SL Lens Tally: What More do we Need?

[sillbeers15]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think it all depends on application. For moving subjects, you almost cannot achieve focus unless you can predict and prefocus for subject to come into range. Otherwise, AF is crucial hunting for moving subjects which telephoto lenses are used most often.

[Advertisement]

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

[helged]

I think it all depends on application. For moving subjects, you almost cannot achieve focus unless you can predict and prefocus for subject to come into range. Otherwise, AF is crucial hunting for moving subjects which telephoto lenses are used most often.

+1

[wildlightphoto]

I think it all depends on application. For moving subjects, you almost cannot achieve focus unless you can predict and prefocus for subject to come into range. Otherwise, AF is crucial hunting for moving subjects which telephoto lenses are used most often.

 

 

R8/DMR, 280/4 APO

 

 

 

 

R8/DMR, 560/6.8 Novoflex Telyt

 

Leica SL, 280/4 APO

 

No predicting or pre-focus.

Edited April 16, 2018 by wildlightphoto

[sillbeers15]

R8/DMR, 280/4 APO

 

 

Very good for you. For the rest of us AF helps a lot in getting focused subjects-in-motion.

You make a living out of taking good pictures.

We spend money learning to take good pics.

Different lives.

R8/DMR, 560/6.8 Novoflex Telyt

Leica SL, 280/4 APO

No predicting or pre-focus.

[wildlightphoto]

You make a living out of taking good pictures.

 

 

I made a living making computers perform tricks.  Photography is relaxation for me.

[sillbeers15]

I made a living making computers perform tricks.  Photography is relaxation for me.

 

 

Good to know that AF is redundant function for you. Keep it up! I know that I do not share the same experience as you do.

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Focusing critically is a skill. It takes time to learn and lots of practice, on an ongoing basis, to do it quickly and consistently. It takes knowing your subjects and their kinds of motion too, and applying your skill and practice to focusing with them. 

 

Most people today, it seems, would rather just rely upon the machine to do it for them over taking the time and making the effort to learn how, and practicing...

 

I disagree with this approach to getting good results. Machines are very limited and fallible compared to the human eye, hand, and brain. I depend upon machines to do simple things well and repeatably, but I depend on eye, hand, and brain to handle the complex, fast, interactive tasks. My approach is to exercise and test the machines' conveniences in order to discover their limits, and apply learning and practice to myself to go beyond that point. 

[LD_50]

The SL and native lenses are designed for autofocus. AF has been around a long time and is mature technology that works reliably better than MF for a wide variety of shooting scenarios. That is why it’s on all the professional systems designed for certain types of shooting, because it just works well.

 

With CDAF the SL doesn’t handle tracking, subjects with certain motion, or lower contrast scenes as well as the competition with PDAF or CDAF / PDAF (Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, etc).

 

It’s really not a system (native lenses) designed for MF so I don’t see this being a question about skill or practice. The system simply underperforms relative to the completion in this area.

 

I rarely found myself needing to use MF with my D4s and Nikon lenses. If I did, it was there and worked poorly compared to the SL. The SL has a huge advantage with the EVF. If Leica upgrades to a better AF system the overall value of the system improves for most photographers shooting in the scenarios I mentioned. That there are highly skilled photographers who still focus manually doesn’t change this. Simply don’t use AF if you’re in that group.

[ramarren]

LD_50, 

 

Let's just agree to disagree on this.

 

I never found any of the Nikon, Canon, whatever AF cameras netted me any better results than my old manual focus Nikons and the Leicaflex SL did in terms of focus. I never needed tracking or any of those other things. Autofocus became popular because it is convenient and fast, and hits the average uses that most photographers use 90% of the time with adequate accuracy to satisfy the needs of news and journalistic publication. But it has NEVER been as accurate as critical manual focus, not ever. 

 

I really don't care that the SL has AF at all. It does, I'll use it occasionally and particularly with the SL24-90 lens because it is convenient. AF kinda dumbs any camera down to being a point and shoot, in my opinion. 

