Jump to content

Wide M lens on the SL


Daedalus2000

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As I said, the sigma 'may be a good choice'. Sigma is promoting it for astrophotography, but bad coma would be a no go. We shall see. What would be your choice of  15mm for astrophotography?

 

These test-shots look promising, so yes, the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art could be the lens many are waiting for.

 

To your question: After multiple purchases, I ended up with one copy of Nikon 14-24mm f2.8G and one copy of Samyang 14mm f2.8 as my go-to astro lenses, without or with only slight tendency for coma.

 

The Canon 11-24mm f4 is reported to be a fine WA lens, but some coma and f4 reduces its versatility for astrophoto (I have no experiences with this lens). The 

 

The 'best' M lens I have tested regarding coma is the 28mm Lux. Coma is present, but it's not too bad. For 28mm astrophoto, I nevertheless pick the Otus. Essentially no coma and bitingly sharp wide open. A brilliant lens, with size, weight and cost on the downside...

 

And since this is an SL-thread: The SL 24-90 at 24mm and f2.8 is a very well corrected lens, essentially without coma. It easily beats the M-lenes I have/have tested at similar focal lengths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply
...

And since this is an SL-thread: The SL 24-90 at 24mm and f2.8 is a very well corrected lens, essentially without coma. It easily beats the M-lenes I have/have tested at similar focal lengths.

 

Thanks for your advice. This helps a lot, as I'm still looking for a good 15mm. I've been looking at the Zeiss ZM 2,8/15mm, outstanding build quality, light and compact and great for film-M's, but used with the SL, you get color smearing in the edges.

 

The quality of the standard SL Zoom is widely underestimated. But at 24mm the lens is a bit slow for astrophotography.

 

OT: Have you ever tried astrophotography-timelapse with the SL? My SL always switches off after a while, probably because the time consuming noisereduction-postshots overheats the nearly always-on sensor of the camera. You can't switch that feature off, do you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

OT: Have you ever tried astrophotography-timelapse with the SL? My SL always switches off after a while, probably because the time consuming noisereduction-postshots overheats the nearly always-on sensor of the camera. You can't switch that feature off, do you?

 

 

As of today, it is impossible to switch off the noise reduction on the SL. Hopefully we will have the option to use the camera without NR in a forthcoming FW. But as of today, the NR is always there.

 

I have not experienced problems with astro-timelapse as you mention. But my experience is limited to rather low temperatures, minus 20 degrees C, typically, and I usually don't shoot long series of photos either. 

 

I really like the SL, but the default noise reduction feature is not among my favourites...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Elmarit-R 24mm f/2.8 was one of my standard lenses on the SL until my recent equipment swap around (to get the SL90-280). It's an excellent lens and fits the SL beautifully. I had the Elmar-M f/3.8 ASPH too and compared it to the Elmarit-R 24mm and found the R lens to be a superior performer on the SL. 

 

Nowadays, when I want 24-50mm focal lengths, I use the SL24-90. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience with the CV 15mm/f4.5 Mk.2 with both SL and M240 has been poor. Significant Italian flag and vignetting, much worse than on M9. The 18mm SEM is great on both SL and M240, I presume because it is a retrofocal lens with the lens exit pupil, a considerable distance from the sensor. Will I keep the 18SEM after I get the 16-35 Vario Elmarit?Probably not but part-ex it for the new SL zoom. 

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really enjoying my 21mm Summilux-M on the SL.  Here is a shot taken last Friday from Glacier Point in Yosemite National Park right at dawn.  Half Dome is the central peak in the middle with the sun just coming out.  Nevada falls are to the right and Mirror Lake is on the far left.

