Jump to content

anyone..Leica SL+90-280 vs Nikon/Canon?


tom0511

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi there,

I am long time Leica user, comin from the M but also liking the simple user interface and IQ of other systems including the SL+24-90.

Now I am interested in the 90-280 but looking at the price and experiencing the somewhat limited AFC of the SL compared to a Nikon D5 I wonder if it is really worth to spend so much money..

I mean specially for a telezoom which one wants to use for sports, kids, wildlife (birds etc.) AF speed is essential. Not that AF of the SL would be bad, but I assume D5 would be in another class and For half of the prica of the 90-280 you can get a 70-200/2.8 and a 1.4 converter.

Someone else in this dilemma who would like to share any thougths?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For tracking focus the DSLR is still top of the heap. It's one of the few remaining areas it is the best choice.

 

I have not compared the 90-280 to the Nikon but I have to my friends Canon 70-200 LIS2. The Canon certainly tracks focus better and is an excellent optic. I think my 90-280 is somewhat better optically but it's hard to say given the 1DX sensor isn't as good as the SL sensor. Canon's lowly dynamic range and insistence on a coke bottle thick AA filter doesn't help. It might fare better on the 1DX2. For single shot I don't see any real difference in focus speed. The Leica does suffer a bit when the light levels drop and contrast is lower. You need to learn to identify spots to focus on that have some contrast.

 

In good light AF speed in single shot is too close to call for most camera brands. When the light levels drop Leica falls a bit behind the latest from Sony and Fujifilm. The XPro 2's acquisition in low light is fabulous. For CAF DSLR's rule. In good light the Sony's are OK. The rest reasonable. When the light levels go down the DSLR pulls ahead.

 

I think the SL focuses more like an entry level to mid range DSLR.

 

I don't shoot professional sports and I don't personally feel the need for AF at the level of the D5 to photograph my kids or wildlife. I do use the SL professionally though and I shoot most things except sports. So I haven't seen a situation where I wished for more than what the 90-280 is capable of. Plus, since neither Canon or Nikon make a decent camera with an EVF I won't be purchasing form them any time soon.

 

The first real mirrorless competitor for CAF will be Sony. The A7R2 is already pretty good at CAF. I have Sony's rather excellent 70-400G2 on my A7R2 and it focuses very very fast and the new G master lenses all seem to have excellent CAF.

 

Gordon

Edited by FlashGordonPhotography
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Leica glass is better but the D5 is going to be faster when it comes to focusing and burst shooting, etc.

 

That said I was pleasantly surprised by the performance of the SL's autofocus at the skate park.  It had no problem maintaining focus for 5 to 10 shot sequences.

 

I did notice that the SL's contrast detection AF sometimes struggled when there wasn't something for it to "latch" onto.  Like a solid white surface such as the hood of a white car would give the AF a lot of problems even when the car was completely motionless.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SL with 90-280 does not come close to D810/70-200/2.8 as far as AF speed or ability to lock on focus, I am afriad. It is much much more obvious at low light situation. However, SL is not bad and is still very usable but you will need to be more patient and work the AF a bit more. I don't have D5 but D500 AF performance is in another class entirely. However, I would say that in real world typical shooting, 90+% of the time, SL 90-280 will do just fine for my need.

As far as IQ is concern, you can decide for yourself. This is very unscientific test where I did a quick handheld test this morning. Nikon 70-200/2.8 was used on my SL via dummy adapter so no VR and was at f2.8 since that is the only F stop that I know is accurate using the adapter diaphragm for aperture control. I kept shutterspeed at 1/250 for both via auto iso in A mode. However, something is very strange with metering.

With Nikon, @200mm/f2.8, iso was at 6400 and the picture was a bit over exposed. Whereas with 90-280, iso was 640, f3.5@190mm. So take this for what its worth. I imported both DNG into PS, adjust exposure down for Nikon and increase exposure for 90-280 a bit otherwise just resize and converted to jpg with no other adjustment.

 

bird_zpsoejf3v0e.jpg

90-280

 

bird2_zpsixs0kz1f.jpg

Nikon 70-200/2.8

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

My experience so far has been with using an SL with the 24-90mm zoom compared to an S007 and a Nikon D4. this was shooting wild water canoe kayak, which I am used to do, as my kids are competing in that sport.