 

G

 

 

The SL and native lenses are designed for autofocus. AF has been around a long time and is mature technology that works reliably better than MF for a wide variety of shooting scenarios. That is why it’s on all the professional systems designed for certain types of shooting, because it just works well.

With CDAF the SL doesn’t handle tracking, subjects with certain motion, or lower contrast scenes as well as the competition with PDAF or CDAF / PDAF (Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, etc).

It’s really not a system (native lenses) designed for MF so I don’t see this being a question about skill or practice. The system simply underperforms relative to the completion in this area.

I rarely found myself needing to use MF with my D4s and Nikon lenses. If I did, it was there and worked poorly compared to the SL. The SL has a huge advantage with the EVF. If Leica upgrades to a better AF system the overall value of the system improves for most photographers shooting in the scenarios I mentioned. That there are highly skilled photographers who still focus manually doesn’t change this. Simply don’t use AF if you’re in that group.

Edited April 17, 2018 by ramarren

[sillbeers15]

It is fine that we do not need to agree on matters as we each have our experiences and preferences.

 

My own experience tells me that no one system (Manual focusing, contrast detect AF or phase detect AF) is perfect on all situations and technology continues to advance...till the AI can read our mind on which subject to track.

 

As it is, I’m happy with SL and M10 combo as the gear meets most of my needs. I think I should fine more time to use them to derive more pleasure for myself.

[PBart]

My #1 request is a 24mmTS lens. Also a macro lens around 90mm.

[Bill W]

My only request is that they reduce my new zoom really soon....!!!!

[lx1713]

I like the native SL zooms as they are, largely because it's my standard range of focal lengths doing events for more than 2 decades. In fact I thought and still think the 24-90 and 90-280 is perfect for a pro. But a younger one 

 

I no longer depend on events and weddings as a revenue to my work. So playing with the SL and the 24-90 for the last 12 months I've come to the conclusion, for me at least, age does require me to go for something lighter in the long zoom. I think a 70 - 200 f2.8 or 3.5 with OIS would be a nice but only if it's lighter and shorter. I only pull out a long zoom in 5-10% of my events but long shots have always been a winner for me.

 

I vote for a smaller and shorter native SL70-200 f2.8 OIS. (just in case someone suggests a 55-135 which I have, the f3.5 -4.5 aperture, slow AF and lack of OIS are the minuses I have for it. I use it almost exclusively on manual because focusing has been more misses than hits)

Edited April 21, 2018 by lx1713

[gvaliquette]

I'd like to know if SL 1.4x and 2x extenders are feasible or possible … and seem to recall that they are not … hence none hinted at by Leica Camera AG. . 

 

dunk 

 

Dunk,

 

Tele-extenders are certainly possible optically;  the APO-Extender-R 1.4X and 2.0X are optically impeccable and do not degrade image quality to any visible extent.  I rather suspect that the integration of auto-focus and OIS, wich are new with the SL, are the hitches.  Maybe Leica should consider remounting the Extender-Rs into the SL mounts and just forego AF and OIS.

 

Guy

[dkCambridgeshire]

Dunk,

 

Tele-extenders are certainly possible optically;  the APO-Extender-R 1.4X and 2.0X are optically impeccable and do not degrade image quality to any visible extent.  I rather suspect that the integration of auto-focus and OIS, wich are new with the SL, are the hitches.  Maybe Leica should consider remounting the Extender-Rs into the SL mounts and just forego AF and OIS.

 

Guy

 

The APO Extender R lenses were introduced for Leica R series lens in the late 1970s and early 1980s … they are 40 years old designs. Unlikely they would be optically compatible with SL lenses … and extremely unlikely Leica Camera AG would introduce SL manual focus extenders. SL extenders would need to be AF compatible.

 

dunk 

[jplomley]

Would love to see a 28 Cron for street to accompany the 50 Cron we are expecting to see soon.

[lx1713]

And a 21mm f2

[Jeff S]

All I’d like is an updated and extended roadmap.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jplomley]

Indeed Jeff. Hopefully we’ll have more info come June

[garypoon]

My #1 request is a 24mmTS lens. Also a macro lens around 90mm.

+1

Also a 1.4x or 2.0x converter