Leica R and M lenses on the Leica SL (Typ 601)

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Correct, using the 280 APO lens profile on SL is not good.

[Advertisement]

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

[ramarren]

Thanks Godfrey.  The lens works just fine on my A7r2 except for specular point lights, doesn't seem to need a Leica profile. 

 

 

Most of these long lenses work just fine regardless what camera they're fitted to. I've tested the Telyt-R 250/4 on the Leica SL with both profiles and no profile on the SL ... It produces excellent results in all three tests.

 

The major advantage of the lens profile with these lenses is that the EXIF lens data is embedded and the SL's "f/stop used" estimate is a bit more accurate. You don't get either of those with a brand X camera no matter what you do. With some other lenses, particularly in the shorter focal lengths, the lens codes add some good lens correction processing to the raw files.

[ramarren]

Correct, using the 280 APO lens profile on SL is not good.

 

 

Sorry for the misattribution. Scott reported a few of these, I didn't realize you'd done the APO 280. 

[John McMaster]

Any SL user(s) can share images captured with the APO-Telyt-R modular telephoto lenses?

It would be interesting to find out the performance of these limited APO-Telyt-R module lenses in current digital sensor/technology!

 

Thanks in advance!

 

 

Cheers!

 

Not got an SL, just looking through. Given the APO-Telyt-R lemses work fine on the S family (2/006/007) I doubt there are any issues on a SL ;-)

 

john

[Likaleica]

I think it got my technique down regarding the 280 lens.  Stacking 1.4 and 2X Apo-Extenders not a great idea.  Better to use one or the other and crop if necessary.  Here is SL 280 Apo-Telyt-R f/2.8 with 2X Apo-Extender shot at effective f/5.6 at 1/500 sec, ISO 100.  No crop.  PP in LR and SE2.  (Posted elsewhere, too, but I'm rather proud of it!)  Original file very sharp.

 

Canis lupus (gray wolf)

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!

[steppenw0lf]

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.

 

Hello,

 

I have the SL just a few days, so I'm still collecting experiences.

 

But what I can say already is that the R lenses have the big advantage of close and very precise focus.

 

A good example is the simple R Summicron 50mm. It is now really my standard-lens. It is small and light (little difference to M cron 50, much smaller than a noctilux), and it is very high quality for such a cheap lens. It allows Macro either directly (up to 45cm) or with a Macro Extender (actually for the 60mm, but it works nicely anyway).

 

The feeling is VERY leica-like (all metal, more so than on M lenses which contain plastic parts), very VERY smooth focus, (bigger turning angle than M, gives you more control), with the SL finder it's a dream, and I like the resulting images. I feel I have "the control" again.

Before, I used a 5Ds with its 50mm and was not very happy, also because the lens is not directly manually usable (there is always a motor being used, even if you manually focus.)

 

The same positive experience you can find with the 35mm Summicron R   and the 90mm cron R (non-apo). Rather small, ALL metal, VERY precise, you have full control, just to the closest distance. Exactly as in the 80s and 90s when I first bought these lenses. Also a pleasure are the 28mm and the 135mm (which is also all metal with very fine control) and the 180mms (any, even the slow 4.0)

And best of all the Apo Macro 100mm (not all metal but extremely fine focus control (almost 2x around the lens).

 

So for me the R lenses are ideal for the SL (or vice versa). I don't mind manual focus, I actually enjoy the feeling of control, especially if I focus on anything far off the center. It feels as if I was *in the cinema*.

The Ms are fine but better used on a M240 or M246. A different type of photography.

 

The only exception is the WATE (16-18-21 M), which is so brilliant (small and mostly metal with fine focus control), I even prefer it to the R 19mm and R 15mm, thougn they are also fine. But the WATE is virtually a free ride comparing weight and room in the camera bag. 

 

So summary: I prefer R.                 Stephan     

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, Stephan, a useful summary

[ramarren]

My feelings as well, Stephen.

 

I have both the R 15 and 19 mm lenses (older versions) and they are rather large and heavy, but I like their rendering qualities and their ergonomics. I thought about the WATE but I'm happy with my choice of these two instead. 

[steppenw0lf]

My feelings as well, Stephen.

 

I have both the R 15 and 19 mm lenses (older versions) and they are rather large and heavy, but I like their rendering qualities and their ergonomics. I thought about the WATE but I'm happy with my choice of these two instead. 

 

 Hello Ramarren,

 

I have to say I like the fotos you do with these lenses, especially the Hasselblad style with the square shape (I would probably never have had the idea).

I also like the old 15mm which is a Zeiss construction as far as I know because of the built-in filters. And the old 19 has a nice shape. It's maybe foolish, but I like to use the lenses that "look best". And these two look really interesting on the camera. (good old Leitz style) 

 

Stephan

[ramarren]

I have to say I like the fotos you do with these lenses, especially the Hasselblad style with the square shape (I would probably never have had the idea).

