90-280 tele versus f4/280 and 70-180 on the SL

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe I should have used "versatile" than "future proof" to explain my thought process. If I get SL zoom then I am stuck to SL's capability where there is room for improvement (let's say DR or megapixel need). Specially in sensor technology there will be further innovations across camera makers. R lenses allow me to take advantage of these right away by exploiting sensors (and features such as IBIS) outside SL and not wait for future SL bodies.

 

 

As I said, "With the release of the SL, everything I wanted has been supplied. If I'm going to buy any new lenses, they'll be lenses that expand the full capabilities of the SL."

 

As far as I'm concerned, I have no need of more pixels or more dynamic range. I bought the SL because it has everything I'll ever want and need in a camera body. (I don't need any more lenses either; I have enough.)

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Helmut99]

Sorry to be so frank: Don't you think it is stupid to sell important equipment to buy something new, but untested ?

Would you do it that way ? I definitely wouldn't - at least one or two seasons with both lenses is mandatory. And there is the possibility to rent.

So why are you looking for such id...  ?

Thanks for being frank, I agree with what you're suggesting and as I mentioned before, I'm fairly new to this hobby and just looking for some advice based on experience.

[tom0511]

I dont have used either (R280 / 90-280) just the 80-200R at the moment.

For my part I dont get the "future proof" point of the R lenses?

You can use the lenses with adapters in manual mode with fixed aparture and without IS on several brands cameras.

But if you own a Leica SL and plan to stay in this system then native lenses for the SL like the 90-280 offer various advantages.

For me the handling of the 80-200 R or other manual focus lenses on the SL is just a compromise.

[jaapv]

As I said, "With the release of the SL, everything I wanted has been supplied. If I'm going to buy any new lenses, they'll be lenses that expand the full capabilities of the SL."

 

As far as I'm concerned, I have no need of more pixels or more dynamic range. I bought the SL because it has everything I'll ever want and need in a camera body. (I don't need any more lenses either; I have enough.)

Famous last words? GAS rules...

[ramarren]

Famous last words? GAS rules...

 

 

Maybe for you. 

 

The SL and M-P are satisfying to me at the same level as the Nikon F3/FM2 and Leica M6/M4-P once were. I worked with that kit from 1982 to 2002. Now that the digital capture world has achieved the capabilities I wrote down in 2001, there is very little motivation for me to change equipment. I've been uninterested in new equipment since I received the SL, and I don't see that changing other than for minor bits and pieces. 

 

I'd rather spend the money on my retirement and photography. I hope I have another twenty years left to enjoy these cameras. 

[Theodor Heinrichsohn]

Maybe for you. 

 

The SL and M-P are satisfying to me at the same level as the Nikon F3/FM2 and Leica M6/M4-P once were. I worked with that kit from 1982 to 2002. Now that the digital capture world has achieved the capabilities I wrote down in 2001, there is very little motivation for me to change equipment. I've been uninterested in new equipment since I received the SL, and I don't see that changing other than for minor bits and pieces. 

 

I'd rather spend the money on my retirement and photography. I hope I have another twenty years left to enjoy these cameras. 

 

 

I agree completely. I purchased the SL because it allows me to use my various screw and bayonet Leica lenses as well as my R lenses and because I can also fit my Nikon lenses such as the 1.2 asph and many others. In addition, I have an adapter for my Hasselblad lenses to Nikon F mount + Nikon F to Leica, so that I can also use Haselblad lenses, such as my 250 Superachromat and various others from wide angle to 150mm. I particularly appreciate the f2 100 Planar. I also have a converted 24mm Olympus shift with a Nikon F

bayonet and two Nikon shift lenses (35mm and 28mm)

In other words, it depends on the type of photography one prefers. None of these combinations are for sport, other action or hand held photography of quickly moving subjects. 

The SL is the camera of choice when I can carry a lot of equipment. The other extreme is the M 240 with the two Tri Elmars.

Teddy

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a question.

 

Can 90-280 zoom be used as a manual focus lens on any camera other than SL?

 

I am guessing that answer is "no" due to mount distance. The reason I am asking this question because it means (if true), other R zooms and primes in this FL can be used on more than one body but SL zoom has to be used for only one body. This makes R lenses more versatile and future proof (minus AF, of course).

 

edited above.

I believe that the SL applies in-camera software correction for the lens which wouldn't be available with other cameras (other than perhaps the Leica T) so even if the lens was usable its performance wouldn't be optimal on a non-Leica camera.

 

Pete.

[ramarren]

I believe that the SL applies in-camera software correction for the lens which wouldn't be available with other cameras (other than perhaps the Leica T) so even if the lens was usable its performance wouldn't be optimal on a non-Leica camera.

 

 

While this is true, the corrections applied for long focal lengths tend to be quite small. It is short focal lengths that typically require a good bit of correction. 