 

Thanks - Jared

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

Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

21mm SEM.........love this little lens

 

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

Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

Another in favour for the 21mm SEM

 

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

Wide open, I am disappointed on the corner IQ for my 18SEM (compared to the 21SEM) on my SL, but closed down to f/8, the corners pick up nicely. The center area on the 18SEM is very sharp from the widest aperture. I also have a hard time finding comments about the 18SEM on the SL. I seem to recall some reports in general describing poorer edge/corner performance with the SL compared to the 240 on super wide lenses (but above comments about CV15 do not seem to indicate any disappointment there). My 21 SEM and 21 LUX are both great on the SL, so not sure if it is my newly acquired (used, excellent condition) 18SEM, or if that is to be expected. The Leica MTF plots don't indicate large falloff in IQ towards the edge/corners. I plan to try it with film soon on an MP and I am sure it will seem much better (but I believe this lens was designed for flat digital sensor). I would appreciate any comments about the 18SEM on the SL also (to indicate if this performance is to be expected, or if I have a poor copy; this is the only current Leica lens I have that I have been a bit disappointed in). I have searched the achieves with little success.  

Regards,

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this is an SL-Thread, the quote "it does not focus close enough" deserves some scrutiny.

 
The WATE turns past the focus point of 0.7 cm to a close 5 cm.
While not "focusable' in the strict sense of the word, on an SL it is eminently useable with focus-peaking. 
 
Quote from Leica Camera.com:
 
 

 

Brilliant depth of field can therefore be used from a distance of 0.33m for hyperfocal photography.

 

Many users prefer WATE, but if I would go for a lens wider than 21mm, e.g. 16mm, the WATE would not be my choice, it does not focus close enough and is too slow.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just a quick note on the Sigma 14mm f1.8 ART (Nikon mount): I have returned the lens; the corners/edges were way too soft wide open. Tested for mid-distance landscape (500-1500 m away) on Leica SL and Nikon D5. There are both highly positive and somewhat negative reports on the net - so it appears that the quality control could have been better.

 

Very high resolution & micro contrast in the central part - covering perhaps 60-70 percent of the frame. So if good versions of the lens show (somewhat) similar quality towards the edges/corners - the lens can be superb. Nice colour rendering as far as I could tell. But I got, for sure, a no-go copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a follow-up to the above post: Three copies of the Sigma 14mm f1.8 ART are now tested (all in Nikon mount). None show acceptable sharpness in the 30 percent (or so) outer part of image at f1.8. So this lens is a no-go lens for me. Tested on tripod on SL and FF Nikon, so I am quite confident in the results. Particularly since Nikon 14-28 f2.8G shows fine sharpness across the image for the same test.  :mellow: .

 

[A side note: A really splendid WA lens on SL is the Leica 24mm f3.5 Super-Elmar-S ASPH, giving 19mm on the SL. Brilliantly sharp from f3.5. Ok, its not f1.8 and it is only an option for those using the S-system, but the sharpness is nevertheless worth a comment...].

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a follow-up to the above post: Three copies of the Sigma 14mm f1.8 ART are now tested (all in Nikon mount). None show acceptable sharpness in the 30 percent (or so) outer part of image at f1.8. So this lens is a no-go lens for me. Tested on tripod on SL and FF Nikon, so I am quite confident in the results. Particularly since Nikon 14-28 f2.8G shows fine sharpness across the image for the same test.  :mellow: .

 

[A side note: A really splendid WA lens on SL is the Leica 24mm f3.5 Super-Elmar-S ASPH, giving 19mm on the SL. Brilliantly sharp from f3.5. Ok, its not f1.8 and it is only an option for those using the S-system, but the sharpness is nevertheless worth a comment...].

 

Thank you for the info. But why do you say the 24mm S lens is 19mm on the SL? It is a 24mm, so it should give the field of view of 24mm on the SL and 19mm on the S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 21 2.8 Elmarit is the older model and is doing a good enough job for me so far.

 

35927840165_3298a99efb_b.jpg

 

35757606982_dc88032461_b.jpg

 

 

Indeed, the 21 Elmarit pre asph fares well on the SL

 

32468133135_94e0f3d745_h.jpg

Cidade das Artes, Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro by JM__, on Flickr

 

33359888240_0c76205ec2_h.jpg

il était une ferme by JM__, on Flickr

 

and the very early version allows close focussing down to 40 cm .

Link to post
Share on other sites

SL+Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 v3

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...