Leica SL with M or R lenses?

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a lot of gear to put on the market.   

 

 

I think quite a few of us know that feeling!

[Leicaiste]

 

I think quite a few of us know that feeling!

 

 

 

That is why I don't have the 24-90.  

 

[Guest]

I thought it too bulky and heavy. The range is not ideal for me either.

[ramarren]

That is why I don't have the 24-90.  

 

 

I thought it too bulky and heavy. The range is not ideal for me either.

 

 

I had a lot of gear to sell before I bought the SL and SL24-90... 

 

When I first ordered the SL, I ordered only the body. I already owned more than enough R lenses to do the job and I've never been much of zoom lens user, particularly not "normal" or "mid-range" zooms like this. They are always a trade-off of focal length versatility against loss of speed and increased bulk, and in the past were also a trade-off in lens performance and image quality.

 

But after considering for a couple of days, I added the SL24-90 to my order because the reports on the lens were quite good with respect to performance and, despite the cost in bulk and lens speed, it offered the operational advantages of being able to use all the SL's feature capabilities (AF, P and T exposure modes, image stabilization, etc). It took me some time to start using it, and then to grow accustomed to its bulk and weight. But I have to say the performance it provides is excellent, even against excellent performers like the R prime lenses, and the bulk and weight no longer prove an obstacle now that I've become accommodated to it. 

 

The one thing I do wish is that Leica had included a tripod mount for it like they do with the SL90-280. It would probably have added to the lens' bulk and weight, so maybe it was sensible not to, but it's a large lens to be hanging off the front of the camera on a tripod without a more centered mount. Luckily the SL body and lens mount is extremely strong and rigid so it's not really a problem; it just makes me a bit uncomfortable. 

[Guest]

Have been using the Novoflex adaptor for my R lenses. Just collected an M 3.4 Super Elmar and Leica R Adaptor M additionally. Much to my surprise all lens information is shown automatically for both the new Super Elmar M and my old 180mm R lens and the 90 R lens. The R adaptor M also has a Tripod mount which attaches neatly to the adaptor itself and not the lens. Very neat.

[Leicaiste]

Much to my surprise all lens information is shown automatically for both the new Super Elmar M and my old 180mm R lens and the 90 R lens. 

 

 

The R lenses ? That's weird.

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have been using the Novoflex adaptor for my R lenses. Just collected an M 3.4 Super Elmar and Leica R Adaptor M additionally. Much to my surprise all lens information is shown automatically for both the new Super Elmar M and my old 180mm R lens and the 90 R lens. The R adaptor M also has a Tripod mount which attaches neatly to the adaptor itself and not the lens. Very neat.

 

 

Do you mean that you'd been using the Novoflex LER/LEM on the M Adapter T prior to this, and now you are using the Leica R Adapter M on the M Adapter T? Then yes, the Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH is a coded lens—when fitted to the M Adapter T, the SL automatically knows what lens it is and embeds that into the EXIF data. 

 

With the R lenses fitted to the R Adapter M on the M Adapter T, as long as you set the lens profile in the SL to match the lens you're using, you'll get the matching lens data in your EXIF. That is not automatic ... there's no way for the SL to know which lens you've fitted to the R Adapter M automatically, but it does remember the last R lens code you'd selected when you fit the adapter. So if you are always switching between the SEM21 and the R90, for instance, you could consider that it is 'automatic' ... 

[Guest]

Do you mean that you'd been using the Novoflex LER/LEM on the M Adapter T prior to this, and now you are using the Leica R Adapter M on the M Adapter T? Then yes, the Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH is a coded lens—when fitted to the M Adapter T, the SL automatically knows what lens it is and embeds that into the EXIF data. 

 

With the R lenses fitted to the R Adapter M on the M Adapter T, as long as you set the lens profile in the SL to match the lens you're using, you'll get the matching lens data in your EXIF. That is not automatic ... there's no way for the SL to know which lens you've fitted to the R Adapter M automatically, but it does remember the last R lens code you'd selected when you fit the adapter. So if you are always switching between the SEM21 and the R90, for instance, you could consider that it is 'automatic' ... 

 

Sorry I should have been clearer. I have been using only the Novoflex adaper until today with my R90 and R180.

 

However today I came home with a new M adapter T, and also the neat R adapter M. Also new today the 21mm Super Elmar M. So when I took the 21mm off and attached it to the M adapter T with the R adapter M attached to the 180R, I was suprised to see just like with the M adaptor T and 21mm, all the lenses settings were shown correctly and in fact the two choices of setting which R or M lens you have attached in MF mode is greyed out. 

