digitalfx Posted November 15, 2015 Share #121 Posted November 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anyone used the 24 Summilux on the SL? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 15, 2015 Posted November 15, 2015 Hi digitalfx, Take a look here Leica R and M lenses on the Leica SL (Typ 601). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted November 15, 2015 Share #122 Posted November 15, 2015 Hmm,irony and 148 lenses ... wasted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 15, 2015 Share #123 Posted November 15, 2015 "One of the joys of the M is that I can use nice fifty year old lenses on it" I am still using 84 year old lenses on my M. Scottish origin - waste not want not. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted November 15, 2015 Share #124 Posted November 15, 2015 "One of the joys of the M is that I can use nice fifty year old lenses on it" I am still using 84 year old lenses on my M. Scottish origin - waste not want not. Wilson That's wonderful Wilson. I use quite a bit a Rigid Summicron from 1956. So that's only 59 years old. :-( It certainly has its own signature and seems sharpest at f/8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 15, 2015 Share #125 Posted November 15, 2015 "One of the joys of the M is that I can use nice fifty year old lenses on it" I am still using 84 year old lenses on my M. Scottish origin - waste not want not. Hmm. 1931 lenses ... I have a Zeiss 40mm f/2 lens (uncoated) from a 1940 Berning Robot II. I've got the Robot to LTM to M-Bayonet adapters set up for it. I'll be curious to see how well it performs on the SL. It's only 75 years old, fer gosh' sakes. I do have a Russian 50mm lens from about 1933 (from a FED 1) but I suspect its LTM threads are too funky to risk on my adapter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted November 15, 2015 Share #126 Posted November 15, 2015 There are quite some M-users around with from a few to an arsenal of Leica M-lenses covering the range 16-135 mm. With the SL, both M and R lenses will certainly be used. For those with experience with the R-line of lenses, which R-lenses are seen to particularly complement the M-lenses? I guess that 280 f/4 APO and 100 f/2.8 Macro are two hot candidates, the 85 f/1.4 as well. Any other R-jewels worth mentioning? (I have not followed prices of R lenses on e**y, but that should give an indication as well...). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 15, 2015 Share #127 Posted November 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Are there systemic reasons for preferring R lenses over M lenses of the same FL? As a generalisation, I would have thought the smaller M lenses would be preferable. But I've never used R lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted November 15, 2015 Share #128 Posted November 15, 2015 Are there systemic reasons for preferring R lenses over M lenses of the same FL? As a generalisation, I would have thought the smaller M lenses would be preferable. But I've never used R lenses. I was primarily thinking of particular R-lenses that complement (or expands upon) the available M-lenses. Whether an R-lens adds to a M-lens of the same FL I simply don't know (being an M-user). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 15, 2015 Share #129 Posted November 15, 2015 There are three APO-Telyt-R 280/4s on eBay - all in the USD7,000.00 range. I think I'll be looking at the 90-280/2.8-4 AF SL lens before I go there. While the APO-Tely-R probably justifies its fame on the R cameras, with its "exceptional performance" according to Bower & Clark, it was first released in 1993 (which makes it a 1992 or earlier design), I suspect the later designs will outperform it. The Summicron-R 180/2 is even more expensive (none on eBay at the moment, but last time I saw one it was $10,000, along with the Zeiss/Contax 200/2). Now that Leica is back into 35mm format with a TTL camera, I rather expect that Leica will revisit some of these jewels. Liberated from the 16-135mm range of the M cameras (practically, 28 to 90 without an add on viewfinder), the only constraint will be the size of lens you're prepared to carry and the depth of your pockets. Leaving aside zooms, macros and tilt & shift, the classic prime lenses would be what? Wide - 12-21-28 Standard - 35-50-80 Tele - 120-180-280-400 Pure guesswork on my part, and I would love to know what roadmap Leica has for primes for the SL. I can't imagine that Peter Karbe has not dusted off his notebooks and looked at what will be updated for the new system ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted November 15, 2015 Share #130 Posted November 15, 2015 Hmm. 1931 lenses ... I have a Zeiss 40mm f/2 lens (uncoated) from a 1940 Berning Robot II. I've got the Robot to LTM to M-Bayonet adapters set up for it. I'll be curious to see how well it performs on the SL. It's only 75 years old, fer gosh' sakes. I do have a Russian 50mm lens from about 1933 (from a FED 1) but I suspect its LTM threads are too funky to risk on my adapter. Mine is a no serial number Nickel Elmar off my 1931 1C Standard. I do have older lenses like Petzval, Jules Richard and Meyer Trioplan but they are stereo, large and medium format. The Nickel Elmar is OK if you stick to black and white. It rather falls over when you use it for colour, as its CA and fringing become more apparent. