Jump to content

For you, 4th announced SL lens should be?...


Winedemonium

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wilson ..... I agree ..... and the 11-23 on the T is in fact a very fine lens ..... works well on the SL but a dedicated 16-24mm would be nice.... and as you say, if a modest aperture then it needn't be too big and heavy...... not at all keen on something like the nikon 14-24 2.8 which had a very exposed front element and was big  ..... but I suspect Leica will end up somewhere in the middle with another variable aperture rather than a fixed one.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the way Leica are pitching the SL as a professional camera, with fast AF etc, i would love to see them round out the "main lenses" with a wide zoom (14-24ish) and a long prime (400 mm f2.8 or f4 or a 500f4) (a nice powerful speedlite system with remote transmitter would be nice too, like tha Canon RT system.

 

I would hate to see how Leica would price the 400/500 though, given the 24-90 costs 3-4times what a canon 24-70 does, and the Canon supertelephotos are 10-15k AUD

 

 

That all said, i really think the SL is the future, from what i have seen, at my local dealers, it is a camera i would enjoy using.

But work issues me my gear........

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see a 180mm f/2.8 prime and a dedicated 1.7x tele extender for it. The already announced telephoto zoom is just too big to suit me. I don't, however, expect a 180 any time soon. I think a wide angle zoom in the 12-24 range is much more likely. I'd also love to see a dedicated portrait lens for studio work--say an 85mm f/1.4 with image stabilization? The already announced 50mm is just a bit shorter than I would like. Honestly, though, I think we've got a long time to wait. Maybe 2017 before we see more lenses announced. Leica has limited R&D budget, and they have already been pretty busy. If they are going to get a replacement for the M(240) any time soon, I expect that will occupy much of their attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was Nikon photographer of course I had that 14-24 - very good only in decent light - annoying flare and very heavy stuff.

 

In that focal length range I don't need AF - so I would always prefer my M-WATE and LUX 21 instead of a Leica SL super-WA-Zoom. I can say now they work perfectly on the SL.

 

With the SL Leica has obviously a total integration approach of 4-5 systems: SL, S, R and M - and T a little bit.

 

This to me is by far not a poor compromise because of too few lenses. System integration in different formats and lens generations can be a big advantage - in particular for the specific Leica client and user.

 

IMO they should follow this approach consequently and consider very carefully which lenses are really to be developed - also in order to make the equipment not too heavy...

 

Regards

Lik

Link to post
Share on other sites

... I'd like to see a 35mm Noctilux equivalent. It would be physically huge but that would defiantly get Asia's attention. ;)

 

It would be nice, but not my first choice, because the small, tiny summilux 35mm works well with the SL.

 

I suggest following order of appearance:

Fast prime portrait lens

Super-Wide angle zoom lens

fast prime wide angle lens

further: e.g. tilt/shift wide angle lens, e.g. 28mm

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 Summilux-L (OIS+AF obviously)

80 Summilux-L (OIS+AF obviously)

 

In my hands mid 2017 latest. And I'm happy. Oh and also a early delivery date on the 50 Summilux-L (say mid 2016).

 

Killer performance, but not bland rendering like you get from the Art lenses or Otus lenses. Something very reminiscent of R or M rendering. Even the S-system lenses although not bland, lack something the M lenses and to some extent R lenses have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Killer performance, but not bland rendering like you get from the Art lenses or Otus lenses. Something very reminiscent of R or M rendering. Even the S-system lenses although not bland, lack something the M lenses and to some extent R lenses have.

 

 

I think "killer performance" (at least of the objective kind - excuse the pun) and "not bland rendering" are somewhat of a mutual contradiction in the small format (35mm) world. The 50 APO-M is an illustration of this dichotomy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...