Vario-Elmarit-SL 90-280 or Telyrt-R 280/1.4?

[relms]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you, everyone, for your valuable input.  This is not any easy decision, but the majority of you have swayed me toward the 90-280.  However, it is no easy task to divert my attention away from the 280.   Set on a tripod, with a remote release, it renders images that are incredible.  Vieri, your comment about the optical quality of the two lenses under consideration being equal is encouraging.    

 

The main attraction I have for the 90-280 is the stabilization, a feature that becomes all the more important as focal length increases.  I recall back in my former Canon life, although I had half a dozen or more lenses, I shot 70-75% of the time with the stabilized Canon 70-200 (Version 1), and the hit rate with that lens, almost always hand-held, was impressive.  I like the option of using extenders with the 280, but then stabilization would become even more important.  Of course,  I suppose I could attach the 280 to a Sony a7xx, but I prefer to stick with a Leica body.

 

I am leaning toward the 90-280 on the SL, with a TL2 pulling double duty as a back up camera and extender when I need it.

 

Robert

[Advertisement]

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

[Lazytiger]

The OIS is incredibly effective. Still can't believe my eyes how steady the picture is at 280mm in APSC mode, even with 5x EVF magnification, equalling something like 2000mm.

 

The only criticism in this thread comes from someone with a very specific demand, which of course is to be respected, but does not affect photography outside of the area he describes. I fear that if his wishes would be adressed, the general performance would suffer.

[wildlightphoto]

The OIS is incredibly effective. Still can't believe my eyes how steady the picture is at 280mm in APSC mode, even with 5x EVF magnification, equalling something like 2000mm.

 

The only criticism in this thread comes from someone with a very specific demand, which of course is to be respected, but does not affect photography outside of the area he describes. I fear that if his wishes would be adressed, the general performance would suffer.

 

 

Performance need not suffer if the OIS firmware allowed the user to modify the system's response to certain types of camera motion.  As it is the OIS system makes assumptions about low-frequency motions and adjusts accordingly; leave that option in the system for those who prefer it, give other users additional options.  I don't see how this would make performance suffer.

[Lazytiger]

Performance need not suffer if the OIS firmware allowed the user to modify the system's response to certain types of camera motion. As it is the OIS system makes assumptions about low-frequency motions and adjusts accordingly; leave that option in the system for those who prefer it, give other users additional options. I don't see how this would make performance suffer.

Good point. Could be a menu option. Guess it's way down on some list at Panasonic...

[MRJohn]

Back to the lenses, I would definitely get the 90-280mm. The only thing that would make me choose the 280mm f/4 is if you wanted to use extenders with it. About stabilisation, If you don't like or don't need the OIS for your kind of shooting, just turn it off and the zoom will behave the same as the 280mm - but you'll still have one of the best AF for a long zoom around. Physically, both lenses are the same size once you factor in the adapter, and the zoom is actually lighter (ever so slightly). Optically the zoom is as good as the 280mm. So, unless you really need to use an extender, it would be a no-brainer for me

 

Best regards,

 

Vieri

 

I happen to have both (= no brain  ) and rationally I agree with you. The reason why I can't part with the 280 is the fact that I know there are sometimes challenging situations with the 90-280. Those are very low light or complex, fast moving subjects (e.g. a pool of people). So the 90-280 performs well in these situations, especially after the last FW update. But it sometimes misses. I tend to be more forgiving if I blame it on me (manual focus with the 280) vs the AF misses the focus, then I get mad at the SL and the 90-280. Granted, an emotional answer, irrational and unprofessional. The other reason to keep the 280 (and maybe a reason to prioritise a purchase) is that I think it works quite well on a digital M. I do not have one at the moment, waiting for one with a build-in EVF and this might make me sell the SL again. But then I would still have the 280 (which are sometimes hard to find at a reasonable price). But such an evfM might never happen. - If you (relms) are happy with the SL concept, believe in its future, are not nostalgic, then I would recommend to get the 90-280. 

[relms]

I happen to have both (= no brain  ) and rationally I agree with you. The reason why I can't part with the 280 is the fact that I know there are sometimes challenging situations with the 90-280. Those are very low light or complex, fast moving subjects (e.g. a pool of people). So the 90-280 performs well in these situations, especially after the last FW update. But it sometimes misses. I tend to be more forgiving if I blame it on me (manual focus with the 280) vs the AF misses the focus, then I get mad at the SL and the 90-280. Granted, an emotional answer, irrational and unprofessional. The other reason to keep the 280 (and maybe a reason to prioritise a purchase) is that I think it works quite well on a digital M. I do not have one at the moment, waiting for one with a build-in EVF and this might make me sell the SL again. But then I would still have the 280 (which are sometimes hard to find at a reasonable price). But such an evfM might never happen. - If you (relms) are happy with the SL concept, believe in its future, are not nostalgic, then I would recommend to get the 90-280. 

 

I admit to being a bit nostalgic, but not enough to tip the scale in favor of the 280 when I consider all the advantages that come with the 90-280, specifically auto focus and stabilization.  I would love to have both, but my brain wins the argument over my heart in this case.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both, and am always a bit skeptical of lens comparisons not done by me.  (For example, I found the 21-35 R, although quite lovely, doesn't measure up to the 28 Summilux M, despite firm claims to the contrary.)  So I'll see what I can find out at the 90 and 280 ends of the range sometime soon.  But given the size of these "bazookas,"  the critical test picture will have to be shot within 100' of the car.