) but I felt very comfortable with it.

 

Thorsten Overgaard posted a nice photo where you compare the size with some 70-200 lenses:

http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-Camera-Typ-601.html

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe an estimate according to the foto from Thorsten Overgaard:

The Nikon lens on the foto is 87mm wide and 205.5mm long and the weight is 1540g, which is probably of little help.

 

So an estimation could be at least 2 cm more length:       88x226mm

But maybe the foto is not exactly in the same scale.

 

Stephan

 

Feel free to make your own guesses.

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the assumption that in the SL Leica Catalog the image on page 17 shows the lens at scale 1:1  (on page 12 the SL plus 24-90 are also shown 1:1)

the lens will be 210mm long:     about  88x210mm  for the 90-280 .

As the lens is a Apo construction, I expect it to be actually even slightly better than the 24-90 and probably also better than the R 105-280.

 

Stephan

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting. The 80-200/4 R was not too terrible a lens to carry onto vacations and I'm hoping the new 90-280 will be the same.  The range of course is fantastic as I'm sure the image quality will be too.  While it will be longish it is fortunately not too fat.  Weight wise there is probably little chance of it not being at least 1.5kg and to me the weight will be the determining factor as to whether I will ultimately get this lens.

 

Under the assumption that in the SL Leica Catalog the image on page 17 shows the lens at scale 1:1  (on page 12 the SL plus 24-90 are also shown 1:1)

the lens will be 210mm long:     about  88x210mm  for the 90-280 .

As the lens is a Apo construction, I expect it to be actually even slightly better than the 24-90 and probably also better than the R 105-280.

 

Stephan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not consider buying the SL 90-280 lens until Leica offer an SL 1.4x or a 2x extender. Meantime I'll continue using my 280/4 R with its APO extenders - because the extra reach is more important than SL AF up to only 280mm. 

 

dunk

But the Is for such long lens will help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dunk.

 

The R 4/280 with Leica adapter stack is almost exactly the same size as the 90-280 (according to wiki). And the largest reproduction ratio is also exactly the same. So I cannot see that you will ever have an advantage with the new 90-280. So in your place I would probably never buy the new lens if you have the old one for free. An AF lens is not really necessary as you prove every day.

I have the 2.8/280, and as it is heavier and taller than your lens, the 90-280 could be useful, anyway. Seeing this, I definitely do not feel the rush anymore to buy it as soon as possible.

 

Stephan

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dunk.

 

The R 4/280 with Leica adapter stack is almost exactly the same size as the 90-280 (according to wiki). And the largest reproduction ratio is also exactly the same. So I cannot see that you will ever have an advantage with the new 90-280. So in your place I would probably never buy the new lens if you have the old one for free. An AF lens is not really necessary as you prove every day.

I have the 2.8/280, and as it is heavier and taller than your lens, the 90-280 could be useful, anyway. Seeing this, I definitely do not feel the rush anymore to buy it as soon as possible.

 

Stephan

 

 

My US$0.02 worth:

 

I'd a expect a variable focal length would be useful in some circumstances; I've used 180mm, 100mm and 90mm lenses for a few of my wildlife photos.  Weather sealing would be handy too.

 

I have the 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R but it's not 'for free' until the resale value plummets to US$0.00.  The opportunity cost of this lens is substantial.

 

The IS of the 90-280 SL lens could be beneficial but for now I'm using a Sony and its sensor stabilization works just fine with the 280 APO as well as with the 60 Macro, 100 APO and the Canon FD 500mm L.  If the SL had sensor stabilization it would be 'game over', the Sony would head off to eBay and I'd replace the loaner SL with one I don't have to give back.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In size and weight - yes probably. In image quality? That would take some doing.

 

 

Hi Jaapv,

 

don't take it as an insult, but I never liked the 105-280, I always found it ugly and unwieldy. (No offence please).

I was actually always quite glad that I never had the money to buy one. (One of the few times that missing money made me happy).

And it is not even Apo (again no offence).

I always liked the 250 and 350 instead, though especially the 350 is quite poor in image quality compared (contrast !).

