sillbeers15 Posted September 7, 2017 Share #21 Posted September 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is a frequent comment that SL native zooms are 'big and bulky','I have no need for AF'. All sounds reasonable without much consideration. Once I was planning to bring along my camera for my business trip on very limited baggage. It was a decision I had to make between bring my SL + 24-90 or M240 + 21lux,35lux,90con. Weight & bulk wise my M system would not be less than my SL with one zoom. The final decision came with consideration that I would not have to change lenses during not so friendly weather conditions plus my SL with native zooms are more weather resistant than with M lenses. In reality, the SL+zoom is not as bulky to me comparing to M with primes. Rather it is the enjoyment that I receive more bringing along and using my M10 (replaced my M240 since) with m primes over my SL with zoom when I can afford the leasure to do so on holiday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 7, 2017 Posted September 7, 2017 Hi sillbeers15, Take a look here 24-90mm or 90-280mm?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
darylgo Posted September 7, 2017 Share #22 Posted September 7, 2017 Buy the 90-280, it is a lifetime purchase that fills a gap nicely in the current Leica lineup. For many years I have wanted to purchase a 280/4 Apo but their local availability has been zero. The 90-280 is state of the art, optically in a league of it's own (for a zoom) and should be a lifetime lens. Leica hit a home run with this lens. Btw- the 16-35mm will be the next zoom with announcement next year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share #23 Posted September 7, 2017 >> Btw- the 16-35mm will be the next zoom with announcement next year. Ouch, it hurts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted September 7, 2017 Share #24 Posted September 7, 2017 24-90mm is in a way redandent to my M primes. It implies, effectively, I am going to struggle to part with my beloved good old M primes. This was and likely continue to be my major used focal range. Getting 90-280 would be simpler. But I am jot sure how useful it will be. Will it be mostly for wild life only? Very often I wish I had a wonderful super tele for bird or animal watching, which I never did. But after thinking the expensive super tele lens, the heavy tripod, the camerouge clothes and face painting, I becane reluctant. Only the recent viewing on the Iceland pictures makes me wanting the 90-280. What I am looking for is the advise how likely this enthusiatic of wanting the bird/snimal watch would last. How many of you tried it then find it is not as fun as you think and quit in the end. Or, what is the other more normal usage of 90-280 other than go wildness? The 90-280 is not a super-tele. It is actually often too short for small sorts of wildlife. As you had on the old SLRs a 70-210 to go everywhere, it is exactly that for me. But it is of much higher quality and with OIS you have hardly any misses (mostly keepers). I use 90 mm or 135 or around that very often - and this lens gives you a very short distance to the subject (0.6m). That is exactly what I need and this is the first lens that delivers that at optimal quality. If you take photos mainly for fun, go for the smaller SL 90. But for "serious fun" the 90-280 can make your day. For me it is the most useful lens on the SL. The 90-280 is for the fun seeing/getting the results, not for the fun of shooting. By the way, that is exactly what happened with the 24-90. First I thought what a wonderful lens giving me everything in one go. Then I thought how unwieldy it is compared to my R and M and Contax lenses. Then I simply had enough of it. So the 24-90 is also no fun lens. For fun buy the Summicron primes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fang Posted September 7, 2017 Share #25 Posted September 7, 2017 If you ask me before I have purchased the SL, 24-90 and 90-280. I would say go for the 90-280 since I have most of the Leica M lens that covers the range of 28-90. After using the SL with both the 24-90 and 90-280; I found that I hardly use the 90-280 SL lens, most of the time the 90-280 SL lens was in my backpack together with my Leica M240 fixed to a 35 mm Summilux. I would recommend that you get the 24-90 mm. There are circumstances (seldom with my style of photography) whereby there is a need for the 90-280 mm lens, so I would recommend that you get the 90-280 mm lens for completeness. I am waiting for Leica or a third party to produce a 2x extender so that I can use my 90-280 mm for wild life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fang Posted September 13, 2017 Share #26 Posted September 13, 2017 I am waiting for Leica or a third party to produce a 2x extender so that I can use my 90-280 mm for wild life. Silly me.....it just came to me that all I have to do is to buy the Leica T2 and I am within range for wild life !!! Interesting........worth considering.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 13, 2017 Share #27 Posted September 13, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Silly me.....it just came to me that all I have to do is to buy the Leica T2 and I am within range for wild life !!! Interesting........worth considering.... Or you can save money and crop in post for similar effect. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted September 13, 2017 Share #28 Posted September 13, 2017 Or you can save money and crop in post for similar effect. Jeff The T2's sensor has higher pixel density than the SL so cropping will not yield a similar effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted September 13, 2017 Share #29 Posted September 13, 2017 Is OIS available with the TL2 and 90-280 combination? Focus speed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 13, 2017 Share #30 Posted September 13, 2017 The T2's sensor has higher pixel density than the SL so cropping will not yield a similar effect. Hence the term "similar", not "same". Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 13, 2017 Share #31 Posted September 13, 2017 Is OIS available with the TL2 and 90-280 combination? Focus speed? Yes, OIS is available. Haven't noticed any particular difference in focus speed - I'm sure someone will measure it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted September 14, 2017 Share #32 Posted September 14, 2017 Hence the term "similar", not "same". Jeff 'Similar' is subjective. With a lens as sharp as the 90-280 APO the TL2's higher pixel density will reveal more retails and reduce aliasing and moire when compared with a cropped photo made with the SL. I don't consider these to be similar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 14, 2017 Share #33 Posted September 14, 2017 Doug, your needs are very specific. I suspect that my needs could be covered well with either approach, particularly when taking into account myriad processing variables in my print workflow. As you note, subjective.... as with most picture rendering discussions, especially when comparing different gear. Whatever works. I always recommend that people make their own tests and decisions, as you do. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.