Sully Posted November 14, 2015 Share #1 Posted November 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I got wonderful help demoing the SL from Ferenc and Thomas at the Leica Store in Wien this Thursday. The viewfinder was very good...big...bright...easy to manually focus. The size and feel of the camera was just right for my large hands. The only thing Leica needs to do is shift the focus assist button to a more convenient place on the body. I could do it with my left hand, but it was not easy. Surprisingly, the normal focus without assist was quite good. Using the B&W mode in the finder is the way I usually shoot. The focus peaking was easy to see. But the screen is so big and bright that I had no trouble focusing manually. I'm sure Leica will figure a way to shift the manual assist button to a more convenient place. I will probably use the SL with manual primes and zooms anyway. But what about auto focus? Just for fun, we put my 23mm (FOV 35mm) T lens on the SL and shot a picture (ISO 400, auto white bal., auto focus, at F4 on a tripod). You only get about 10 MegPixels on the SL with a T lens. But all the auto-focus features work and the picture is full frame in the SL finder..... Very bright and easy to see. We then took the Vario-Elmar 24-90mm lens and shot the same picture (ISO 400, auto white bal., at F 4 on a tripod). To my surprise both the 23mm T lens and the Vario Elmar (at 35mm setting) looked the the same on a large computer screen in the store. The resolution from both lenses was quite good. Switching back and forth between each picture, the only way I could pick what lens it was shot with was by looking at the background out of focus area. The Vario-Elmar back round looked a little more out of focus (different focal length lens). Since the 10 Meg and 24 Meg images looked the same....very, very good, what would other T lenses look like on the SL. The coming 35 Summilux for the T might produce excellent images on the SL, yet it would be much smaller than the 50 Lux in the new L mount. I did not have time to cycle through all the other T lenses on the SL, but hopefully somebody will go into the Wien Leica Store and ask Ferenc or Thomas to run some more tests. They might still have our test shots on the store computer. I'm sure the full chip SL images will look better in a big enlargement (16X20 or larger). But on the 20 inch computer screen, even zoomed in, the 10 Meg T lens shot looked just as good as the Vario-Elmar at full 24 Meg. This does not seem too crazy, because I can remember seeing beautiful 11X14 pixs from 6 and 8 Meg Canon Rebel cameras from many years ago. More good news. We called Leica HQ and found out that the SL has SMPTE time code. Good news for us video hounds. Ciao, Sully Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Hi Sully, Take a look here T lens on SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jonoslack Posted November 14, 2015 Share #2 Posted November 14, 2015 Hi there ive used all three T zooms on the SL. They all focus faster than on the T and produce great results, certainly fine for A2 prints unless you're going to ogle then from half a metre. As you say, we all used to think 10mp was a lot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted November 14, 2015 Share #3 Posted November 14, 2015 Hi there ive used all three T zooms on the SL. They all focus faster than on the T and produce great results, certainly fine for A2 prints unless you're going to ogle then from half a metre. As you say, we all used to think 10mp was a lot! I would be interested how images from T lenses with T vs SL body compare. The T should have more resolution but the SL more dynamic range and less noise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted November 14, 2015 Share #4 Posted November 14, 2015 i need a superwide for my hopefully soon the be delivered SL and thought about the T 11-23....long and hard.....but in the end it is just completely backwards to shoot with this lens on the SL.....you can easily pick up a T body for very little.....its just a crime to me to spend another 2000$ (even if it is only 1800$ right now) to only use a small crop on a 7500$ camera.... voigtlander heliar III 15mm it is for me....focus is just not an issue with these superwides.... i understand that at one point we were happy with 10mpix and in many ways i still could be....but using T lenses on SL (unless you already own them of course) just makes no sense.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted November 15, 2015 Share #5 Posted November 15, 2015 voigtlander heliar III 15mm it is for me....focus is just not an issue with these superwides.... i understand that at one point we were happy with 10mpix and in many ways i still could be....but using T lenses on SL (unless you already own them of course) just makes no sense.... WATE is a winner on the SL too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 15, 2015 Share #6 Posted November 15, 2015 Back in the days of cyan edges and Italian flags, the CV15 was almost impossible to use except on the M8 and with a healthy dose of CornerFix. Has the latest version (M-bayonet mount, III edition) removed most of those problems? It should certainly be a tougher lens to support on the SL than the WATE. And then there is the CV12, a bigger, less symmetric lens which did not cause the same color problems. Has anyone got one of those, and time to run to the nearest Leica store and try it out? The CV12 is pretty much the most radical rectilinear wide angle that I know of. I have enjoyed working with the Olympus Pro 7-14/2.8 Micro4/3 lens recently, but that only starts at 14 mm FOV in full frame terms. It helped me to realize a real advantage of a mirrorless platform for these extreme short focal lengths -- you can work very close and still see what you are getting. My 7-14 focuses down to less than 20 cm, which translates into 5-10 cm from the front element of the lens. (See some examples over at GetDPI). scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted November 15, 2015 Share #7 Posted November 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) CV 12 is actually a bit better on the SL than the M .... if coded as 21/2.8 there is minimal colour shift .... and corner performance is really quite good. WATE on SL is actually marginally better than on the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted November 15, 2015 Share #8 Posted November 15, 2015 Back in the days of cyan edges and Italian flags, the CV15 was almost impossible to use except on the M8 and with a healthy dose of CornerFix. Has the latest version (M-bayonet mount, III edition) removed most of those problems? It should certainly be a tougher lens to support on the SL than the WATE. i had the first version of the 15mm on my M8 and that was a nightmare....the lens played a big part but the M8 was also tough to work with in that regard....i got cyan to magenta shifts on almost all lenses i used.... according to all reviews the III version of the 15mm is a new design and there are no issues at all....i won't know for sure until i have my SL... WATE is nice but 750 vs 4750 is an easy decision..