I agree with the views above, but would add that the big let down was the viewfinder of the SL in very bright condition (harsh sunlight reflected as well by the water). This has been discussed extensively in a thread here and in the getdpi forum. I doubt that I would take the SL again for that type of shooting. Better the "slower" S and seeing what you are looking at ;-)

if I was making a living of shooting fast-paced action in bright sunlight, I would definitely go with the D5. What you get from a 300mm 2.8 lens cannot be obtained either from the current SL offering.

Marc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm still waiting for my Pre-ordered 90-280mm to arrive, so I am in no position to comment on the actual performance of the len's AF speed & accuracy.

 

Typical comparison on availability range of lenses,  AF performances and Price between Nikon / Canon to Leica SL makes a clear choice on who is the logical choice. 

 

However so, there is still no perfect AF system available in the world. Until there is a camera system available someday that can read your mind and act perfectly without any lag! And still that does not include changing your mind half way or later (whahaa..)

 

I believe one does not buy a car just based on price vs performance specification alone. If that is true, Nissan R35 GTR would have been the only sports car lust after by sports car buyers,...as a matter of fact, it is just another alternative choice.

 

I on the other hand look at the color rendering and the image artistic appeal as key elements on what I wish to obtain from a photograph / camera system. So I therefore have to be willing to pay more and willing to accept less on data comparisons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for sharing all those experiences.I understand that from just price-value ratio the Leica probably cant win and that there are other factors as well. (Rendering of the lens, color, user interface).

 

While I find the SL viewfinder the best EVF I have used, I also admit to prefer the OVF of S in many conditions.

Another thing I find a little strange is that when pressing the shutter in fast mode, the camera will take a series of at least 2 images even if I press the shutter  release just for the slightest moment. When using a Canikon the camera only takes images as long as I press the shutter release and then stops. I can take 1,2,3,... images, depending on how long I press the shutter.

 

On the other side I really like the size / handling and consistent IQ I get with the SL and 24-90mm and I assume the 90-280 should be just as good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad fact with Leica is that there will always be a Nikon/Canon/Fuji alternative that does the same but cheaper ..... and sometimes a lot cheaper. 

 

I have no complaints about the SL with 24-90 and 90-280 ...... and both lenses and camera have done everything I have thrown at them and I have yet to find a situation where I have 'wished I had a D5'.

 

Image quality can't be faulted and for once I have a unified system (M, T, Q  and SL) that does just about everything and am spoilt with lens/body/ergonomic permutations. 

 

I don't even bother to look over the fence any more to see if the grass is greener ....... what I have does what I want in a way I want it to and is a pleasure to use. 

 

Of course I'm penniless as a result .... buy hey, money in the bank doesn't buy happiness or amusement .....  :p

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Image quality can't be faulted and for once I have a unified system (M, T, Q  and SL) that does just about everything and am spoilt with lens/body/ergonomic permutations. 

 

 

 

Now you're only missing the S integration.   :o

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you're only missing the S integration.   :o

 

Jeff

 it's not possible to survive without kidneys.

 

No other spare unsold organs that will generate the required cash ....... so the S will have to wait ....

Edited by thighslapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad fact with Leica is that there will always be a Nikon/Canon/Fuji alternative that does the same but cheaper ..... and sometimes a lot cheaper. 

 

I have no complaints about the SL with 24-90 and 90-280 ...... and both lenses and camera have done everything I have thrown at them and I have yet to find a situation where I have 'wished I had a D5'.

 

Image quality can't be faulted and for once I have a unified system (M, T, Q  and SL) that does just about everything and am spoilt with lens/body/ergonomic permutations. 

 

I don't even bother to look over the fence any more to see if the grass is greener ....... what I have does what I want in a way I want it to and is a pleasure to use. 

 

Of course I'm penniless as a result .... buy hey, money in the bank doesn't buy happiness or amusement .....  :p

 

I am quite happy with the SL and 24-90 as well and I accept to pay a little (tiny litttle ;) ) more than for Canikon. Overall I mostly believe to see differences in IQ. Its also cool that I can use my M primes on the SL vs Canon/Nikon I would hav to buy additional lenses.