[ramarren]

Sorry I should have been clearer. I have been using only the Novoflex adaper until today with my R90 and R180.

 

However today I came home with a new M adapter T, and also the neat R adapter M. Also new today the 21mm Super Elmar M. So when I took the 21mm off and attached it to the M adapter T with the R adapter M attached to the 180R, I was suprised to see just like with the M adaptor T and 21mm, all the lenses settings were shown correctly and in fact the two choices of setting which R or M lens you have attached in MF mode is greyed out. 

 

 

Hmm. Well, that just doesn't make much sense to me. I've been using the R Adapter M/M Adapter T stack since I bought the SL, and you have to assign which R lens is on the mount with the Lens Profiles setting in order to see the correct lens in EXIF. This has been true with all revisions of the SL firmware. ???

[Guest]

I think you are correct. I just fitted the M adapter T and the 21mm lens and straight away it recognises the Super-Elmar. When I take the 21mm lens off and attach the 180mm R and the R adapter M, it now said unknown lens, and then I had to choose from the drop down list. This did not happen the first time I did thisunless I am deceiving myself I could have sworn that the lens profile was greyed out but the R lens was shown correctly........

 

I like very much thatl the R adapter M also comes with a neat tripod mount, this screws onto the adaptor itself and not the lens.

 

Excuse the iphone photos. Doh, I just realized on the R lens profile I selected the 90mm, I did have a 180 R on......

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!

[Craggs 101]

Interesting perspective here:

 

http://www.ultrasomething.com/photography/2016/01/camera-season-the-leica-sl/

 

"Most of the wide lenses I tried exhibited quite a bit of smearing at the edges and in the corners (at least at the wider apertures dictated by camera season weather conditions). This is not a problem that’s unique to the SL — it exists any time you mount a rangefinder lens on a camera with a “standard” sensor."

 

​Another reason to go with R on the wide/standard and only M for short telephoto... (?)

[steppenw0lf]

 

Another reason to go with R on the wide/standard and only M for short telephoto... (?)

 

 

Of course it is not a bad idea to use R glass, especially the macros and teles, and zooms. But generally I would say all of them - yes I did not test all of them, but in all tests I did the results were very satisfactory for me.

 

I have read this report several months ago and had not the impression, that this was a technically deep test. His qualities lie in the photos and writing skills.

For technical prowess I regard Sean Reid of Reid Reviews much higher. He lists exactly all the details, while this author makes rather general statements, that do not reflect the complex reality. As an example a UWA lens like the WATE never had a problem of smearing on the SL. And the newly constructed M lenses also do not at all, they are even slightly better on the SL than on the M.

He talks about "most of the wide lenses I tried". Now tell me, what does that mean for the Elmarit-M 2.8/28 Asph V2 ? See what I mean ?

 

The best is simply to make photos and see if the results are good enough for you or maybe even better.

I tried e.g. some Contax lenses and was surprised about the results. (positively surprised)  You will probably not find many reports about their usage on Leica cameras.

 

Stephan

[MEB]

Since there is no way in this lifetime that I will be able to afford the SL 90-280, I am considering a purchase of the R 280/2.8 APO Telyt (not modular) lens for my SL.  Has anyone tried this combination?  I have never used one but it was apparently an outstanding lens.  According to reports, only slightly below the stellar R 280/4 APO.

 

Thanks,

Mark

[Helmut99]

Mark, I have not tried the 2.8/280 but for more flexibility, less weight and outstanding IQ, I'd recommend also looking at the f2.8 APO Elmarit plus 1.4 and maybe 2.0 extenders. I have the f4/280 APO as well and compared the twowith a few shots yesterday. You can download and check full size jpegs from here: https://ziewers.smugmug.com/LensTests/.

Helmut

[MEB]

Helmut,

 

Wow!  The amount of detail preserved even with the 2x extender is amazing.  Thank you for the advice.

 

Mark

[Helmut99]

If you were to consider the 180 APO option with extender(s), beware that not all 180 APO versions take the 1.4x extender. The 2x extender fits all 180 APO versions.

If you zoom in the large white pot on the right side of the images, with the big contrast between white pot and dark tree - that's where the 280f4 really shines, virtually no chromatic aberrations.

[steppenw0lf]

Since there is no way in this lifetime that I will be able to afford the SL 90-280, I am considering a purchase of the R 280/2.8 APO Telyt (not modular) lens for my SL.  Has anyone tried this combination?  I have never used one but it was apparently an outstanding lens.  According to reports, only slightly below the stellar R 280/4 APO.

