LocalHero1953 Posted May 5, 2016 Share #301 Posted May 5, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thats what I thought. Seems some don't agree? Conspiracy theories and ulterior motives are much more interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 5, 2016 Posted May 5, 2016 Hi LocalHero1953, Take a look here 90-280/2.8-4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
steppenw0lf Posted May 5, 2016 Share #302 Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) Leica has only made very few lenses up until now. So if they would have to change the design so early, that would show a very poor engineering workmanship or quality. How does it come you expect a difference ? You folk here are mainly Leica fanboys (I'm no exception), so why do you think such rubbish ? And if you don't think so, why are you spreading such nonsense ? Stephan Edited May 5, 2016 by steppenw0lf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 5, 2016 Share #303 Posted May 5, 2016 It's far more likely to be production difficulties than a design error. I have seen no complaints at all from the early adopters of the 90-280 on image quality. This lens may give the MATE serious competition for the most complicated still lens Leica has made (other than the one off commissions), so it would not be at all surprising if they struggle in the early stages with getting a consistent product. Given that they don't have a great reputation in recent years for consistent assembly, final adjustment and QC on the M lenses, they may be trying extra hard to make sure no "Friday" lenses escape into the wild this time. It would certainly make sense to me. I am happy to wait, if it means I don't have to send another brand new lens straight back to Wetzlar for adjustment or reassembly. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
solal Posted May 5, 2016 Share #304 Posted May 5, 2016 I received my 1 week ago. The image quality is impressive. But I had a small internal dust on the moving group. I hesitated to take it when I saw it in the shop (no influence on the IQ, but the value drop immediately). I called Leica France to check the best solution. They adviced me to take it, no other will be available before a long time. Leica France recorded that it was this dust visible. I will give it to solve this problem in 1 month. They confirmed that the road trip to Germany will take less that 3 weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted May 5, 2016 Share #305 Posted May 5, 2016 Hello Wilson, a remark about a former discussion (about parfocal lenses). I talked to some "filmers" to hear what they typically use with their red (with eos mount). They said generally Contax lenses are good to use (turning the right way), and that they take the 28-85 to every session. So you probably better use your old lens for filming. And that most Canon 80-200 zooms are parfocal. But AF was not an issue (not important). Just to finish this. Now forget it again. Stephan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted May 5, 2016 Share #306 Posted May 5, 2016 Hello Hugues33, Welcome to the Forum. Nice photos all. Best Regards, Michael 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sillbeers15 Posted May 6, 2016 Share #307 Posted May 6, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have been in manufacturing for more than 25 years and I'm with a $30b multinational company with more than 200 manufacturing sites worldwide. It is my precise thoughts to hold back purchase for a quarter after the first launch date due to teething manufacturing problems and learning curve faced by all makers commonly encountered. Don't get me wrong, I, too struggle to hold back purchase as emotions run high on looking forward to owning the first Leica AF mid-range telephoto lens! I practiced what I've preached by buying my SL + 24-90mm in last Christmas (some 3 mths after launch date) and I'm happy with what I had received till date. By the same thoughts, I'm looking to buy the 90-280mm come summer 2016. Hence I look forward to reading all the experience shared online about the thrills and pleasure to use the lens. As no perfect AF system exist, this lens + SL will determine user experience on AFC and AF tracking comparing to the existing competitors' product available in the market today. I do believe firmly that this lens will be one critical lens due to the focal length & application to make or break the success of the Leica SL eventually as a professional grade DSLR replacement which Leica wishes to position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted May 6, 2016 Share #308 Posted May 6, 2016 (edited) Leica has only made very few lenses up until now. So if they would have to change the design so early, that would show a very poor engineering workmanship or quality. How does it come you expect a difference ? You folk here are mainly Leica fanboys (I'm no exception), so why do you think such rubbish ? And if you don't think so, why are you spreading such nonsense ? Stephan I have it on good authority from the dealer that didn't supply my current lens that their allocation had been withdrawn at the last minute and they would not get any till at least now....ish. The dealer I got my lens from was promised 3 ..... and that was confirmed when delivery started ..... but only one appeared. It appears that at least some of the initial production run were kept back because of some unspecified reason .... and certainly the number of lenses in circulation from the initial release seems VERY small, even by Leica's usual standards. To date no-one has noted any issues with the lens ...... apart from the fact it is not parfocal ....... but it was never billed as parfocal and with AF it is of dubious usefulness anyway. If there are/were QC or manufacturing issues I doubt if we will ever know what they were ...... and as long as a delay in delivery is the only consequence then it's no big deal. Edited May 6, 2016 by thighslapper 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meerec Posted May 6, 2016 Share #309 Posted May 6, 2016 (edited) I somehow can't agree there are QC errors or manufacturing faults. Most of the work is done manually anyway !! And c'mon this is Leica, and it's made in Germany My lens was made on 6 April and I received it one month later. I can't fault it. Here is an example, an egret I shot yesterday at my local beach in Sydney. 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! Edited May 6, 2016 by meerec 10 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257858-90-28028-4/?do=findComment&comment=3040240'>More sharing options...