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 15, 2015 Share #131 Posted November 15, 2015 I'm not interested in splitting hairs over "the sharpest" or "the best" lens. Nearly any lens let out into the public branded LEICA has shown excellent performance. Some are better performers than others, of course, but all have basically been decent to very good at least. My goal in buying the R lenses I have collected has been to mainly go for close to the initial designs, most of them by Dr. Mandler, because I've always enjoyed his notions of imaging. They will be my primary lenses on the SL, aside from the SL lenses, not just complements to the M lenses—it's the other way round for my notions. My M lenses will used primarily on the M-P, but I'll check them on the SL to see how they perform and how they differ from the SL lens and the R lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 15, 2015 Share #132 Posted November 15, 2015 ... Leaving aside zooms, macros and tilt & shift, the classic prime lenses would be what? Wide - 12-21-28 Standard - 35-50-80 Tele - 120-180-280-400 My prime set of R lenses includes 24, 50, 90, and 180 mm. I've got the 19, 35, 250, and 60 macro as well, and a couple others. They all produce the look I'm after. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 15, 2015 Share #133 Posted November 15, 2015 While the APO-Tely-R probably justifies its fame on the R cameras, with its "exceptional performance" according to Bower & Clark, it was first released in 1993 (which makes it a 1992 or earlier design), I suspect the later designs will outperform it. I suspect not. AFAIK it is still the only diffraction-limited lens in its focal length range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted November 15, 2015 Share #134 Posted November 15, 2015 Are there systemic reasons for preferring R lenses over M lenses of the same FL? As a generalisation, I would have thought the smaller M lenses would be preferable. But I've never used R lenses. The R lenses are older designs, bigger and heaver. Personally I would prefer to use the M lenses except for video where the larger lenses have advantages. Of course there are R lenses that don't have an M equivalent...and I suspect those will become quite popular. 100mm Macro is one of my favorite lenses. I have the 100mm w/ 1:1 adapter, R19, 70-180 f2.8 and 35-70 f4...looking forward to using them on the SL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted November 16, 2015 Share #135 Posted November 16, 2015 I suspect not. AFAIK it is still the only diffraction-limited lens in its focal length range. Can't get any better than diffraction-limited. IMHO the only way to make a better lens than the 280/4 APO is to make it smaller and lighter with the same performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted November 16, 2015 Share #136 Posted November 16, 2015 The APO-R 280/4 also reflects internally the light from intense specular highlights as it has a flat piece of glass at the front to protect the softer glass inside AFAIK. Canon showed some time ago to avoid those flat pieces. There is a long thread on this forum that discusses all of that in great detail. BTW someone on the German part of this forum remarked that he observed this problem with the 280/4 already on a film camera. I am sure Leica would not use again a flat piece of glass at the front of a lens. But other than to avoid such a scene it's one of my favorite lenses. It's certainly not for sale at any price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 16, 2015 Share #137 Posted November 16, 2015 Can't get any better than diffraction-limited. IMHO the only way to make a better lens than the 280/4 APO is to make it smaller and lighter with the same performance. Well, at a significant price premium, I won't be buying a 280/4 anytime soon. I do recall someone (Jono? or maybe Thorsten) asking Andreas Kaufmann if Leica would be remaking that 280/4, and his reaction was pretty unequivocal. The way it was expressed, it sounded like Leica made a loss on this lens. I live in hope that Leica will produce something in that range which is worthy of the Leica name, rather than looking back at the 280/4 and muttering into their beards "those were the days." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted November 16, 2015 Share #138 Posted November 16, 2015 ... looking back at the 280/4 and muttering into their beards "those were the days." Guilty as charged! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted November 27, 2015 Share #139 Posted November 27, 2015 I'm another with R and M lenses to use with an SL body. I'm wondering if the SL is close enough to being the R10 for me. The characteristics of the R adapter will be critical here. I took the pic below last weekend, relying on the viewfinder performance of an R8 with a 400/4 Modular lens, wide open for best illumination and narrowest depth to help with focussing, then shutting down automatically for the shot. If the R adapter does not feature aperture actuation and leaves the lens stopped down at working aperture, how much trickier will it be to focus, with less light getting in and wider depth shown in the viewfinder? Hmmm ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 28, 2015 Share #140 Posted November 28, 2015 I'm another with R and M lenses to use with an SL body. I'm wondering if the SL is close enough to being the R10 for me. The characteristics of the R adapter will be critical here. I took the pic below last weekend, relying on the viewfinder performance of an R8 with a 400/4 Modular lens, wide open for best illumination and narrowest depth to help with focussing, then shutting down automatically for the shot. If the R adapter does not feature aperture actuation and leaves the lens stopped down at working aperture, how much trickier will it be to focus, with less light getting in and wider depth shown in the viewfinder? Hmmm ... ... I was out shooting with the SL fitted with the 2x Extender-R and Telyt-R 250mm f/4 this evening. Even with the sun dropping down and twilight rushing over, I was able to focus quickly and accurately with the lens set to a marked f/5.6 (f/11 effective). Long lenses are rarely a problem to focus, other than due to jitter because of their magnification. Leica SL + Telyt-R 250mm f/4 v1 :: ISO 3200 @ f/8 @ 1/60 second Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.