I also like the old 15mm which is a Zeiss construction as far as I know because of the built-in filters. And the old 19 has a nice shape. It's maybe foolish, but I like to use the lenses that "look best". And these two look really interesting on the camera. (good old Leitz style) 

 

Thank you for the compliment! 

 

The Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 is indeed a Zeiss Distagon 15mm in Leica R mount, built by Zeiss, with some tuning to the lens coatings and internal filter specs to suit Leica's preferences. (The later Super-Elmarit-R 15mm f/2.8 is a Schneider lens as it turns out, again built in Leica R mount and tuned to Leica's preferences.)

 

The Elmarit-R 19mm f/2.8 v1 is the original Walter Mandler design and a wonderful lens to work with, as nearly all of his lens designs are. The v2 version of the lens was designed to overcome some of the shortcomings of the v1 (better edge and corner resolution and contrast, smaller size, less weight, etc) but honestly I prefer the images that the v1 produces. 

 

Both, despite their size and weight, are remarkably handy in use. And so much easier to focus precisely with the SL compared to the Leicaflex SL or R8...! 

[IkarusJohn]

Noctilux on the SL - the Exif data proposed f/1.4; possibly correct.

 

 

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!

[cpclee]

I can see how R lenses balance better on the SL than M counterparts.  If Leica ever makes an R adapter with an automatic diaphragm / aperture stop-down, the R lenses will gain even more edge over M lenses on the SL.  I did some experimentation and can confirm that when focusing wide open, I can frequently avoid needing to turn on magnification.

 

 

 

 

Hello,

 

I have the SL just a few days, so I'm still collecting experiences.

 

But what I can say already is that the R lenses have the big advantage of close and very precise focus.

 

A good example is the simple R Summicron 50mm. It is now really my standard-lens. It is small and light (little difference to M cron 50, much smaller than a noctilux), and it is very high quality for such a cheap lens. It allows Macro either directly (up to 45cm) or with a Macro Extender (actually for the 60mm, but it works nicely anyway).

 

The feeling is VERY leica-like (all metal, more so than on M lenses which contain plastic parts), very VERY smooth focus, (bigger turning angle than M, gives you more control), with the SL finder it's a dream, and I like the resulting images. I feel I have "the control" again.

Before, I used a 5Ds with its 50mm and was not very happy, also because the lens is not directly manually usable (there is always a motor being used, even if you manually focus.)

 

The same positive experience you can find with the 35mm Summicron R   and the 90mm cron R (non-apo). Rather small, ALL metal, VERY precise, you have full control, just to the closest distance. Exactly as in the 80s and 90s when I first bought these lenses. Also a pleasure are the 28mm and the 135mm (which is also all metal with very fine control) and the 180mms (any, even the slow 4.0)

And best of all the Apo Macro 100mm (not all metal but extremely fine focus control (almost 2x around the lens).

 

So for me the R lenses are ideal for the SL (or vice versa). I don't mind manual focus, I actually enjoy the feeling of control, especially if I focus on anything far off the center. It feels as if I was *in the cinema*.

The Ms are fine but better used on a M240 or M246. A different type of photography.

 

The only exception is the WATE (16-18-21 M), which is so brilliant (small and mostly metal with fine focus control), I even prefer it to the R 19mm and R 15mm, thougn they are also fine. But the WATE is virtually a free ride comparing weight and room in the camera bag. 

 

So summary: I prefer R.                 Stephan     

[wildlightphoto]

I can see how R lenses balance better on the SL than M counterparts.  If Leica ever makes an R adapter with an automatic diaphragm / aperture stop-down, the R lenses will gain even more edge over M lenses on the SL.  I did some experimentation and can confirm that when focusing wide open, I can frequently avoid needing to turn on magnification.

 

 

Yup.

[3ed]

Is there any new info/rumors on their R adapter and whether it will read the exif data on the ROMs, etc? I don't see how/why they would spend a year only to come up with a simple dumb adapter.

[ramarren]

Is there any new info/rumors on their R adapter and whether it will read the exif data on the ROMs, etc? I don't see how/why they would spend a year only to come up with a simple dumb adapter.

Leica has not made any subsequent announcements about the 'R Adapter SL' since the launch announcement last Fall. However, the availability of the 90-280 lens seems to be right on schedule, which augurs well that they are on track in their planned development of the system. I agree that it seems somewhat of a necessity that they will provide more than just a simple, dumb adapter for this amount of time in development, but exactly what they will produce remains to be seen.

[helged]

...and regarding "dumb" adapters, Novoflex has quite some to offer already (of which I have successfully tested and used the Novoflex Leica T to Canon FD (ET/CAN) adapter on a Canon FD 500f4 lens).

 

Beautiful capture, Tim!