John Z. Goriup Posted March 31, 2018 Share #41 Posted March 31, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'll definitely be buying the 16-35 for landscape work, now that I've completed my move to Idaho, with a whole new caleidoscope of scenery beckoning. The only thing I'm not certain about is whether I'll keep my beloved and treasured 21mm f3.4 SEM. I will be doing some serious comparisons between the two lenses to be absolutely positive that the new SL zoom can match the performance of the 21mm optic - personally, I doubt any lens of similar focal length can exceed it's performance. If it cannot, then I'll keep the Super-Elmar and confine use of the 16-35 to focal lengths shorter than the 21mm M lens.................another thought - three SL zooms in one Billingham bag is going to be a Hell of a load to schlepp around. JZG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 31, 2018 Posted March 31, 2018 Hi John Z. Goriup, Take a look here So, who's buying the 16-35mm?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sillbeers15 Posted April 1, 2018 Share #42 Posted April 1, 2018 https://leicarumors.com .....says coming 9th April 2018. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 1, 2018 Share #43 Posted April 1, 2018 Obs, that's in the territory of the 90-280 lens, weight-wise (ok, it's April 1st, but still...). Roughly 40% heavier than the SL 24-90, if the spec is accurate. By comparison, the Canon 16-35 is a bit lighter than the Canon 24-70. I anticipated the 2 shorter SL zooms to be similarly close to each other weight-wise, despite the 90mm reach of the middle zoom, which has added OIS. That’s about 10 lbs for the 3 SL zooms. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted April 1, 2018 Share #44 Posted April 1, 2018 Well, I tried my SIgma 12-24 again today. Hadn't used it since the 3.1 update. It's early but it seems much improved with the Novoflex adaptor. SO if I need it it's available. Sure the SL will probably be better but the Sigma is no slouch and a better range. Gordon 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 1, 2018 Share #45 Posted April 1, 2018 I am buying for sure, can't wait, would be my lens most on the SL for sure. Most likely trade in the 24-90 or WATE for it, will give 2 stops extra over WATE (due to M adaptor on SL loosing more light), great to be able to go to 35mm and also be able to use on the CL. I just really hope it is a little lighter than the 24-90... I do a lot of landscape work and now always leave the house with 24-90 and WATE. Most likely I can now go out with just the 16-35 en maybe the CL and the 60mm lens. Is it April yet? Maciel, the M adaptor on the SL doesn't lose any light - it's just a metal tube, no optics. 1.6KG... that is on the heavy side..: https://leicarumors.com/2018/03/31/leica-super-vario-elmar-sl-16-35mm-f-3-5-4-5-asph-lens-to-be-announced-in-a-week.aspx/ On a positive note, good that it is finally to be announced shortly. I expected it to get delayed further. Joris, while I think April 9 sounds like a possibile date for announcement, I think Leicarumors might be wrong about weight: considering that the 24-90mm is 1.14 kg, the 90-280mm is 1.85 kg, and that the 16-35mm is smaller than the 24-90mm, I doubt that the 16-35mm will be 1.6 kg... Best regards, Vieri 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted April 1, 2018 Share #46 Posted April 1, 2018 (edited) Joris, while I think April 9 sounds like a possibile date for announcement, I think Leicarumors might be wrong about weight: considering that the 24-90mm is 1.14 kg, the 90-280mm is 1.85 kg, and that the 16-35mm is smaller than the 24-90mm, I doubt that the 16-35mm will be 1.6 kg... Best regards, Vieri ...or the 16-35 is (almost) nothing but glass. Holding the 50APO-M in the hand, I am always remenbered of its small size and the relatively substantial weight. Lots of glass... Edited April 1, 2018 by helged Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 1, 2018 Share #47 Posted April 1, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...or the 16-35 is (almost) nothing but glass. Holding the 50APO-M in the hand, I am always remenbered of its small size and thecæ relatively substantial weight. Lots of glass... Yes, but if you held the 24-90mm and the 90-280mm, you'll see that they are all metal bodies, almost nothing but glass as well. And the 16-35mm is smaller than the 24-90mm, hence my doubts... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedro Posted April 1, 2018 Share #48 Posted April 1, 2018 And doubts about the Vegan M10? https://leicarumors.com/2018/04/01/coming-soon-leica-m10-vegan-limited-edition-camera.aspx/ It's April 1st after all .. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bencychin Posted April 1, 2018 Share #49 Posted April 1, 2018 And doubts about the Vegan M10? https://leicarumors.com/2018/04/01/coming-soon-leica-m10-vegan-limited-edition-camera.aspx/ It's April 1st after all .. I would bet the Vegan is a April 1st news! As for weight of 16-35, i can only hope it is one as well, or a typo error ... Iit should have been 1.16 kg. Still hopeful. Otherwise SL 16-35 may win the crown of heavyweight for a 16-35 F3.5-4.5 zoom in history of lens todate. Have a Blessed & Happy Easter everyone. Benedict 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted April 1, 2018 Share #50 Posted April 1, 2018 Yes, but if you held the 24-90mm and the 90-280mm, you'll see that they are all metal bodies, almost nothing but glass as well. And the 16-35mm is smaller than the 24-90mm, hence my doubts... Hope you are right Vieri but I will still get one as soon as I can. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted April 1, 2018 Share #51 Posted April 1, 2018 And doubts about the Vegan M10? https://leicarumors.com/2018/04/01/coming-soon-leica-m10-vegan-limited-edition-camera.aspx/ It's April 1st after all .. Yes April Fools!