steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #181 Posted February 28, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's rather a shame you can't tell the relative sizes of the new primes against the existing three lenses. But you can easily. There are images containing several lenses (24-90, 16-35 and the Summicrons). We also know that 67mm is the filter thread. With this you get a good approximation. Also 82mm for the 16-35. Only the weight is still unknown. And yes, I also would find a 2/28mm very desirable. While an extender (OIS and AF capable) would be much more useful and affordable than a long prime lens. (And then rather a 4/400 or 4/500 than a superfluous 280). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 28, 2017 Posted February 28, 2017 Hi steppenw0lf, Take a look here Please convince me the SL 50/1.4 is better than summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #182 Posted February 28, 2017 Smaller sizes would add a whole new dimension to the versatility of the SL 601. Have you ever added a Canon 50mm AF lens with Novoflex EOS AF adapter ? It is optically inferior, but gives you the versatility you mention. (EF 1.8/50 STM or EF 1.2/50). It is optically actually quite good, depends on your expectations. Or would you volunteer to test the Sigma Art 2/24-35 . It should work with the AF adapter - but nobody gives more info than that. It is "rather small" and has an interesting aperture. But I do not trust Sigma IQ (without a test). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #183 Posted February 28, 2017 A concern I have with the viability of the SL platform is that the lens sales disappoint Leica, and they move away from investing in the SL platform. I don't know the stats but I wouldn't be surprised if for every Leica M body sold Leica sells between 1-3 new M lenses to the average new owner over the next few years. In contrast, the number of SL owners without SL lenses seems pretty high - many using it as a platform for their M lenses. A good number have bought at least 1 zoom. It appears to me that many are questioning the SL -50 as being too big or having slowish AF. This is all anecdotal on my part. Anyways, I'm hoping the next wave of AF lenses for the SL are really compelling. On paper I don't really need another zoom or cron fixed focal lenses in the 35 - 90 range. But I'm hoping the reviews suggest these lenses offer a step change in IQ performance (like the M 50 APO did), and have effective AF and weather proofing, so that I'm willing to take the jump despite potential size issues. If this is true, then I hope they start selling like hot cakes. This will also give me the added confidence I need in the ongoing viability of the SL system and I can commit more fully too it. One fear I have with the SL - 50, at this time, is if I buy it and the SL system proves unsustainable for Leica then I have a lens with very little resale in 3-5 years time. But if I buy the M 50 Apo I know I will be able to sell it easily and maybe even make some money (experience I've had with other Ms). And despite all the reviews I still can't tell whether the Sl-50s images are a step up over the M APO! Lol. In such an uncertain world my head tells me I should be buying the M 50 APO for the SL and not the native lens. Even if the SL will be "abandoned", it is still working for several years (maybe decades). So your "uncertainty" is not really a big problem for most users. If you really would worry about its future, then you would buy anything you could get hold of and thus avoid a possible stop of production. I bought not a single lens, with the intention to sell it at best price again, but instead chose the lens I found best for my pics. Nothing is certain - and has never beeen. Neither investments, nor your future health. Simply said I do not like what you wrote: It's full of ..... negative vibes. It is not about photography, but about investments. And about lenses being a "step up" - what nonsense. The aim is interesting (good ?) pictures, whatever the lens is that you prefer for that. (I come here to read about photography, and would like not to be bothered by that sort of writing full of negative emanations.) (Well, just a wish.) People with some amount of courage would say: I prefer a bad lens, then a fine result will be mainly my own achievement. And not mainly produced by the extraordinary camera/lens. (But many want a camera that allows any chimp to take pricewinning pics. ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phovsho Posted February 28, 2017 Share #184 Posted February 28, 2017 Even if the SL will be "abandoned", it is still working for several years (maybe decades). So your "uncertainty" is not really a big problem for most users. If you really would worry about its future, then you would buy anything you could get hold of and thus avoid a possible stop of production. I bought not a single lens, with the intention to sell it at best price again, but instead chose the lens I found best for my pics. Nothing is certain - and has never beeen. Neither investments, nor your future health. Simply said I do not like what you wrote: It's full of ..... negative vibes. It is not about photography, but about investments. And about lenses being a "step up" - what nonsense. The aim is interesting (good ?) pictures, whatever the lens is that you prefer for that. (I come here to read about photography, and would like not to be bothered by that sort of writing full of negative emanations.) (Well, just a wish.) People with some amount of courage would say: I prefer a bad lens, then a fine result will be mainly my own achievement. And not mainly produced by the extraordinary camera/lens. (But many want a camera that allows any chimp to take pricewinning pics. ) Dear Steppenw0lf I'm sorry that you "don't like" what I wrote which has "negative vibes". I was unaware that in writing on a public forum like this I had to be so sensitive to your specific interests and opinions as to what is an appropriate discussion, or that I and the other members have to be positive all the time. I'm even more disappointed that you have misinterpreted the intention of my post. My comments weren't specifically about the merits of investing in a lens (which I agree is generally a foolhardy proposition), but rather that the "cost of ownership" is a consideration for some unfortunates like myself, who don't have endless resources so as to be insensitive to such considerations. Differences in resale is a legitimate consideration, particularly where there are a number of lens choices available. All I was saying is that at this point in the SL's lifecycle, and given some mixed feelings on this forum about the new SL-50, there is an added risk at resale when compared to the M lens I am considering as an alternative to the SL-50. I don't think I'm the first person on this forum to raise issues of resale when considering purchases. And I appreciate all these issues go away if you assume that you won't want to sell the lens in the future, but why make such a limiting assumption when many of us do ultimately buy and sell equipment - even when at