meerec Posted May 6, 2016 Share #310 Posted May 6, 2016 To strengthen my point that my lens is faultless here is another example of the same egret ... 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! 5 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257858-90-28028-4/?do=findComment&comment=3040243'>More sharing options...
meerec Posted May 6, 2016 Share #311 Posted May 6, 2016 Here is an an example of landscape shot. 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! 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257858-90-28028-4/?do=findComment&comment=3040245'>More sharing options...
meerec Posted May 6, 2016 Share #312 Posted May 6, 2016 ... and another landscape shot ... 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! 3 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257858-90-28028-4/?do=findComment&comment=3040246'>More sharing options...
dgktkr Posted May 6, 2016 Share #313 Posted May 6, 2016 Hello Wilson, a remark about a former discussion (about parfocal lenses). I talked to some "filmers" to hear what they typically use with their red (with eos mount). They said generally Contax lenses are good to use (turning the right way), and that they take the 28-85 to every session. So you probably better use your old lens for filming. And that most Canon 80-200 zooms are parfocal. But AF was not an issue (not important). Just to finish this. Now forget it again. Stephan Another perspective concerning parfocal photographic zooms: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/mythbusting-parfocal-photo-zooms/ dgktkr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 6, 2016 Share #314 Posted May 6, 2016 Another perspective concerning parfocal photographic zooms: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/mythbusting-parfocal-photo-zooms/ dgktkr A good reason why people often go for the Zeiss 28-85, because an expert (not any joe with a screwdriver) can adjust the settings of three screws on the lens, found under the rubber sleeve on the focus/zoom control to make the lens as parfocal as possible. Now it is only an assumption but Zeiss did and do make a lot of zoom cine lenses, where parfocal accuracy is vitally important, so presumably they carried this knowledge into their Contax lens division and did the best they could, within budgetary parameters. I know Zeiss always said they made money on the Contax MF SLR primes but lost about the same total amount on the zooms, even considering they were far from cheap when they were sold from the early 1980's to 1999. In effect, Kyocera who were a very precision orientated company, could not meet Zeiss' standards when auto focus was added into the equation with the N and 645 zoom lenses. The fail rate from the Zeiss inspectors at the Kyocera plant (rumoured to be around 75%) was one of the factors leading to an irreparable rift in the relationship. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediaFotografie Posted May 6, 2016 Share #315 Posted May 6, 2016 I've a little problem with the new Apo-Elmarit-SL 90-280: I get better results in manual focus mode then autofocus at large distances and 280mm. Here's a typical example at 1:1, left side MF, right AF, all other settings are the same (280mm, f 4,8). Didn't understand this... 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/257858-90-28028-4/?do=findComment&comment=3040450'>More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted May 6, 2016 Share #316 Posted May 6, 2016 Spot, field or zone AF? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediaFotografie Posted May 6, 2016 Share #317 Posted May 6, 2016 Spot, field or zone AF? Spot! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted May 6, 2016 Share #318 Posted May 6, 2016 Spot! Looks like the AF has picked the tree in the foreground rather than the steeple. I see the on some of the more recent Nikon DSLR's you can fine tune your AF. Maybe the SL should have had this feature. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted May 6, 2016 Share #319 Posted May 6, 2016 (edited) I should have asked also: are those the full frame or just a small crop? i.e. how big is the focus box in relation to this image. I agree, it looks like it picked the trees in front. Edited May 6, 2016 by LocalHero1953 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 6, 2016 Share #320 Posted May 6, 2016 That shouldn't happen with a CDAF camera as it uses the sensor to determine AF. Try the other AF settings. I do find they work a bit differently under different circumstances. All AF systems can be confused in some circumstances but this doesn't seem like it would be one of them. Gordon 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now