Which telephoto outfit to complement the M8?

[colorflow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Alan,

 

I don't know why anyone has not made the suggestion that you should try a Digilux 3 with some oly glass. They make a 50 - 200mm f/2.8 lens. This translates to 100 - 400mm in 35 terms at a fixed f/2.8 aperture... Not even Canon manufacture a lens like this. Best of all, the price for this lens is real reasonable.

 

Some of the images, that have been taken with the D3, posted on this site are incredible. I would think that they are at the very least as good as Canon images, if not even better.

 

Hope this helps

Andreas

 

You are right about the Digilux 3. Never thought about it, need to look further into it.

Thanks,

Alan

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Cindy Flood]

I have had the 20D. I just sold my 5D and replaced it with an XTi. The 5D has seen very little use since I got my M8 in early November. The XTi is a very nice little body. It is small and light. I am very happy with it. I would consider it over the 20D as a backup if weight and size are a consideration. I bought mine used for a little less than a used 20D.

[andit]

Hi Alan,

 

Yes, pixel density does count for higher resolution. You will find that the higher the pixel count, the larger the file output size. It goes without saying that a 7 or 10 megapixel camera will return a better image than a 3 megapixel unit. However, the larger the pixel, the more sensitive it is to light. What the manufacturers have been doing over the last few years, is add and add megapixels - without changing the size of the sensor. This leads to smaller pixels which are less sensitive to light and produce more noise.

 

Some people feel that the saturation point in the compact camera market was reached at the 5 megapixel mark. The lenses do not have a high enough resolution to effectively activate the pixels on these higher megapixel units, with the result that noise levels increase. Looking at a direct comparison (this is easier to check with compact camera's), if you take the same image with a 5 megapixel, and with a 10 megapixel unit, you will see a huge increase in noise but only a slight increase in detail. In fact, if you look at the Canon units, the photo's taken on an old Ixus (digital Elph in the US) 40, are sharper and clearer than those taken with the new Ixus 750. Yet the 750 produces a much larger file. People in the photo industry acutally believe that the saturation point on full frame (24 x 36mm) sensors lies at 16 megapixels.

 

What also has a direct influence on image quality, is the resolution capability of the lenses, and this is where Leica is the world leader. Sorry Canon. I used Canon equipment for the last 20 years, including some fine "L" primes, but Leica has the upper hand in this respect...

 

In terms of resolution capability, Leica and believe it or not Olympus lead the way, with Zeiss, Canon (not all lenses though), Nikon and the others following on behind, very, very closely, but that is what gives you the "Leica" look.

Andreas

[deltoid1]

Hi Alan,

 

I don't know why anyone has not made the suggestion that you should try a Digilux 3 with some oly glass. They make a 50 - 200mm f/2.8 lens. This translates to 100 - 400mm in 35 terms at a fixed f/2.8 aperture... Not even Canon manufacture a lens like this...

 

 

Hope this helps

Andreas

 

First, the Olympus lens is a variable aperture f2.8-f3.5.

 

And due to the difference in sensor size, there is a two stop difference in f-stop equivalence. So, the Olympus 50-200 f2.8-3.5 would be equivalent to a Canon 100-400 f5.6-f7 on a FF body like the Canon 5D.

[tbarker13]

I had thoughts very similar to yours. Wanted a telephoto setup to go along with my M8.

I opted for the 30D and then a 70-200 f/2.8 IS. I absolutely loved that lens for landscapes, but it was so freaking heavy (at least for me and hiking). So I sold it and replaced it with the new 70-200 f/4 IS. While I miss extra stop, I don't regret the decision. The f/4 is a nice lens. And for me, personally, I prefer the ability to zoom, without using my feet, when shooting landscapes.

[Eoin]

At one stage I used to have a 20D and 70-200 f/4. The 70-200 f/4 was a lovely light lens and very sharp, I'd be hard pressed to decide on image quality between it and the f/2.8 IS version I had later. My only concern is the newer IS version might be slightly softer than the original f/4 due to the changed optical formula. Also if memory serves me right you would be right on the limit of center point autofocus with the 1.4x TC attached, The 20D I think can only AF at f5.6 and wider. I would check out if this also applies with the newer 70-200 f/4 IS.