 

But the SL90-280 and SL24-90 will only be usable on TL mount cameras anyway. There are too many control protocols (aperture, focus, etc), too few mounts that could be compatible, and not enough market for a third party vendor to invest in backwards engineering the mount and the protocols. Buy one of these lenses and you're 'stuck' with a Leica. 

 

Of course, being 'stuck' with a Leica is hardly a bad thing. 

[cpclee]

Would love to see some images shot with the 250mm Superachromat

 

I agree completely. I purchased the SL because it allows me to use my various screw and bayonet Leica lenses as well as my R lenses and because I can also fit my Nikon lenses such as the 1.2 asph and many others. In addition, I have an adapter for my Hasselblad lenses to Nikon F mount + Nikon F to Leica, so that I can also use Haselblad lenses, such as my 250 Superachromat and various others from wide angle to 150mm. I particularly appreciate the f2 100 Planar. I also have a converted 24mm Olympus shift with a Nikon F

bayonet and two Nikon shift lenses (35mm and 28mm)

In other words, it depends on the type of photography one prefers. None of these combinations are for sport, other action or hand held photography of quickly moving subjects. 

The SL is the camera of choice when I can carry a lot of equipment. The other extreme is the M 240 with the two Tri Elmars.

Teddy

[farnz]

While this is true, the corrections applied for long focal lengths tend to be quite small. It is short focal lengths that typically require a good bit of correction. 

 

But the SL90-280 and SL24-90 will only be usable on TL mount cameras anyway. There are too many control protocols (aperture, focus, etc), too few mounts that could be compatible, and not enough market for a third party vendor to invest in backwards engineering the mount and the protocols. Buy one of these lenses and you're 'stuck' with a Leica. 

 

Of course, being 'stuck' with a Leica is hardly a bad thing. 

Agreed, being 'stuck' with Leica is not a bad thing at all until for justifiable business reasons it orphans the system or, God forfend, ceases trading.

 

I don't know for sure but I suspect that the T mount/ TL mount and its protocols are likely to be patented in the same way that the M mount was for so many years so backward engineering is probably not an option even if there was sufficient appetite.

 

Pete.

[phongph]

Hi All!

Pls. advise the IQ of R Apo 70-180 f2.8 vs SL 90-280/ ASPH at 90mm to 180 mm.

Have a good day!

Thanks!

[phongph]

Hello,

I'm new to this forum but enjoy and it helps quite a bit to learn the SL beyond manuals. I'm also fairly new to photography, never had a DSLR but have been using the M240 for about 2 years and Have been enjoying my new hobby a lot. Just recently got the SL with 24-90 after putting a lot of thought into why spending more money into more gear. As for R tele lenses, I own the f2.8 Vario 70-180 and the f4 280.

My question: has anyone parted from one of those two R lenses (or both) to fund the 90-280? And if yes, why and are you still happy with the decision?

I'm planning an Alaska trip in summer and not sure what to do.

Any idea or comment would be appreciated.

Hi "Helmut99"!

Please advise your sharing of R Apo 70-180 f2.8! Please also post some images of this len on SL 601, eps. the portrait at max f2.8.

I intend to get R Apo 70-180 f2.8 or SL 90-280 f2.8-4.0 to shoot with my SL 601.

Have a nice day!

Many thanks!

[phongph]

I did a road trip from Denver to Phoenix recently with the SL and a kit of R lenses including the 70-180 and 280/2,8. I have those lenses since many years and wanted to use them again properly.

 

It was really fun thanks to the car and the tripod. For hikes I had to leave the 280 ++ in the car or hotel. And several times I only took the 28-90. If I had to do it again, I would leave the 280 at home and rely on the Apo-Exender 2x.

 

I also made a trip to Alaska last summer with 5D MIII, 24-105 and 100-400 + Extender 1,4.

 

Based on these experiences, in your position, I would switch to the 90-280 for that trip.

 

The 70-180 is a great lens, but not easy to focus or stabilize handheld.

 

In Alaska I had a lot of use of the IS and could only really use my tripod twice.

 

Obviously it would be even better to have an hypothetical L Apo-Extender X1,4.

Hi "leicaiste"!

Plsease advise your sharing of R Apo 70-180 f2.8! Pls also post some images of this len on SL 601, esp. the portrait at max f2.8.

I intend to get R Apo 70-180 f2.8 or SL 90-280 f2.8-4.0 to shoot with my SL 601.

Have a nice day!

Many thanks!

[gvaliquette]

 ...

I intend to get R Apo 70-180 f2.8 or SL 90-280 f2.8-4.0 to shoot with my SL 601.

 ...

 

phongph,

 

If you don't have the APO 70-180 nor the 80-200 nor the APO 280, buy the SL 90-280.  Don't even think twice about it, it's a no-brainer!

 

Guy

[sillbeers15]

Hi All!

Pls. advise the IQ of R Apo 70-180 f2.8 vs SL 90-280/ ASPH at 90mm to 180 mm.

Have a good day!

Thanks!

The money you spend getting a good used APO R70-180mm is similar to getting a used APO SL 90-280mm. Perhaps even a bit less