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted November 16, 2015 Share #9 Posted November 16, 2015 Leica is Leica. The T lens on SL outcome shows that! Not the same in other brand. My daughters has a T. Sometimes I use it. It is fabulous! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfunnell Posted November 20, 2015 Share #10 Posted November 20, 2015 I have a good selection of M lenses which I love but was considering a fixed 23 T lens for my new Leica SL when you just wanted to have auto focus available for quick work. Would be keen on seeing anyone's images if there are any of this lens on the Leica SL . Thanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted November 21, 2015 Share #11 Posted November 21, 2015 Just note that you do also lose some of the EVF detail and speed using T lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernie.lcf Posted November 21, 2015 Share #12 Posted November 21, 2015 Just note that you do also lose some of the EVF detail and speed using T lenses. Can you explain, please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted November 21, 2015 Share #13 Posted November 21, 2015 I tried a T lens on an SL today (in the store). The EVF to me looked like a lower quality picture and with slight picture lag. I was not expecting any change to the EVF so I was surprised. It's not terrible, but is not as high quality as using the full frame lens. I guess it is to do with only sampling a smaller part of the sensor translating into less pixel detail in the EVF. Not sure if the maths works out, but that is what I noticed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted November 22, 2015 Share #14 Posted November 22, 2015 I tried a T lens on an SL today (in the store). The EVF to me looked like a lower quality picture and with slight picture lag. I was not expecting any change to the EVF so I was surprised. It's not terrible, but is not as high quality as using the full frame lens. I guess it is to do with only sampling a smaller part of the sensor translating into less pixel detail in the EVF. Not sure if the maths works out, but that is what I noticed. I went back to the shop today and tried a couple of T lenses again, mid zoom and telezoom. I did not notice the lag this time, so I stand (self-)corrected. Seems the EVF refresh does appear to vary dependent upon other factors (eg zooming, slow and fast panning, lighting changes). Go and buy some T lenses and feel happy. They are certainly a lot lighter on the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfunnell Posted November 22, 2015 Share #15 Posted November 22, 2015 Thanks for that Budfox I have only M lenses and think it would be great to have some auto focusing lenses maybe the 32 or 50 equivalent and perhaps a small zoom that are light and easy to use for special occasions when you just want to get some images without working for them . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elopezso Posted December 8, 2015 Share #16 Posted December 8, 2015 Thanks for that Budfox I have only M lenses and think it would be great to have some auto focusing lenses maybe the 32 or 50 equivalent and perhaps a small zoom that are light and easy to use for special occasions when you just want to get some images without working for them . Anyone else, other than Jono, try the T lenses on the Leica SL? What did you think of it? Sample images? Best, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompoes Posted December 10, 2015 Share #17 Posted December 10, 2015 I used the T Vario Elmar on the SL and on a full screen 27 inch 4k iMac screen i cannot see any difference. With magnification to 100 % the pictures from the T are showing more detail but this is after a lot of pixel peeping.Shot the frames at 800 and 1600 ISO and the pictures taken with the SL show considerably lower noise levels. At low light levels i prefer to use the T Vario Elmar lenses on the SL.The AF speed with the Vario Elmar lenses on the SL is about 30 % higher compared with the same lenses on the T. Shot to shot speed on the SL is about double.The Q is about 100 % faster then the T with the Vario Elmar lens at same focal length, this after the latest firmware upgrade of the T.All in all you can conclude that T Vario Elmar lenses on SL perform quite nicely, you gain 30 % AF speed and a couple of ISO stops with minimal file degradation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budfox Posted December 10, 2015 Share #18 Posted December 10, 2015 I now have the Leica APO 55-135 Vario-etc-etc. I got it because I wanted a longer lens, and am never gong to buy the 90-280 (promise) as I am not a pro and would not use it enough. The 55-135 is great. Pics are nice and sharp, and much better that my recently sold Nikon 7200 and 18-140mm VR lens despite the much lower pixel count. Obviously more prone to movement at the long end. But the lens looks perfectly matched in size and style to the body, and the heavier package helps with image stabilisation in any case. I am now thinking of getting the 18-58mm T as smaller snapshot lens. Having said that, I have quickly gotten used to the size of the 24-90 SL, so let's see. In summary, I think the T lenses are a genuine option for the SL for a lighter package. I think it is really is a situation where lens and camera quality trumps raw pixel count. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 10, 2015 Share #19 Posted December 10, 2015 But over £5K for a 10MP APS-C body is rather excessive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompoes Posted December 10, 2015 Share #20 Posted December 10, 2015 Did i say that i bought a Leica SL to use with T lenses ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.