Maybe I am just afraif about the 90-280 since this range is a focal length where AF and AF tracking is quite important/usefull.

Also the lens is quite big/heavy.... so certainly bigger than a Canikon 70-200/4.0 or even heavier than a 70-200/2.8 + TC...

 

I am not a sports photographer, so I dont need the very fastest AF, but I would want one that is fast enough for tracking my kids and things like that.

 

It really would help to see more images from moving subjects/sports etc. taken with the 90-280.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 it's not possible to survive without kidneys.

 

No other spare unsold organs that will generate the required cash ....... so the S will have to wait ....

 

Yep....but prices sinking all the time.  One can find an excellent used 006 for about $5500, and a S70 Summarit for about $3000.  One can still find an 006, with full 3 year protection plan (including loaner), for $8000 or less.  Not cheap, but now in the M range.  Not long ago, a new body alone was well over $20k. The 007 is a different story.....for now....but still about half its cost from launch, with careful search.

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also the lens is quite big/heavy.... so certainly bigger than a Canikon 70-200/4.0 or even heavier than a 70-200/2.8 + TC...

 

I am not a sports photographer, so I dont need the very fastest AF, but I would want one that is fast enough for tracking my kids and things like that.

 

It really would help to see more images from moving subjects/sports etc. taken with the 90-280.

 

In use it's not as big, heavy or unwieldy as you would imagine. I use a herringbone leather wrist strap/grip and it dangles fairly effortlessly without actually having to grip it.

 

Of course one arm is now longer than the other .......  :p

 

I have a cheap Safrotto padded lens case from eBay with a shoulder strap and carry the 90-280 (or the 24-90) in that and usually don't bother with a camera bag. 

 

Probably less than I used to lug about with an M and a selection of lenses .... much less fiddling about and 24-280 with fast AF and stunning image quality .

Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I like my Nikon set up, overall, I still prefer to use SL when the situation is suited. I suppose, if I have to have only one system that will serve everything that I need, Nikon will be a bit more versatile and can do a few things to help me capture the pictures better. I played a bit more with Nikon 70-200/2.8 and 90-280 both with my SL. Granted that with Nikon, i only had MF but I managed to find a pigeon that stayed still long enough for me to use focus magnifier to get the eye in focus. Focus may not be 100% exact but this is the sharpest one that I got. The sample are 100% cropped at 200mm wide open for both lens.

 

pigeon3_zpsvlv2ptsb.jpg

Nikon

 

pigeon4_zpssuorfnpx.jpg

Leica

 

Weight of D810 wiht 70-200/2.8 is not that significantly different from SL with 90-280. However, I heard a rumor of a new Nikon 70-200 that will have a bit more weight saving among other things.

OVF vs EVF, there are definitely situations where EVF will have advantage and other situations where OVF will have the advantage. Personally I am glad that I don't have to pick one system only and

use whatever system that is more suited to what I want to do although when all else being equal, I do have a definitive preference for a system.

Too bad though, now that S adapter is out, I was thinking about trying one or two S lenses with my SL but my local dealer really kind of talked me out of it mainly because of the many problems

they had with the S AF system and frequent repairs that their S customers have had.

Edited by Suteetat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to see those images. The Nikon looks like something is not right. Slight shake? or misfocus. The second certainly looks excellent to me.

I still have not had issues with my S lenses-I await the adapter next week and then might be able to report how it works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention that both shots were taken on a tripod. However, with Nikon, I was only able to use MF so focus could be a bit off and after setting the focus on the eye, the pigeon

could very well moved a bit before I press shutter. Shutter speed was 1/500 on both Leica and Nikon shots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made my decision in direction of the 90-280. If I was mainly a sportsphotographer the decision could (would?) be different.

I picked up the lens today and did some first quick shots and I am really more than impressed by the IQ (detail, color, contrast) and the fast/quiet AF (mainly static subects today).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made my decision in direction of the 90-280. If I was mainly a sportsphotographer the decision could (would?) be different.

I picked up the lens today and did some first quick shots and I am really more than impressed by the IQ (detail, color, contrast) and the fast/quiet AF (mainly static subects today).

 

 

They had one just sitting there on the shelf?

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...