LocalHero1953 Posted October 24, 2015 Share #1 Posted October 24, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) So, if I bought the SL now (a big if), and I only have M lenses 28-90 to use with it (I have no R lenses), what would be good lenses to get for it either in the prime telephoto range or a longer zoom? >200mm say. New or s/h? And considering weight, balance, available adapters, IQ, availability and price. Ideas? Edited October 24, 2015 by LocalHero1953 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 Hi LocalHero1953, Take a look here Lenses for SL now. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 24, 2015 Share #2 Posted October 24, 2015 (edited) So, if I bought the SL now (a big if), and I only have M lenses 28-90 to use with it (I have no R lenses), what would be good lenses to get for it either in the prime telephoto range or a longer zoom? >200mm say. New or s/h? And considering weight, balance, available adapters, IQ, availability and price. Ideas? 180mm f3.4 APO … there are faster 180mm R lenses but the SL's high ISO performance and the 3.4's relatively low weight tip the scales … but it might not be quite so good for close distance imaging … it was originally designed as a military surveillance lens. There are several listed by UK Leica Premier dealers … and one budget price 'user' available at an independent s/h `Leica dealer. You might wish to consider checking all possible lens choices by comparing the MTF charts and write-ups/descriptions in the Leica Pocket Book 8th Edition - it's a good guide. dunk Edited October 24, 2015 by dkCambridgeshire 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted October 25, 2015 Share #3 Posted October 25, 2015 It is going to be interesting to see what happens to used R prices. For example, the highly coveted Vario-Elmar-R 28-90 ASPH f/2.8-4.5 lens has been going for over $5000. The SL 24-90 will list for less and will have AF, IS and weather sealing. The R weighs 400g less than the SL, but it gives one pause when thinking of purchasing used R lenses. On the other hand, if you already own some nice R glass the SL is like a great birthday present. For the OP, I agree that 180 f/3.4 a great lens at a great price. Also consider the 100 Apo Macro R. Very reasonably priced and a terrific all-around lens which can easily take the apo-2x doubler making it a 200 f/5.6. The SL EVF should easily handle f/5.6. Then there is the highly sought after 280 apo-telyt f/4. But again, the 90-280 zoom might be priced competitively. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 25, 2015 Share #4 Posted October 25, 2015 It is going to be interesting to see what happens to used R prices. For example, the highly coveted Vario-Elmar-R 28-90 ASPH f/2.8-4.5 lens has been going for over $5000. The SL 24-90 will list for less and will have AF, IS and weather sealing. The R weighs 400g less than the SL, but it gives one pause when thinking of purchasing used R lenses. On the other hand, if you already own some nice R glass the SL is like a great birthday present. For the OP, I agree that 180 f/3.4 a great lens at a great price. Also consider the 100 Apo Macro R. Very reasonably priced and a terrific all-around lens which can easily take the apo-2x doubler making it a 200 f/5.6. The SL EVF should easily handle f/5.6. Then there is the highly sought after 280 apo-telyt f/4. But again, the 90-280 zoom might be priced competitively. Expect quite a few 280/4 R users are waiting with baited breath for the first 280/4 R vs 90-280 SL comparison reviews. High end zooms have evolved into very 'prime competitive' optics so will be interesting to see if the 280/4 R will still be Leica's finest telephoto lens. And the comparison reviews between the 24-90 SL and the 28-90 R will be very interesting. I'm glad I bought my 21-35mm R last year - it might now command a premium price … and there might be renewed demand for the humble Super Angulon R 21/4 … a surprisingly good lens when stopped down to f8. dunk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 25, 2015 Share #5 Posted October 25, 2015 Would be interesting if the Leica Forum Admin could arrange a poll for : 1) Leica M lenses 2) Leica R lenses … asking potential SL camera users to rate them for use with the SL. All the M and R super-wideangle lenses would likely score highly. But I don't think such a poll is possible i.e. awarding points x/10 for each lens as a potential SL optic. dunk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted October 25, 2015 Share #6 Posted October 25, 2015 10/10 for 80/1.4R 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 25, 2015 Share #7 Posted October 25, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) And 10/10 for both the 60/2.8 R and 100/2.8 APO macro lenses. dunk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 25, 2015 Share #8 Posted October 25, 2015 I love my 280/4.0 and would almost consider getting the SL just for that lens, or my R 50/1.4... actually my R 105-280/4.2 would round out a pretty good system with the SL 24-90. I just have to keep telling myself that I don't need this camera, but I'd be set with just the camera and the SL kit lens (24-90). 