Jump to content

Should we lobby for an AF enabled extender in the SL Lens program?


wlaidlaw

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Ramarren,

thanks, got it. I have also noted with the SL that the reported aperture numbers are quite random - it depends mostly upon where the light sources are.

Surprisingly the result seems to be ok most of the time - but I wonder if this is just because I watch it on a monitor which is not as critical as paper.

Stephan

 

 

The SL, like the M, uses the auxiliary ambient light sensor combined with the lens id code to make an estimate of the set aperture. But I suspect that since the dedicated lenses made for the mount provide full information, unlike M lenses, they didn't waste too much time and effort in tuning it as finely. Which is all right with me ... The M makes its guesses and is sometimes well off as well. It's what happens when you don't have full information via mechanical or electronic communication from the lens directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Is it possible that T-lenses covers full-frame with an extender?

If so, the 1.4x extender+T-zoom could be a very practical travel kit,

a choice of 15-32mm, 25-80mm and 75-190mm.

 

Arto

 

 

Sadly, I don't think you could get a quart out of a pint pot. I am sure with the T lenses even with an extender/expander, you could still only use crop frame. 

 

 

I made some test shots with full-frame Canon body + crop-frame Sigma zoom + Extender 2x. I also had to add a 12mm extension tube to make the marriage physically possible.

Sigma 12-125mm 1:3,5-5,6 zoom has an image circle of about 29mm. With the extension tube it is 34mm and with the extender it covers full-frame, diagonally 43mm. That leads me to a hasty conclusion, that the T-lenses can cover full-frame with an extender, at least with the 2x-extender. Leica Apo-Extender-R 2x don´t have protruding front element like Canon has, so you don´t need any tubes to make mounting possible. It would be nice if Leica could take this into account when they are designing new extender for the SL.

I try to add some pictures...

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn´t know how to name the pictures.

Anyway, the first one is just zoom@18mm

2. is zoom@18mm+ext.tube

3. is zoom@18mm+ext.tube+extender2x

4. is zoom@98mm+ext.tube

5. is zoom@125mm+ext.tube+extender2x

6. is the test combo

 

Best regards

Arto

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could not justify an SL 90-280mm (when available) unless I sell / PX my 280/4 R - but the latter has the advantage of converting to 392mm and 560mm via the Apo R extenders and as such would continue to be more useful than the SL tele zoom. So unless an SL extender is made available I'll stick with my 280/4R rather than trade it for the SL 90-280. 

 

dunk

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...