TL lenses on an SL

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There was a thread which I can't find on the first three pages, so I'll set this example loose by itself.  The question was "does it matter that I am using only 10 MPx out of the SL's 24 MPx sensor when I slap on a TL lens?" Since I usually save my keepers as 50% (6 MPx) jpegs, and the TL lenses have awesome resolution (MTF) specs, I was inclined to think it doesn't matter. 

 

But I tried a comparison between a macro shot using the whole SL sensor and one in which I used a TL lens to capture the same field of view, but only over the APS-C area of the chip.  Here's the whole picture (the back of a cereal box):

 

S1010312 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr using S120 macro ISO 200 f/2.5

 

Now a tiny section of the same picture, captured with the TL 11-23 @ 23mm:  (the words say "gluten-free corn flakes)

 

R1010489 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr ISO 200 f/4.5

 

The aliasing is because the lens is out-resolving the SL's chip, and the printing on the box has a very fine screen, which you can see better in this crop of the same area on the full chip image:

 

S1010311 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr ISO 200 f/4.0

 

This also served as a pretty good stress test for the 11-23, which is not often used for shooting at a distance of about 20 cm.

Edited November 16, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[Jared]

I have been using the Leica TL 18-56 on my SL as a "walk around" lens for quite a while and think it's a fantastic combo.  The focus is quick, the contrast is good, I get to use that viewfinder--oh, that viewfinder!  The lens makes the SL seem positively svelte.  What's not to like?  OK, so I wouldn't pick this combination for fine art work or for low light work or for portraiture.  But for watching the kids opening Christmas presents?  Or for walking around the city?  Or for almost any event where I just want to capture the moment with a little more consistency than I can get out of my iPhone?  It's great!  

 

We all get hung up on megapixels, and there are certainly situations where I would want more than ten.  But there aren't as many of them as one might think.  If I just want an image to fill my computer screen with good contrast, accurate colors, and sharp focus TL lenses on the SL work great.  I think your example shows that (despite the moire/aliasing issues).  That "whole picture" version looks fantastic to me.  Well, at least in terms of image quality.  Not suggesting it's the most compelling photograph I have ever seen.

 

Seriously, if the use of a TL lens is the difference between bringing your SL with you or leaving it at home with its big lens in favor of your cell phone... I think the choice is obvious.

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I have been using the Leica TL 18-56 on my SL as a "walk around" lens for quite a while and think it's a fantastic combo.  The focus is quick, the contrast is good, I get to use that viewfinder--oh, that viewfinder!  The lens makes the SL seem positively svelte.  What's not to like?  OK, so I wouldn't pick this combination for fine art work or for low light work or for portraiture.  But for watching the kids opening Christmas presents?  Or for walking around the city?  Or for almost any event where I just want to capture the moment with a little more consistency than I can get out of my iPhone?  It's great!  

 

We all get hung up on megapixels, and there are certainly situations where I would want more than ten.  But there aren't as many of them as one might think.  If I just want an image to fill my computer screen with good contrast, accurate colors, and sharp focus TL lenses on the SL work great.  I think your example shows that (despite the moire/aliasing issues).  That "whole picture" version looks fantastic to me.  Well, at least in terms of image quality.  Not suggesting it's the most compelling photograph I have ever seen.

 

Seriously, if the use of a TL lens is the difference between bringing your SL with you or leaving it at home with its big lens in favor of your cell phone... I think the choice is obvious.

Agree!  I showed the full frame from the S/SL combo, but I could have shown the APS-C shot as well.  They are indistinguishable on a 23" screen.  And both lenses easily out-resolve the SL's 6 micron pixels.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Too late to edit -- I posted several TL on SL shots over at GetDPI in the "Where's Jono?" thread recently.  Those lenses are currently available from many sources at decent prices, and Jono's cryptic comment was "now might be a fine time to get some of them."

[jankap]

Interesting, that the MTF data are also given for close focus distance.

I have only looked at R (and M) till now.

The 11-23 curves are very good, indeed.

Jan

[Big John]

Sorry if this is a sumo question but what is meant by the lens out resolving the sensor? Thanks.

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry if this is a sumo question but what is meant by the lens out resolving the sensor? Thanks.

Errr iPad autocorrect ....meant stupid question. Apols.

[Irakly Shanidze]

it means that the resolution of the lens is higher than of the sensor, and it is the sensor that becomes a bottleneck in faithfully rendering image detail. The thing is, beyond 24mp it does not really matter who outresolves who

[scott kirkpatrick]

.... The thing is, beyond 24mp it does not really matter who outresolves who

 

That has also been my experience.  Moire in architectural shots from fine grills seems to go away when I use a 39 MPx digital back and older Zeiss/Hasselblad lenses.  But I am sure one can find bigger sensors and sharper lenses adequate to create artifacts in carefully chosen scenes all the way up to 100 MPx.  It gets pretty scarce, however.