Jump to content

gotium

Members
  • Posts

    371
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Member Title
    Benutzer
  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks, in fact I am using those. With Leica, Ricoh and Panasonic S5 files I can get where I want with a few seconds of sliding. With the a7c, often never.
  2. I'm just a hobbyist and don't use the SL system (too big), but my experiences with Leica USA when I needed repairs have ranged from not-very-good to absolutely *TERRIBLE* - I could not imagine relying on them if I needed my gear for work. My experience with Leica USA p*ssed me off so much though that I would have switched to Sony IF I could have gotten the colors to work! But I'm just a hobbyist and I can't, at least not with the a7c. So if you have any Sony color tips, having just made the change, I'd love to hear them!
  3. Indeed, I'm only referring to the TL18 when I compare to the Ricoh GRiii - that's what matters most to me, as it's my favorite focal length. If Leica had continued the CL/TL line I would certainly have stuck with it and gotten more lenses, especially the fast wide-angle prime they never made. I also *much* prefer using an EVF than an LCD screen and do wish the Ricoh had one. But it doesn't. At least it's pocketable though.
  4. Well that's odd. Two of you out there with better TL18 results than the GRiii. I'm tempted to upload some examples because my GRiii *clearly* outclasses my (ex) TL18. I agree I prefer the Q2 in every way except cost and size, in 28 mm mode. Not so much in crop mode.
  5. I’m still waiting to get myself a new Honda s2000. Waiting for 22 years now…
  6. Yes, chrominance noise bothers me by 6400 on the Ricoh. I think the CL may be better in that regard.
  7. I would test carefully using the exact same subjects, both at inifinity focus and close-range - it’s not subtle. The TL 18, at least my (ex-) copy, is fine in the center but gets blurry pretty quickly toward the edges, not to mention the corners. The colors are lovely but the resolution I find really poor. The Ricoh lens is pretty even across the frame and really quite sharp. Not a close comparison at all.
  8. I was really still in the process of building a CL kit - I would have wanted to add more lenses, but stopped when it looked like they might drop the line. So I had kind of a "half kit" that I didn't feel like adding to. The Ricoh is already ahead of the CL in several ways important to me anyway - smaller, much quieter, much better face and eye AF, and significantly better IQ than the CL with the TL18, my most-used focal length. But I did fiddle and vacillate for a few months before moving fully over. Now that I'm here, though, it's making me really think about the rest of my (non-CL) kit. I think I've been too precious about Leica gear.
  9. So (drumroll....) my CL replacement is a Ricoh kit: the III, the IIIx and the teleconverter. So far so excellent, really. What is *really* surprising me is (1) that the IIIx gives me more pleasing results than my Q2 in crop mode, and (2) just how close the IIIx comes to an M-mount 50 mm lens (f/2 apo no less) - barring high ISO, where there really is a sensor difference, it's on a pixel-peeping level. Food for thought.
  10. I agree with fotografr here about the lens character. Yes, there are plenty of pixels to crop the Q2 to 50mm field of view, but you absolutely lose the character that you would get using a dedicated 50/2 on an M body, for example. I know this because I've done obsessive side-by-side testing. Cropping is not even close to adequate for what I am looking for. I do use the Q2 and I sometimes crop to 35, but most of the time in post I find that I prefer the 28 mm field of view anyway. So I basically just use it as a fixed 28 (more like 25) mm focal length camera when I have a need for auto-focus.
  11. Leica NJ recently quoted me in excess of $1200 for work I instead had done elsewhere for $280. That was still professional, not DIY. Additionally, the last repair I DID have from Leica NJ came back broken in a different way. After seven months.
  12. Count me surprised also. B and H has been really reliable, responsive and easy to deal with for years.
  13. I have not broken that lens, but I did send one to Leica NJ for a CLA and got back a qoute for something in excess of $600 for repairs. I could not, however, get an explanation of what needed repairing and why, so I just had them send it back to me.
×
×
  • Create New...