steppenw0lf Posted March 26, 2016 Share #121 Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, the MTFs are not so bad, definitely good enough for me. Isn't it a bit early to pick it out ? Even before making a few test shots ? Sounds a bit like the story of "the fox and the grapes". (from Aesop, greek poet) But I don't mind if many find it not good enough. That makes the waiting list shorter. Stephan Edited March 26, 2016 by steppenw0lf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 26, 2016 Posted March 26, 2016 Hi steppenw0lf, Take a look here 90-280/2.8-4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
steppenw0lf Posted March 26, 2016 Share #122 Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) Curious about 180 elmar. Does it perform well to your expectation? It is quite cheap, that's why I am asking. It's an old construction and so most lenses you can buy have a longer history (two or more owners). As usual with older lenses you cannot guarantee that it is perfect. I also have a used one that I bought already two decades ago. The lens hood is dented and looks not nice (so it was cheap), but optically it is excellent. And the hood is long and quite effective - I never had problems with flare, but maybe I was lucky to get a "good one". If you compare it with a fixed focal length Apo, no match. If you compare it with a non-Apo zoom I would say it is better, about equal to a Nikon 180 fixed focal length. It's main advantage is size and weight - it is lighter than the R 2.8/135. And for its focal length it is relatively easy to hold steady. I like it for portraits of humans or pets/animals - where I need no Apo performance. Or for a sunday walk in the mountains. But it is not soft at all, it is a lovely old Leica lens. (from the good old days). Unfortunately Leica cannot make these lenses anymore, as it is not spectacular enough for a new construction - modern Leica fans would probably never spend money on such a "humble" lens. So it depends on you and your expectations ... Stephan Edited March 26, 2016 by steppenw0lf 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 26, 2016 Share #123 Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) Well, the MTFs are not so bad, definitely good enough for me. Isn't it a bit early to pick it out ? Even before making a few test shots ? Sounds a bit like the story of "the fox and the grapes". (from Aesop, greek poet) But I don't mind if many find it not good enough. That makes the waiting list shorter. Stephan The MTF curves are quite good for a zoom. The 280/4's MTF curves are very similar to the 90-280's curves centrally and improve off-center until about y=15mm then start dropping. The 40 lpm curve never drops below 60%. Edited March 26, 2016 by wildlightphoto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted March 26, 2016 Share #124 Posted March 26, 2016 Looks like it's no substitute for the 280/4 APO. It looks close enough to have the added benefits of AF and a zoom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 26, 2016 Share #125 Posted March 26, 2016 It's main advantage [180mm Elmar-R] is size and weight ... It is delightfully tiny and light weight for a 180mm lens. It also has the closest minimum focus distance among the Leica 180mm lenses before the APO-Elmarit-R, and can also use ELPRO close-up lenses. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share #126 Posted March 26, 2016 It does seem that whatever is the difference in optical quality between 90-280 and the 280/4 APO shouldn't be a major consideration. In a package slightly lighter and more compact than the 280/4 APO (quite an achievement!), the zoom offers comparable image quality, a range of focal lengths, AF and OIS. That's very compelling. For me, the main decision will come down to film applications. If shooting film is important (which can be for me), then an R prime or zoom might still be a better choice. Other than that the 90-280 seem quite faultless. Note that at 160mm the maximum aperture is f3.3. So the rise towards f4 isn't very fast. It looks close enough to have the added benefits of AF and a zoom. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share #127 Posted March 26, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) And let's not forget that the 90-280 is classified APO, which by Leica standards means it reaches APO quality across the frame at all focal lengths and from the widest aperture down. Not even the very outstanding 105-280/4.2 was APO. That makes this very much a statement lens and the first time in any Leica zoom to reach APO quality out to 280mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 26, 2016 Share #128 Posted March 26, 2016 There are clearly some tradeoffs to be made, the conveniences of the modern lens vs. the optical properties of the older one. For myself the image quality outside the central area is important; these photos made with the 280/4 APO are cropped from the corner of the image: Having used several Leica APO lenses i can say there's APO and then there's 280/4 APO. I can see the difference. I'm not sure where your info comes from but I don't see that the 90-280 is smaller than the 280/4. The 90-280 is 238mm long, the 280/4 is 208mm long or with adapters just about the same size. Quite an accomplishment for a zoom, but not smaller. 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post thighslapper Posted March 26, 2016 Popular Post Share #129 Posted March 26, 2016 The 280/2.8 APO seems pretty good as well .... although it is a bit big ....... this is from a few days ago ...... I posted a few more on the photo bit of the forum .... 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! 24 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=3014832'>More sharing options...