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted October 25, 2015 Share #9 Posted October 25, 2015 I just have to keep telling myself that I don't need this camera,... Resistance is futile. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 25, 2015 Share #10 Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) I love my 280/4.0 and would almost consider getting the SL just for that lens, or my R 50/1.4... actually my R 105-280/4.2 would round out a pretty good system with the SL 24-90. I just have to keep telling myself that I don't need this camera, but I'd be set with just the camera and the SL kit lens (24-90). Resistance is futile ... Ooops, beaten by another Dr Who fan! You know, Rick, the possibilities of this system are endless, and really interesting with the lenses you have. The perfect M(240) companion ... Sorry, that is really rather pointless and juvenile. Edited October 25, 2015 by IkarusJohn 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 25, 2015 Share #11 Posted October 25, 2015 Resistance is futile ... Ooops, beaten by another Dr Who fan! You know, Rick, the possibilities of this system are endless, and really interesting with the lenses you have. The perfect M(240) companion ... Sorry, that is really rather pointless and juvenile. Stop it! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 25, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted October 25, 2015 Thanks for all the responses so far and I'd welcome any other suggestions. I have done a bit more research on this forum - both the Wiki and the linked threads are such a useful resource - and I'm sorry for posting the question before doing that first. The 180/3.4 looks a good and available option, especially given its size/weight, but I'm concerned (i) at the comments that it is exceptional at infinity but less so closer and (ii) has a poor close focus distance. I am likely to want to use it on closer subjects than infinity. Or is its performance just poor relative to infinity, and quite acceptable otherwise? The 80-200 zoom looks a good option to consider for one aspect of what I want it for (performance/concert/theatre), as long as the f/4 is compensated by the SL's good ISO performance. At less than 80, I would be likely to use my M lenses. If I am convinced that I really would use MF in preference to AF, then the SL with R lenses is a much more acceptable weight and size proposition. First world problems. I see that several of these lenses are in the Westlicht auction next month (the last time I bought there, the item was in better condition than the description, so bargains can be had). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 25, 2015 Share #13 Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) I have 8 or so M lenses, spanning 15mm to 90mm, which I would happily use with an SL. What I read about the 24-90 AF zoom, I would probably make do with that and what I have, til I see more of what is planned for the SL. My reasoning is this - the R lenses were designed for film. It sounds like they were fantastic ... for film. About 10 years on from the last R lens design, rather than paying a premium for R lenses, I would wait to see what Leica proposes for the SL. What would I add to my M lenses? I'm wary of a huge telephoto zoom like the 90-280, so I would wait for a single, fast prime. To that I would add a macro. That's probably it. Edited October 25, 2015 by IkarusJohn 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted October 25, 2015 Share #14 Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) I had the 80-200. It had great performance at the short end but became surprisingly soft at the long end. In hindsight that copy might have needed adjustment. That lens is very long and doesn't balance well on even the R8/R9 with a motor drive attached (which gave a very good grip). You can hold the lens fine, but focusing it is difficult. I suspect it will get even harder with the SL going by the shape of it. Thanks for all the responses so far and I'd welcome any other suggestions. I have done a bit more research on this forum - both the Wiki and the linked threads are such a useful resource - and I'm sorry for posting the question before doing that first. The 180/3.4 looks a good and available option, especially given its size/weight, but I'm concerned (i) at the comments that it is exceptional at infinity but less so closer and (ii) has a poor close focus distance. I am likely to want to use it on closer subjects than infinity. Or is its performance just poor relative to infinity, and quite acceptable otherwise? The 80-200 zoom looks a good option to consider for one aspect of what I want it for (performance/concert/theatre), as long as the f/4 is compensated by the SL's good ISO performance. At less than 80, I would