 

As this is not the first Apo from Leica, I expect only the best, and cannot see a reason why they should fail. (Size and weight of the 90-280 are probably quite conventional and not out of the ordinary, so not a risky construction at all). For example not as advanced as the Nikon fresnel lense construction (AF-S 300mm PF ED) or the Canon DO (diffractive optics) construction in the EF 4/400.

 

Stephan

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

My US$0.02 worth:

 

I'd a expect a variable focal length would be useful in some circumstances; I've used 180mm, 100mm and 90mm lenses for a few of my wildlife photos.  Weather sealing would be handy too.

 

I have the 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R but it's not 'for free' until the resale value plummets to US$0.00.  The opportunity cost of this lens is substantial.

 

The IS of the 90-280 SL lens could be beneficial but for now I'm using a Sony and its sensor stabilization works just fine with the 280 APO as well as with the 60 Macro, 100 APO and the Canon FD 500mm L.  If the SL had sensor stabilization it would be 'game over', the Sony would head off to eBay and I'd replace the loaner SL with one I don't have to give back.

 

 

I add another cent:

 

I am quite "glad" that the SL does not have IBIS. If it is important enough, I try to use a tripod. And stupid me, I often forget to turn off the IS which is not beneficial for quality.  So I often have to take more pictures than necessary, if repetition is possible at all.

You can say I never wholeheartedly embraced the IS/OIS/OSS/VR, so I do not miss it. You have it "in the blood", so you would probably not fare well without. For example I also do not miss it with the Apo Macro Elmarit-R 100, which is my preferred lens, anyway.

 

Apropos free lenses: I make the budget/accounting quite easily: What I have and have payed for is now "free". So the old Leica gear is now the "freeest" part of my equipment. Any new aquisition to be done, is extremely costly compared to that.

 

I have another question: You mentioned the problems with birds feathers and moire. Does that mean a 5Ds is for birds preferrable to a 5DsR ? Or it does not matter anyway ?

 

Stephan

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

I add another cent:

 

I am quite "glad" that the SL does not have IBIS. If it is important enough, I try to use a tripod. And stupid me, I often forget to turn off the IS which is not beneficial for quality.  So I often have to take more pictures than necessary, if repetition is possible at all.

You can say I never wholeheartedly embraced the IS/OIS/OSS/VR, so I do not miss it. You have it "in the blood", so you would probably not fare well without. For example I also do not miss it with the Apo Macro Elmarit-R 100, which is my preferred lens, anyway.

 

I have another question: You mentioned the problems with birds feathers and moire. Does that mean a 5Ds is for birds preferrable to a 5DsR ? Or it does not matter anyway ?

 

Stephan

 

 

Where do I start?

 

A tripod is not always practical, for example when contorted in the front seat of my truck with the lens pointed out the open window.  Even if I could use a tripod inside the truck the wind shakes the truck.

noharr14.jpg

 

Do you see the streaks of rain in this photo?  Not quite vertical, I'd say.  There's also the weight of a tripod which quickly adds up on long hikes in the mountains of Alaska:

dashee01.jpg

 

The weight saving using a monopod & shoulder stock instead of a Series 5 Gitzo is substantial and is the difference between "carry camera" and "leave camera behind" or alternatively "take hike with camera" and "don't take hike".

 

I have not had any trouble with the Sony's sensor stabilization at any shutter speed, tripod or not so I leave it on.  The only reason I'd turn it off is when there's a greater risk of moire and aliasing from too much sharpness.

 

I do not have stabilization 'in the blood'.  The Sony, purchased last summer, is my first camera with any kind of stabilization.  One of the primary reasons I bought it is for the sensor stabilization which works with every lens I can attach to the camera, including every R lens ever made, and focal lengths not yet available in SL mount .  I can choose a lens for its optical properties and not be bothered by what kind of stabilization technology it has.  The camera handles the stabilization.

 

The Canon 5Ds and 5DsR do not interest me.  Nor does any other DSLR.  I'm over that technology.  The EVF has too many advantages to consider another SLR.

  • Like 3
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...