 

Thanks,

Mark

 

 

Hello Mark,

as you say you cannot afford it, I assume this is not your profession. So simply buy a cheap 2.8/280 if you can afford it - they are now only about one quarter to what they were new. They are used, so you can never be sure that they are exactly like new, but you do not make your living with it.

They main difference is the weight, but the 4/280 is still extremely heavy and much more expensive (about the same price they had when new).

So if you really cannot afford it, buy a Nikon and a Nikkor 4/300mm PF. It is much smaller, has probably equal quality and additionally AF and VR and costs also much less - and for macro focuses up to 1.4m . which both Leica s can't do.

 

So either you have the money and need not talk about it, then buy any Leica folly you like, Or money is scarce, then buy the best you get for your buck - and then there is also no reason anymore to talk about the money.

 

I have the 2.8/280 and it is excellent as it always was, also on the SL. I have it since the nineties and never wanted to give in to the Leica R catastrophe. I made some nice photos, but would not call this a test. But a test is not needed, all R lenses are fine with the SL, so simple. On the forum you will also find a few very nice birds photos (robin) with the 2.8/280. But why would you buy such old stuff, if you get a modern much more usable lens (weight is around 750g) for the liitle money you can afford.

 

If you are a specialist that needs exactly this lens for his profession, then of course buy the old R lens, but again no more complaining about prices.

 

Of course you are impressed by the photos shown, but you do not know the whole story. They are not made hand-held. It takes the right conditions, skill, patience and the right tripod to produce such "sharp" results. With a modern lens this is much easier and will give you a quick start even when photography is just an occasional hobby.

 

Stephan

[ramarren]

Since there is no way in this lifetime that I will be able to afford the SL 90-280, I am considering a purchase of the R 280/2.8 APO Telyt (not modular) lens for my SL.  Has anyone tried this combination?  I have never used one but it was apparently an outstanding lens.  According to reports, only slightly below the stellar R 280/4 APO.

 

Thanks,

Mark

 

 

I'm quite happy with the rather inexpensive Elmar-R 180/4 and Telyt-R 250/4 v1, along with the non-APO 2x Extender-R. May not be state of the art, but for the price and how much I use such long lenses they do just fine. 

[Guest]

Me too, I am happy with my Elmarit-R 1:2.8/180 and am on the look out for a non-apo 2X Extender which I would use with my 90mm lens when I don't want to take the 180 out.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Helmut99]

Hello Mark,

as you say you cannot afford it, I assume this is not your profession. So simply buy a cheap 2.8/280 if you can afford it - they are now only about one quarter to what they were new. They are used, so you can never be sure that they are exactly like new, but you do not make your living with it.

They main difference is the weight, but the 4/280 is still extremely heavy and much more expensive (about the same price they had when new).

So if you really cannot afford it, buy a Nikon and a Nikkor 4/300mm PF. It is much smaller, has probably equal quality and additionally AF and VR and costs also much less - and for macro focuses up to 1.4m . which both Leica s can't do.

 

So either you have the money and need not talk about it, then buy any Leica folly you like, Or money is scarce, then buy the best you get for your buck - and then there is also no reason anymore to talk about the money.

 

I have the 2.8/280 and it is excellent as it always was, also on the SL. I have it since the nineties and never wanted to give in to the Leica R catastrophe. I made some nice photos, but would not call this a test. But a test is not needed, all R lenses are fine with the SL, so simple. On the forum you will also find a few very nice birds photos (robin) with the 2.8/280. But why would you buy such old stuff, if you get a modern much more usable lens (weight is around 750g) for the liitle money you can afford.

 

If you are a specialist that needs exactly this lens for his profession, then of course buy the old R lens, but again no more complaining about prices.

 

Of course you are impressed by the photos shown, but you do not know the whole story. They are not made hand-held. It takes the right conditions, skill, patience and the right tripod to produce such "sharp" results. With a modern lens this is much easier and will give you a quick start even when photography is just an occasional hobby.

 

Stephan

Stephan,

here's the whole story - my skills are based on 18 months of hobby photography, before that I didn't even know the difference between aperture and focal length. I used a $200 tripod in windy conditions on my wooden home deck. I did this quick ~500mm focal length comparison as I'm not sure what tele I should take for my upcoming Alaska trip in summer. Thought I should point out the phenomenal image quality of the Apo 180 which I have used a lot handheld on MP240 and SL, even with the 1.4x or 2x extender.

Thanks, Helmut