SL 90-280 image stabilization rocks!

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I sold off a good bit of gear, including both of my long R telephoto lenses, to acquire the APO-Vario-Elmarit-SL 90-280 lens with the notion that its image stabilization would net more usage and better results for me than the long R lenses did. I haven't yet made any exposures worth of the name "photograph" with it, I'm still just experimenting to learn it and become accustomed to its size and weight. 

 

I remain astonished with how effective the image stabilization actually is! 

 

The following is a simple, casually made hand-held test snap at 1/50 second - image data directly out of camera as JPEGs. 

 

 

 

Full frame downsized to 1200x800, above. 

100% detail @ 1200x800 pixels, below

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leica SL + APO-Vario-Elmarit-SL 90-280mm f/2.8-f/4 

ISO 3200 + f/4 + 1/50 sec, hand-held

 

JPEG directly out of camera. IPTC data added with LR6.9.

Click either image to download full resolution image.

 

To be clear, that exposure is about six times longer than I would even consider shooting a non-stabilized 280mm telephoto at, and likely 12x longer than I actually would. I find its detailing and lack of camera motion absolutely remarkable for that long a hand-held exposure. This is exactly what I was hoping for... so I'm pretty darn pleased. Not to mention that the lens is otherwise a light-year ahead of my old R lenses with respect to overall performance from wide-open to f/16.  

[thighslapper]

yup ..... I've got plenty of perfect shots using 1/25 sec at 280mm. 

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I've left the auto ISO-imposed minimum shutter speed at 1/f, but I've gotten lots of nice stuff at 280 mm, handheld @ 1/250, because the higher ISOs on the SL are quite reliable.  Her's one that I haven't posted:

 

R1000290 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

 

I'm holding on to my 180/2.8 and 280/4, because I can use 1.4X and 2.0 X extenders with them.

 

scott 

Edited March 19, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[ramarren]

I've held onto my Elmar-R 180/4 because it's very small and very light, and I can use the 2x Extender-R with it too. The result is pretty slow, but produces good results.

 

Just finished a half hour walk in the park carrying just the SL+SL90-280. It certainly is a big and heavy thing to walk with, but at least I don't also need to carry a tripod every time.

 

I'll take a look at the exposures when I get home. Need to relax now for a little bit and catch my breath.

[Chaemono]

I took it out yesterday and was reminded of this, again. Not quite as impressive as the OP's handheld 280 mm @1/50 sec. picture above but the first one of a round yellow valve handle, that I posted in the image thread, is a handheld 90 mm @1/25 sec. shot. Less compressed JPEGs can be found here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-r7LspX/

[Guest VVJ]

I remain astonished with how effective the image stabilization actually is! 

 

+1.  And mind-boggling that also on this forum a lot of people keep on questioning its usefulness

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

+1.  And mind-boggling that also on this forum a lot of people keep on questioning its usefulness

+1

[helged]

Just finished a half hour walk in the park carrying just the SL+SL90-280. It certainly is a big and heavy thing to walk with, but at least I don't also need to carry a tripod every time.

 

For carrying the SL + 90-280, I have good experience with Magpul strap or corresponding, but more comfortable, Black Rapid straps. I use this type of strap system for the S, or when outing with Nikon with large lenses. Two bodies with large/heavy lenses can be carried simultaneously. Nothing I would do in a city  ​ , but something I often do in the field.

[Steve McGarrett]

JorisV, on 11 Feb 2018 - 14:16, said:

+1.  And mind-boggling that also on this forum a lot of people keep on questioning its usefulness

 

True, but to me it's even more mind-blogging that a lot of people question about (hypothetical) IBIS usefulness on "SL2"...

[ramarren]

To each their own.

 

IBIS provides a different set of plusses and minuses, and the lenses I want stabilized have stabilization in them already. It would be good to have it ... if it didn't potentially hurt image quality, sensor thermal stability, mechanical durability, cost of service, likelihood of body failure, etc etc. 

 

I also am not sure I even want an SL2, with all the feature creep that people on the forum want to stuff into it. The SL already has more than I use, why want more?

[Steve McGarrett]

Neither do I (not sure about wanting an SL2, I mean, I've just bought an SL... I'm fine for now)

 

But as Leica will do an SL2 sooner or later, then I think it would be better they do it with IBIS.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Steve McGarrett

[hkgmatt]

I also am not sure I even want an SL2, with all the feature creep that people on the forum want to stuff into it. The SL already has more than I use, why want more?

 

+1. The SL is such a lovely camera that even in the second year of ownership I have not discovered any limitations to my style of photography - on the contrary, I keep discovering more aspects of the camera that delight me. I am in no hurry for an SL2.

[ramarren]

I'm willing to wait and see what Leica decides should be the next version of the SL and then I'll decide whether I'm interested in it. Right now, I'm inclined against buying anything newer simply because I hardly use all of what I have already, and it is in no danger of becoming less than what it is. 

 

If they can do an in-body stabilization that does not compromise the functionality of the camera, as I put forth in my prior post, sure.