the time of purchase we thought it was a camera/lens for life. I would also challenge your contention that my post was full of "negative vibes" and "negative emanations". I stated pretty clearly that despite the mixed feelings of many towards the SL-50 (read this thread as evidence), I'm hoping the next wave of SL lenses are really compelling and they sell like hotcakes, so that the SL system grows and prospers. I think being realistic and balanced in my opinions, and rational in my decision making is very different than being full of negative energy. I assume that because you (incorrectly) think I'm an investor in lenses that I am the "any old chimp" you refer to who thinks they can be a better photographer simply with better gear. Unlike (you?) courageous people who can make a silk purse out off a sow's ear (in this case with a "bad" lens). Well done you. Just keep your positive energy flowing. I don't know you or your photography, and you certainly don't know me or mine. What I do know is that you frequent the Leica forum, and as such its unlikely your primary camera yis a Holga or similar. Keep riding rough. Finally, calling someone's opinions nonsense or implying they are someone they may not be and following that up with some stupid emoji, doesn't make it less personal or your comments more acceptable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #185 Posted February 28, 2017 Did not read it, sorry. I think more of the same bad style. (Maybe wrong ?) I don't do that to me, sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phovsho Posted February 28, 2017 Share #186 Posted February 28, 2017 Thanks for making my point for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #187 Posted February 28, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Minerva. A comparison of the wide open Noctilux and the wide open 50mm SL Summilux. The latter is a bit sharper (as expected) and the background is a bit more blown out with the former. Not a scientific test (hand held, etc) but the exposures are the same, but only a bit of the same sharpening, clarity and vibrance added. 20170225-164147_L1080947.jpg 20170225-163803_L1080941.jpg Thanks for the comparison. I like the second image (SL 50) better, because it is really crisp, which is suitable for a cold statue. I could imagine that for a living person it is the other way around. (I do not know, maybe you could add another comparison ?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #188 Posted February 28, 2017 L1308697-2.jpg I like that sort of inquisitive sharpness, that's really great. Even for portrait use. But many "objects" do not like it that much. They prefer a more flattering picture. (with less details) Any more pics of very young people/children - without any wrinkles ? (like the Vermeer portraits, or some of Jonos portraits) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 28, 2017 Share #189 Posted February 28, 2017 Thanks for making my point for me. No sweat. Ever thought about adding anything useful or even positive ? Too far from your usual way ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted February 28, 2017 Share #190 Posted February 28, 2017 I like that sort of inquisitive sharpness, that's really great. Even for portrait use. But many "objects" do not like it that much. They prefer a more flattering picture. (with less details) Any more pics of very young people/children - without any wrinkles ? (like the Vermeer portraits, or some of Jonos portraits) Well it is true that the different lenses render differently. The only thing that I would say is that it is easier to unsharpen a sharp picture than the other way around. But it's the overall look of the lens, its signature, that is important, sharpness being only a part of that. That said, most non-photographers would probably not notice much difference between the two images shown as they do not induce different levels of emotional engagement, which is what ultimately makes a pic. PS: In reality, the light conditions were dimmer than they appear in these (identically exposed) pics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted March 1, 2017 Share #191 Posted March 1, 2017 No sweat. Ever thought about adding anything useful or even positive ? Too far from your usual way ... Don't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted March 1, 2017 Share #192 Posted March 1, 2017 I like that sort of inquisitive sharpness, that's really great. Even for portrait use. But many "objects" do not like it that much. They prefer a more flattering picture. (with less details) Any more pics of very young people/children - without any wrinkles ? (like the Vermeer portraits, or some of Jonos portraits) from the 90-280mm which is pretty sharp! A4 Version - Masquerade by dancook1982, on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted March 1, 2017 Share #193 Posted March 1, 2017 in other news my 50mm SL arrives tomorrow kudos to @jrp on the tip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 1, 2017 Share #194 Posted March 1, 2017 Have you ever added a Canon 50mm AF lens with Novoflex EOS AF adapter ? It is optically inferior, but gives you the versatility you mention. (EF 1.8/50 STM or EF 1.2/50). It is optically actually quite good, depends on your expectations. Or would you volunteer to test the Sigma Art 2/24-35 . It should work with the AF adapter - but nobody gives more info than that. It is "rather small" and has an interesting aperture. But I do not trust Sigma IQ (without a test). Thank you for the suggestion. I may just get around to trying that canon 50mm AF, though, so many have said that the Novoflex adapter is "hit or miss" with many Canon lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blacksinner Posted March 1, 2017 Share #195 Posted March 1, 2017 in other news my 50mm SL arrives tomorrow kudos to @jrp on the tip can't wait for you thought with SL 50 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 1, 2017 Share #196 Posted March 1, 2017 in other news my 50mm SL arrives tomorrow kudos to @jrp on the tip .... be interested to see what you make of it ...... Sammy ..... this afternoon @ 1.4 ..... 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/267776-please-convince-me-the-sl-5014-is-better-than-summilux/?do=findComment&comment=3224535'>More sharing options...
dancook Posted March 2, 2017 Share #197 Posted March 2, 2017 Received it and first impressions are, "i'm not sending it back" I won't bother posting any images until i've got something worthwhile Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 2, 2017 Share #198 Posted March 2, 2017 Received it and first impressions are, "i'm not sending it back" I won't bother posting any images until i've got something worthwhile Good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted March 2, 2017 Share #199 Posted March 2, 2017 Good that he's not posting more images or good that he's not sending it back? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 2, 2017 Share #200 Posted March 2, 2017 reassurance that I have not completely wasted my money on a heap of cr*p. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.