Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cattoo

  • Rank
    Neuer Benutzer

Profile Information

  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think Tailwagger's questions were appropriate, and well-intended. I don't see how anyone could advise on which of two very different camera systems to buy into without knowing how you intend to use it. What's your use case?
  2. The Address Hotel in Dubai M240 with Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton, 1 Sec at f/3.8, ISO 100
  3. Jackson Lake, Grand Teton National Park SL with SL 16-35, 1/180, f/16, ISO 100
  4. Suggest you check out Ken Rockwell's Leica M lens recommendations. He's sarcastic and the article is a bit dated but he does give some good advice on how to think about buying one, two or three M lenses. I went with 50mm for the first lens myself, then got a 35, then a 90, then a 21, then a 28, then another 35, and recently another 50. It's addictive. I have both models you referenced. I'd go with the 35 myself for a first lens if I could only choose between the two. The 28 SUMMICRON is significantly larger. That 35 is really lightweight and so, so sharp. Good luck.
  5. Leica SL 601 w/ SL 16-35mm. 1/100 sec at f/7.1. ISO100 Grand Tetons at Oxbow Bend
  6. Nice shot. Can you give us some exposure details?
  7. I have the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art. It's a great lens. I bought it specifically for astro work.
  8. simply google “noise reduction” and “Astro photography” for a dozen articles on the topic. Yes, you can use noise reduction, but some stars in your photo will be faint, tiny points of light that will inevitably get lost /erased when NR is applied. (see link below for more info on the topic) This has long been the bane of Sony users (google sony and “star eater”) until the A7iii, which allowed you to disable the feature. People still complain that they lose stars though. Perhaps Leica’s NR doesn’t eat stars the way other cameras’ NR does. I don’t know, I’ve been trolling the
  9. The SL2-S should be better for astro work. You get better performance at higher ISOs and you'll see less noise and fewer star tails with the lower (but still respectable) 24mp resolution. In theory anyway. I have an SL2 and it's not so good for astro. I was about to buy a Sony A7III but then Leica released the SL2-S. I'm leaning toward that now but would like to see some examples. Most of the examples I've seen, though, have long-exposure noise reduction enabled, which you do not want for astro work since it tends to treat some stars as noise and effectively erase them.
  10. Wow. Thanks for posting. This is really helpful.
  11. I understand the auto focus is faster with the sl2-s. That, and with higher iso you can use faster shutter speed, no? I assume it might not matter so much on a sunny day, but it might make the difference between a missed or blurred shot on a cloudy one.
  • Create New...