Jump to content

1.4x Extender for SL 90-280?


Dhuff

Recommended Posts

Just to build on a point made earlier, the Nikon 400mm f 2.8 is phenomenal in quality of the images, rapid autofocusing and a great viewfinder.  I love Leica, but think they would be wise to stay out of this ballpark.

 

 

Its certainly not easy for Leica to mach e.g. Nikon's high-end tele and af systems. And I guess Leica's long-lens market share would not be very large, keeping Leica's ambitions for long L-mout lenses low.

 

That being said, there are lots of situations where an L-mount 400mm or 500mm f4 with af and stabilisation, even not at Nikon/Canon standards, would be very useful. An L-mount 400mm f2.8 would also be interesting, apart from the size, weight and cost of such a lens...

 

Anyway, I have ended up with using a Nikon system for non-static and/or low-light wildlife, and Leica SL for pretty much the rest of photography I do. I would gladly sell the Nikon gear the day Leica offers long tele lenses with af and image stabilisation. But with the current SL lens road map, this will not happen any time soon. 

 

A compromise in the mean time could be 1.4x and 2.0x converters, possibly in combination with the cropped-sensor TL2 and the rumoured CL.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the SL and this lens, but it just doesn't have enough reach for sideline or surf sports photography.  Anyone heard whether Leica will produce a 1.4x extender?  Thanks.

I think thats a darn good question. I have been seriously thinking of getting the SL with a 90-280 as I'm planning a safari trip next year. The 280 is not quite enough reach, methinks, so an extender would be terrific. I've been using Leica for nigh on 30 years now so moving away to Canon or Nikon is unfathomable at this point but the extender would have made it an easy decision to jump onto the SL bandwagon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its certainly not easy for Leica to mach e.g. Nikon's high-end tele and af systems. And I guess Leica's long-lens market share would not be very large, keeping Leica's ambitions for long L-mout lenses low.

 

That being said, there are lots of situations where an L-mount 400mm or 500mm f4 with af and stabilisation, even not at Nikon/Canon standards, would be very useful. An L-mount 400mm f2.8 would also be interesting, apart from the size, weight and cost of such a lens...

 

Anyway, I have ended up with using a Nikon system for non-static and/or low-light wildlife, and Leica SL for pretty much the rest of photography I do. I would gladly sell the Nikon gear the day Leica offers long tele lenses with af and image stabilisation. But with the current SL lens road map, this will not happen any time soon. 

 

A compromise in the mean time could be 1.4x and 2.0x converters, possibly in combination with the cropped-sensor TL2 and the rumoured CL.

The Apo-Modular system still knocks all other brand telelenses hollow for image quality. The only thing they would need to do is build an AF and auto-aperture unit (and possibly O.I.S) into the two focusing modules.

Leica has the  expertise, the problem is the cost vs. sales ratio.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Yes, 280mm is hardly sufficient for those faraway shots.  

The only way to overcome it now is to set your camera to APS-C mode and that gives us 420mm/F4 albeit at 12MP instead of 24MP.

 

 

...or to use the CL (or TL).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd love to have an "APO-Extender-SL 1.4x" as well. That with the 90-280mm lens would cover anything I'll ever want, need, or use at the long end. 

 

Looking at this question of lenses historically, I look at the R system development history. The Leicaflex came out in 1963. The R3 came out around 1974. The first Leica extender came out around 1978 (can't find an exact date), the APO-Extender-R 1.4x in 1986. AND the Leicaflex mount was not compatible with any other SLR lens mount, really; the body was too deep. So we're doing pretty well with the SL using a wide range of excellent quality, useable, compatible lenses from the R, M, TL, and other brand cameras only two and a quarter years after the SL's introduction. 

 

The next round of SL lenses (the SL75 and SL90) are just being released now. Hopefully they'll get to a 1.4x extender within the next couple of years. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quite relevant history, but wouldn't you think that the 1.5X extension that the CL provides would keep Leica's planners feeling covered for now?  The CL has deficiencies as a studio camera, but the usual motivation for extenders is outdoors, shooting wildlife. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quite relevant history, but wouldn't you think that the 1.5X extension that the CL provides would keep Leica's planners feeling covered for now?  The CL has deficiencies as a studio camera, but the usual motivation for extenders is outdoors, shooting wildlife. 

 

 

Many people, myself included, don't really want to buy another camera body. Think about it: use the same controls, ergonomics, etc etc, and spend $1000 for an extender, or spend $3000 for a body and get a completely different set of ergonomics, controls, format, DoF characteristic, etc to learn and adapt to ... That doesn't make any sense at all, and I'm sure Leica is aware of that. 

 

When I considered buying the CL it was with the notion that it would replace the SL, not supplement it to get tighter FOVs, because the things I'm completely dependent on the SL for could be done well by the CL and it would be smaller for carrying. I'd get wider FOVs by using shorter lenses on it. But I already have the M-D for a smaller camera, and for the lenses that are useful on it for travel and most of my photography, there's not enough size difference between it and the CL to warrant the switch there. Plus I don't have to learn a different set of FoV/DoF couplings compared to the SL, etc. 

Edited by ramarren
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

P fully agree with ramarren.Moreover the effect of an 1,5 ply sensor is not equal to the effect of a

1,4 or 1,5 extender on a lens - in the first case it is practically a crop, in the second case a real

change of the focal length. And I am pretty sure, that with a good extender the picture quality on the SL would be better as on the CL and the ergonomics would be better on the SL, because of the

considerable weight of the lens. Therefore Leica should really work on a 1,4 or 1,5 ply extender,

even if the price would be not very lower as of the CL.And this item should have high priority.

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...