cpclee Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share #130 Posted March 26, 2016 You need to add 25-30mm and 150-200g for the R -> SL adapter to any R lens for a fair comparison and that's what my comment was based on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted March 26, 2016 Author Share #131 Posted March 26, 2016 This was shot on the SL? Flawless looking The 280/2.8 APO seems pretty good as well .... although it is a bit big ....... this is from a few days ago ...... I posted a few more on the photo bit of the forum .... L1301738.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted March 26, 2016 Share #132 Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) For myself the image quality outside the central area is important; these photos made with the 280/4 APO are cropped from the corner of the image: Having used several Leica APO lenses i can say there's APO and then there's 280/4 APO. I can see the difference. Hello Doug, thanks for the details. Now I can finally grasp why this lens is so important for your work. But I wonder how you have access to these hummingbirds. Do you spend the winter in the south ? In Lake Constance (on the Island of Mainau) not far from my home town in Switzerland, there is a "butterfly house" where it is possible to see butterflies almost the whole year through. So is there maybe a "hummingbird house" you frequently visit ? Or do they live in the californian wilderness ? Thanks. Stephan Edited March 26, 2016 by steppenw0lf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 26, 2016 Share #133 Posted March 26, 2016 ... I wonder how you have access to these hummingbirds. Do you spend the winter in the south ? Anna's Hummingbirds don't migrate and here in eastern Sacramento County California I live within their normal range. This bird in in my yard. The other hummingbird species ought to show up any day now 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted March 26, 2016 Share #134 Posted March 26, 2016 (edited) WOW! To Doug and TS's bird pix Edited March 26, 2016 by Likaleica 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MediaFotografie Posted March 27, 2016 Share #135 Posted March 27, 2016 The famous Leica Boutigue here in Tübingen has a first Apo-Elmarit. I could try it yesterday: Super-fast AF and much more handsome as expected, wow! You can see some pics here http://adobe.ly/25qKI96 The corresponding DNGs are here: http://www.vesta.uni-tuebingen.de/l_forum/temp/Apo_Elmarit_90_280.zip 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 27, 2016 Share #136 Posted March 27, 2016 Curious about 180 elmar. Does it perform well to your expectation? It is quite cheap, that's why I am asking. I like the results I've gotten with the Elmar-R 180mm f/4 very much, and it's a delight to use since it is so small and light. Here's an example with the 180/4 on the SL: If you're interested, I posted four more photos made with this lens this morning: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253192-leica-sl-image-thread-post-your-examples-here/?p=3015552 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted March 28, 2016 Share #137 Posted March 28, 2016 The MTF curves are quite good for a zoom. The 280/4's MTF curves are very similar to the 90-280's curves centrally and improve off-center until about y=15mm then start dropping. The 40 lpm curve never drops below 60%. I don't know. Based on those curves, theoretically it looks like the 90-280 is marginally better at f/5.6 and 8. I imagine contrast is worse with the zoom because of all the air/glass interfaces. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 28, 2016 Share #138 Posted March 28, 2016 I don't know. Based on those curves, theoretically it looks like the 90-280 is marginally better at f/5.6 and 8. I imagine contrast is worse with the zoom because of all the air/glass interfaces. ?? The 280/4's sagittal curves show more contrast away from the center, the 90-280's sagittal curves show less contrast away from the center. How is less contrast marginally better than more contrast? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted March 28, 2016 Share #139 Posted March 28, 2016 Sorry, Doug. I was referring to resolution. I agree re contrast. ?? The 280/4's sagittal curves show more contrast away from the center, the 90-280's sagittal curves show less contrast away from the center. How is less contrast marginally better than more contrast? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted March 28, 2016 Share #140 Posted March 28, 2016 Contrast @ spatial frequency = resolution. Higher contrast at a specified frequency is higher resolution. 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