Jump to content
eraydinc

Feel like a full frame. 11-23 TL with CL

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think it's pretty obvious the OP just meant that with an ultra wide angle zoom on the CL he doesn't feel constrained by the crop factor and that IQ is good enough he doesn't miss full frame.

 

 

If it was obvious I would't have asked the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was obvious I would't have asked the question.

Everybody knows different between FF and apsc. But some FF lovers always attacker to smaller sensor users, I don't know why

I always say, apsc has lots of advantages to full frame. We don't need bigger or giant sensors. Because there are two things: Experience(compact, portable, carrying with small bags, motivative) and results (Good picture (not image quality) Thats all [emoji4]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody knows different between FF and apsc. But some FF lovers always attacker to smaller sensor users, I don't know why

I always say, apsc has lots of advantages to full frame. We don't need bigger or giant sensors. Because there are two things: Experience(compact, portable, carrying with small bags, motivative) and results (Good picture (not image quality) Thats all [emoji4]

 

I fully agree with you. APSC is more than good enough. FF sensors were the goal to allow users to switch from 35mm systems without 'losing' any of their lenses, and the fact that most of us still think in terms of FF focal lengths. 

 

Nikon and Canon offer 'pro' spec APSC bodies but they're limited by the lenses, the best being made for FF. I have said before, Leica could do something unique with APSC ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

I have said before, Leica could do something unique with APSC ....

 

I think they are.  They are IMO just doing it at an excruciatingly slow pace... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's repurpose this slightly into a "show what the 11-23 can do" thread.  I carry it when the scenes range from wide to very wide with some closeups mixed in.  (I.e., the 23 can't do it all.)  I spent some time today catching up with wildflowers in the wild, and used the full range of the lens.  Once the weather turns nice, all of Israel reports to the nearest park in the hills where wildflowers are reported in bloom. Fortunately, 95% of Israel stays close to the car, sets up chairs for the grandparents and toys for the kids, then lights the barbecue:

 

C1010486 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 11 mm @f/4.0

 

But the trail leads past signs of ancient settlement

 

C1010496 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 22 mm f/4.4 

 

to woods filled with rakefot (local name for a favorite local flower, which looks like a columbine) 

 

C1010532 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 14 mm f/5.6

 

In open areas, signs of last summer's fires are giving way to new green growth:

 

C1010558 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 11 mm

 

and the almond trees share the open hills with spreads of cactus:

 

C1010607 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 14 mm

 

There's more in a family album at https://www.flickr.com/gp/133969392@N05/K58C99 , plus dog pix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quite agree. Focal length is a property of the lens, not of the sensor I wish people would stop using these confused equivalences and start learning the properties of the system.

 

 

But you've used the 'equivalence' argument yourself jaap … and on more than one occasion …

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269711-discussing-leica-lenses-on-micro-43rds/?p=3221830

 

… it's common practice and useful when comparing lenses

 

dunk 

Edited by dkCambridgeshire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you've used the 'equivalence' argument yourself jaap … and on more than one occasion … [...]

 

As long as he doesn't use the equivalence argument about apertures all is not lost for jaapv

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you've used the 'equivalence' argument yourself jaap … and on more than one occasion …

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269711-discussing-leica-lenses-on-micro-43rds/?p=3221830

 

… it's common practice and useful when comparing lenses

 

dunk 

Yes, I do, for comparison purposes. Even Leica does (the Digilux 2 is marked in equivalences). But I draw the line at people thinking that their 50 mm lens has miraculously turned into a 75 mm lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully agree with you. APSC is more than good enough. FF sensors were the goal to allow users to switch from 35mm systems without 'losing' any of their lenses, and the fact that most of us still think in terms of FF focal lengths. 

 

Nikon and Canon offer 'pro' spec APSC bodies but they're limited by the lenses, the best being made for FF. I have said before, Leica could do something unique with APSC ....

 

 

 

Leica already did … with the X Vario

… Great camera!!  … With a fantastic lens acknowledged by 'those who've used it' to be one of the finest optics that Leica has ever designed … But unfortunately some people failed to recognise this fact. 

 

dunk 

Edited by dkCambridgeshire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CL with a 35mm f1.4 and the 11-23mm is a wonderful combination.  Have fun!!

Totally agree. I have the exact fun. I will also add summarit-M 35/2.4 a very tiny lens, a perfect companion to CL for day time shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Just re-rented CL w/11-23 and M adapter for my 25 Snapshot Skopar & Rokkor 90/4.

I think I know what's gonna happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am talking about ‘’feeling’’ not cropping. Firstly this is a APSC-system lens. So that’s pure 16-35mm. Name is 11-23 because of some system solutions... 11-23 TL’s optical language is so widely perspective line of corner, ultra wide angle without deformation. That totally means: You don’t have to walk a few steps back when you shoot wide pictures with 11-23 T

Tapatalk kullanarak iPad aracılığıyla gönderildi

I agree, 11-23 is 16-35 equivalence and gives the same feel

It’s important to convert to a standard that everyone understands, in this case FF, to understand the view

DOF is difference and people can do the maths in their head.

 

I guess the best thing to say is the 11-23 f3.5-4.5 is equivalent to 16-35mm f5.25-6.75

 

BTW this is an amazing lens and IMHO the best urban walk around on the CL/TL

 

Rgds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2018 at 3:27 AM, Alistairm said:

I think it's pretty obvious the OP just meant that with an ultra wide angle zoom on the CL he doesn't feel constrained by the crop factor and that IQ is good enough he doesn't miss full frame.

I think it is also reasonably obvious that everyone posting in the thread understands his intent, even if you disagree with his nomenclature. But then again, I'm also a newbie here so didn't feel the need to "welcome" him with the old fashioned boarding school roll in the urinal.

Maybe take it a bit easy on a new member who pops in, posts some photos and celebrates his Leica gear... unless you don't actually want any new forum members.

3

Love your attitude. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am 28.1.2018 um 01:06 schrieb jaapv:

Quite agree. Focal length is a property of the lens, not of the sensor I wish people would stop using these confused equivalences and start learning the properties of the system.

Well, I can not agree to this. I think that all the problems and confusions come from the fact that focal length might be an outdated measurement. It would be more usefull to speak about angle of view insted. And like that we would all speak of the same thing regardless the size of the sensor. And because we do not have that we have after all to understand what a lens does. Anf for that it is usefull to speak about 35mm equivalence.

I know that this brings up a bunch of emotions. The next point would be the equivalence of aperture . . . Here too the would be much better metrics than the f/xx. 

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...