Jump to content

Finally for me, the search is over (lens)


Marac

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own the SL, great camera as you all know.

I have always wanted a camera & 1 lens that was tight enough and gave me the quality and range I like to use that is also light to carry (i'm getting old)

 

I tried the various M lenses but ended up with 4 lenses and needing a bag to carry them in etc. So I thought, and decided to sell 3 of M lenses (keeping the summilux 50) and I got myself the SL vario elmar 24-90, WOW, great lens for IQ, too bulky, too heavy, too unbalanced, for me.

 

So I traded it back for a Leica Q. perfect, brilliant little camera, use it A LOT. But what about the SL sitting there with the Lux 50 looking gorgeous but also not getting used a great deal.... hmmmm, sell it? NO! 

 

Today I picked up a very reasonably priced Tri-Elmar E55 28/35/50 ... Yes I know and have read of it's 'problems' and maybe in time I will encounter one or two of them, but for now, THIS is the lens I have been looking for as a travel companion for my SL. The Summilux fits nicely in my pocket and the SL around my neck with the MATE is perfect for me.

 

Some have knocked the IQ of this lens and the first thing I checked was the washy contrast issue (thanks jono) all perfect the locking issue at 28mm coming back, no problem. The flare at 50mm, well, I don't consider that will be an issue for me, really.

 

Does anyone else here have the same combination? would be nice to get a few other opinions.

 

Actually, I should test it on my M8 too now its been converted to IR.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The MATE is a perfectly serviceable little lens with good but unspectacular performance. 

 

The only real issue is f4 ...... but if you have the 50/1.4 handy it bypasses most of that issue. 

 

I have used it on the SL but it is a bit clunky for a general snapping lens. It is however a wonder of opto-mechanical engineering and a good copy is a delight to play with from time to time. :)  

 

Personally I would still prefer to carry 1 lens with the extra 400g and benefit from AF/OIS and the extra range of the 24-90.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Tri-Elmar for events. It is an excellent performer at 5.6 -- which is fine for flash or the lovely overcast skies of Seattle.  I use it on both an M246 and SL.  Perhaps it isn't the perfect lens but it is perfect for what it is.

 

Regards,

Dean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks guys, I'm quite happy using 28/35/50 for now. I do still have an R adapter and the R 250mm ver II if I ever do need some serious reach but its a heavy lens.

 

I have a problematic back and now, lucky me, I have a frozen shoulder too hence the need for a light tight system. I enjoy street photography and also landscape so this little kit will do nicely for me now.

 

When I was younger and a lot fitter I remember carrying a ton of stuff up mountains and through valleys deep, sadly those days are long gone.

 

I know the lens isn't perfect but it is for me right now, I'm happy with the IQ, the size/weight, & also the fact that the SL is getting used a lot more now.

 

I have never used the crop mode, apparently it produces a cropped jpg to slot 2 and the raw in slot 1 remains full image? this could be handy while travelling to send the jpg to my phone for instant gratification. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

And why not use the TL 18-56 zoom? It is light, small (relatively) and cover a large part of your prefered range?

 

When space for tools is restricted, I use this combination with pleasure.

 

... err .... why not just get a TL2 then you can use this lens at 24mp and benefit from even more reduction in size and weight? 

 

A TL2 is an excellent SL back-up body for travel and a useful option if you want to travel very light..... which is precisely why I added one to my arsenal. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you're right. But I was replying to OP : one SL and one "lens".. ;)  I owned the T since its birth and got several TL lenses and recently bought a SL but couldn't afford the price and the weight of any SL lens, so my take. BTW I am rather satisfied with the results of the SL as an APS-C device :D . For the rest I use my (sometimes old and very old!) M lenses.

Have good pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What advantage would an SL camera have over a T type camera as an APS device considering the considerable bulk disadvantage?

Ergonomics. Dual SD cards. EVF quality. GPS.

 

Everything that makes the SL body special is why I would prefer it to a TL body. The only disadvantage (and one too large for me to bother using it with TL lenses) is the resolution of the cropped images.

 

The SL body is not too heavy for me with M lenses so I don’t see why TL lenses would be an issue.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

One camera, one lens for me with the SL is the SL body fitted with the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8. Fast enough, outstanding sharpness and bokeh, down to 1:2 magnification, and light weight. I like the "long normal" focal length too. It's what's usually on my SL these days as a default. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...