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sillbeers15 Posted April 1, 2018 Share #52 Posted April 1, 2018 Checked with Leica Store Singapore 2 days ago on price list of 16-35mm, no news as yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 1, 2018 Share #53 Posted April 1, 2018 Hope you are right Vieri but I will still get one as soon as I can. Hello Bill, I hope to be right too, and I think that I will get one as soon as possible as well, unless something completely unexpected happens between now and then Best, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted April 1, 2018 Share #54 Posted April 1, 2018 Vieri, I did finally order my filter kit using your magic discount. I need the 67mm size to use on my X1D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 1, 2018 Share #55 Posted April 1, 2018 Vieri, I did finally order my filter kit using your magic discount. I need the 67mm size to use on my X1D. Bill, enjoy the filters! If you got any kit with the FH Firecrest Holder included, you should find a 67mm step-up adapter ring (together with a 72mm and a 77mm) included in the package Let me know how you enjoy the filters! Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted April 1, 2018 Share #56 Posted April 1, 2018 Bill, enjoy the filters! If you got any kit with the FH Firecrest Holder included, you should find a 67mm step-up adapter ring (together with a 72mm and a 77mm) included in the package Let me know how you enjoy the filters! Best regards, Vieri I bought the Ken Kaminesky Signature Edition Master Kit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted April 1, 2018 Author Share #57 Posted April 1, 2018 I'll definitely be buying the 16-35 for landscape work, now that I've completed my move to Idaho, with a whole new caleidoscope of scenery beckoning. The only thing I'm not certain about is whether I'll keep my beloved and treasured 21mm f3.4 SEM. I will be doing some serious comparisons between the two lenses to be absolutely positive that the new SL zoom can match the performance of the 21mm optic - personally, I doubt any lens of similar focal length can exceed it's performance. If it cannot, then I'll keep the Super-Elmar and confine use of the 16-35 to focal lengths shorter than the 21mm M lens.................another thought - three SL zooms in one Billingham bag is going to be a Hell of a load to schlepp around. JZG Interesting to read this feedback. I found the corner performance of the 18 SEM superior to that of my 21 SEM on the SL. The corners of the image with the 21 SEM are notably smeared. In contrast, corner performance of the 21 SEM is spot-on with my M10. I'm banking on the 16-35 zoom to deliver exceptional performance in line with the other two zoom lenses. I see a nice kit consisting of 16-35, 50 Cron (when released, and can be used for street as well) and the 90-280. This would comprise a brilliant landscape kit for certain. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted April 1, 2018 Share #58 Posted April 1, 2018 Interesting to read this feedback. I found the corner performance of the 18 SEM superior to that of my 21 SEM on the SL. The corners of the image with the 21 SEM are notably smeared. In contrast, corner performance of the 21 SEM is spot-on with my M10. I'm banking on the 16-35 zoom to deliver exceptional performance in line with the other two zoom lenses. I see a nice kit consisting of 16-35, 50 Cron (when released, and can be used for street as well) and the 90-280. This would comprise a brilliant landscape kit for certain. +1 (although with the 50 Cron substituted with 75 Cron...). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieke Feenstra Posted April 1, 2018 Share #59 Posted April 1, 2018 Maciel, the M adaptor on the SL doesn't lose any light - it's just a metal tube, no optics. Joris, while I think April 9 sounds like a possibile date for announcement, I think Leicarumors might be wrong about weight: considering that the 24-90mm is 1.14 kg, the 90-280mm is 1.85 kg, and that the 16-35mm is smaller than the 24-90mm, I doubt that the 16-35mm will be 1.6 kg... Best regards, Vieri Hi Vieri, thx, I learned the lens being further away from the sensor is also causing less light to hit the sensor? Is this not the case? And I really hope the 16-35 will be lighter than the 24-90 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 2, 2018 Share #60 Posted April 2, 2018 I bought the Ken Kaminesky Signature Edition Master Kit. Great kit, perhaps you might want to complement it with a stronger Grad ND (1.2 stop, 1.5 stop, or both) otherwise is pretty much all you'll ever need, IMHO. Hi Vieri, thx, I learned the lens being further away from the sensor is also causing less light to hit the sensor? Is this not the case? And I really hope the 16-35 will be lighter than the 24-90 Hello Maciel, what you learned is correct, and works for extension tubes, i.e. when using macro lenses and adding an extension tube to increase magnification: that effectively changes the amount of light reaching the sensor. Here, though, the situation is different: the adapter doesn't "add" any extra length to the lens' original focal length, it just compensates for the difference in flange-to-sensor distance existing between the M and the SL (with the M's flange-to-sensor distance being slightly longer). To put it another way: with the adapter, your M lens used on the SL behaves exactly as it would do on your M cameras; without the adapter (were it be possible to mount it) you would actually GAIN light compared to the same lens used on your M. I hope this makes sense Best regards, Vieri 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now