be likely to use my M lenses. If I am convinced that I really would use MF in preference to AF, then the SL with R lenses is a much more acceptable weight and size proposition. First world problems. I see that several of these lenses are in the Westlicht auction next month (the last time I bought there, the item was in better condition than the description, so bargains can be had). Edited October 25, 2015 by cpclee 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 25, 2015 Share #15 Posted October 25, 2015 Whatever R lenses you decide on, those likely to be in demand for the SL are likely to cost more in the coming months - so maybe a good argument for buying now rather than later i.e. from dealers' existing stocks. As soon as they become scarcer, Ebay prices will rise and so will dealers' prices. And there might even be renewed demand for the humble Elpro - especially if the 60/2.8R and 100/2.8 APO R macro lenses become scarce. dunk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted October 25, 2015 Share #16 Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) I can strongly recommend the APO 180 3.4 which I use very happily on my M.It works so well for me that it entirely covers my occasional need for a mid- range telephoto and it's probably another reason why the SL doesn't feel particularly necessary to me. But if the SL appeals to you, I imagine it will be a wonderful addition. The same goes for the 60 2.8 macro which I can imagine will work very nicely with the SL, both in terms of performance and easy handling, and It is not expensive. Edited October 25, 2015 by Peter H 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 25, 2015 Share #17 Posted October 25, 2015 Do you guys think that we will be fine with our M if/when it gets the new EVF (hotshoe is ok) from the SL? My M works well with my R lenses. It is the EVF for the long lenses that needs to have a lot more resolution to focus my long R glass when on the fly. Maybe, a good thing to just wait, we have time. Also, it isn't like the new SL is 42MP and is going to make my 280/4 even more jaw dropping. By the way, for me, I'm not a big birds and bugs shooter so I really don't need a dedicated SL for this sort of thing like Doug. A did use my 280/4 in Idaho this summer to take a picture of an Eagle along the Salmon River. Imagine that, an Eagle sitting in a tree looking down at the "Salmon" River. Go figure. Rick 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted October 25, 2015 Share #18 Posted October 25, 2015 I'm thinking M 240 for 28 to 75 range, and SL with R or SL lenses for 75 or greater, and anything less than 28. And probably M without SL for ultra light travel outfit. At least until SL lens products are finished out, which will probably take some time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 25, 2015 Share #19 Posted October 25, 2015 Do you guys think that we will be fine with our M if/when it gets the new EVF (hotshoe is ok) from the SL? My M works well with my R lenses. It is the EVF for the long lenses that needs to have a lot more resolution to focus my long R glass when on the fly. Maybe, a good thing to just wait, we have time. Also, it isn't like the new SL is 42MP and is going to make my 280/4 even more jaw dropping. By the way, for me, I'm not a big birds and bugs shooter so I really don't need a dedicated SL for this sort of thing like Doug. A did use my 280/4 in Idaho this summer to take a picture of an Eagle along the Salmon River. Imagine that, an Eagle sitting in a tree looking down at the "Salmon" River. Go figure. Rick Sorry to say this, Rick, but we all know prior models stop working when a new model is released. As soon as SL deliveries start, your M(240) and EVF will develop a fatal error and will pack itself back in its box and order the courier for eBay! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted October 25, 2015 Share #20 Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) Because the SL has been designed with an EVF and to accept M and R lenses, and because the native SL lenses have been calculate to be the best in their class, the SL lenses are huge. Much longer than the equivalent R lenses, not to mention the L lenses. It suffice to compare the M Summilux 50/1,4 Asph.(46mm filter) the lastest R Summilux 50/1,4 (60mm filter) and the new SL Summilux 50/1,4 (82mm filter) to see it. By the way, it will be interesting to compare the results of those three lenses on the SL. But because it needs adapters with L and R lenses the SL itself is slimmer (without counting the handle) than the previous Leica SLRs and almost on par with the digital Leica Ms. I can see the SL fitting in my M or R camera bags, but I don't see the SL lenses fitting in the same camera bag as my R lenses. You only need to add the length of the two stacked adapters to the 28-90, the 180/2,8 Apo or the 70-180/2,8 Apo to see why. Edited October 25, 2015 by imported_leicaiste 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.