[deltoid1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

At one stage I used to have a 20D and 70-200 f/4. The 70-200 f/4 was a lovely light lens and very sharp, I'd be hard pressed to decide on image quality between it and the f/2.8 IS version I had later. My only concern is the newer IS version might be slightly softer than the original f/4 due to the changed optical formula. Also if memory serves me right you would be right on the limit of center point autofocus with the 1.4x TC attached, The 20D I think can only AF at f5.6 and wider. I would check out if this also applies with the newer 70-200 f/4 IS.

 

True about the f5.6. As far as optical quality goes, the new IS version is probably sharper than the first version, even with the IS elements. A number of online reviews show this. A truly phenomenal lens.

[cmarbach]

Here's one from a Canon 1DS MkII...

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!

[cmarbach]

Here's one from a Canon 1DS MkII...

 

 

Sorry, the lens was the 70-300mm DO on the Canon....

[cmarbach]

These are the jpegs right from the camera, I shoot Raw+ Jpeg. The 70-300 is very easy to handle, but the whole rig (1DSMKII+ 70-300 DO) is heavy.

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!

[colorflow]

These are the jpegs right from the camera, I shoot Raw+ Jpeg. The 70-300 is very easy to handle, but the whole rig (1DSMKII+ 70-300 DO) is heavy.

 

Yes, this is what I would use the tele for. I am leaning towards the 20D or XTi as Cindy suggested because of the weight.

 

Great photos,

 

Alan

[colorflow]

Hi Alan,

 

People in the photo industry acutally believe that the saturation point on full frame (24 x 36mm) sensors lies at 16 megapixels.

 

ndreas

 

I retired from the semiconductor equipment industry a year ago. The company I was with designs and manufactures ion implanters for making transistors, therefore CCD and CMOS sensors, on silicon wafers. Although I ran engineering and R&D, I never paid a lot of attention to the fine points that differentiates CCD and CMOS sensors. However, I know CCD sensors require more specialized implanters, and are more tricky to manufacture. I also remember that CCD sensors are less noisy. So perhaps the saturation point is different between CCD and CMOS. Also at the rate the silicon devices are advancing the saturation point should be advancing likewise.

 

I will check with my past colleagues and report back if I find anything. Has this been discussed before in another thread?

 

Anyone knows who manufactures the silicon CCD sensors for Kodak? I am pretty sure they do not have their own semiconductor fab.

 

 

Alan

[wstotler]

Err... (posted before) :D

 

 

That? That is INSANE. Bazooka M. Incredible.

[cmarbach]

Shot wide open, Aperature priority, manually focused. Still the 70-300 DO.

 

300mm, 1/80th at f5.6.

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!

[deltoid1]

Hi Alan,

 

People in the photo industry acutally believe that the saturation point on full frame (24 x 36mm) sensors lies at 16 megapixels.

 

Andreas

 

Well, if Canon created a FF sensor with the pixel pitch of the 400D, then the resulting sensor would have 26MP. Now the 400D does not have the same high ISO performance of say a 5D, but with a slight increase in microlens performance and/or cleaner electronics of the 1 series pipeline, it's not hard at all to see how Canon could retain the high ISO performance.

[luigi bertolotti]

I have decided to fully jump into digital photography. Have a couple of trips planned for this summer. Naturally will be taking the M8 (hope it comes back from Solms in time). But need something longer than 90 or even 135. Am considering getting a used Canon 20D and their new 70-200 f4 IS plus, perhaps, the 1.4x converter. Seems to me the 20D is a good value - has enough resolution (actually higher pixel density than the M8 or full frame Canons) and pretty inexpensive used. My other criteria is size and weight and so the f4 rather the f2.8. I will be using the M8 90% of the time and the tele only occasionally for birds or wild-life.

Any input would be appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance,

Alan

 

Are we or not in a Leica forum ? My suggestions are

 

1st choice for a real Leica Lover : M8 - Visoflex III - Telyt 200 f4 or 280 4,8 last version

2nd choice for a frustrated Leica Lover : V-Lux (with of course native zoom lens)

3rd choice for a so-so Leica Lover Digilux 3 with some Oly Zoom...but...think some Leica lens of long focus is arriving soon in the market for the four/thirds (news exist with details)

[jonoslack]

Others have mentioned the Olympus 50-200 f2.8/f3.5 zoom.

why not get a bargain E1 to go with it - I've seen shots taken with this combo underwater, and although I'm not suggesting it, it's weatherproof, great colour, splendid handling - and then with the 14-54 to go with it you have near macro functionality into the bargain.