After eight months of using the SL, going back to an M seems impossible

[Steve McGarrett]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 ...... so you are still driving a 1960's Vintage car and flying by Biplane ...... and using a wind up gramophone .....  

 

If someone has no need of autofocusing in his photography, why bother with the complexity and "expiration date" of AF lenses?

Anyone who is still using a rangefinder drives a 1930s car, then?

[Advertisement]

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

[tom0511]

anybody has calculated the weight of 24+35+50+90mm M lenses vs the 24-90?

[LD_50]

Google the weights of each and add them up. Should be readily available.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

anybody has calculated the weight of 24+35+50+90mm M lenses vs the 24-90?

 

A while back (like 18 months) I did a rough weigh of an M240 with EVF and grip, 24, 28, 50, 75 and 90mm lenses. vs the SL and zoom. Weight was within a hundred grams or so. Not  entirely fair as the primes were all faster and with the M you can leave most of it at home but good enough for me. I took to carrying the SL plus an M and 50 1.4 for a while and like that combination. That's why I wanted a 50mm Q.

 

Gordon

Edited June 7, 2018 by FlashGordonPhotography

[trickness]

A while back (like 18 months) I did a rough weigh of an M240 with EVF and grip, 24, 28, 50, 75 and 90mm lenses. vs the SL and zoom. Weight was within a hundred grams or so. Not  entirely fair as the primes were all faster and with the M you can leave most of it at home but good enough for me. I took to carrying the SL plus an M and 50 1.4 for a while and like that combination. That's why I wanted a 50mm Q.

 

Gordon

 

My rig is the SL and an M Summilux 50 1.4 ASPH, plus a 21 SEM. Thinking about getting a 28mm M lens and perhaps the 75M to round my kit out.

[Guest VVJ]

My rig is the SL and an M Summilux 50 1.4 ASPH, plus a 21 SEM. Thinking about getting a 28mm M lens and perhaps the 75M to round my kit out.

 

Will you carry all of them?  Because your kit would weigh as much the 24-90mm without having the advantages of AF, weather sealing, close focusing, etc.  

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Will you carry all of them?  Because your kit would weigh as much the 24-90mm without having the advantages of AF, weather sealing, close focusing, etc.  

But a 50lux @f/1.4 or even 28cron @f/2 will have no equivalence in 24-90. Only if one cares about that.

[jmahto]

A while back (like 18 months) I did a rough weigh of an M240 with EVF and grip, 24, 28, 50, 75 and 90mm lenses. vs the SL and zoom. Weight was within a hundred grams or so. Not  entirely fair as the primes were all faster and with the M you can leave most of it at home but good enough for me. I took to carrying the SL plus an M and 50 1.4 for a while and like that combination. That's why I wanted a 50mm Q.

 

Gordon

This is very valid argument and in the beginning I have found myself falling in the trap of carrying more than what I need with M (and carrying equivalent weight to Canikon/SL). Now my cutoff is 3lb. It means one main lens and second light lens with M240.

 

If we want weight advantage then we will have to forego something (with any camera system).

[Guest VVJ]

But a 50lux @f/1.4 or even 28cron @f/2 will have no equivalence in 24-90. Only if one cares about that.

 

The zoom will give you f2.9 at 28mm, not a lot of difference with the 28 cron, but yes, whereas the stabilization of the zoom will more than compensate for its slowness it won't give you shallow DOF, indeed if that is important to you...

[jmahto]

The zoom will give you f2.9 at 28mm, not a lot of difference with the 28 cron, but yes, whereas the stabilization of the zoom will more than compensate for its slowness it won't give you shallow DOF, indeed if that is important to you...

2.9 and 2 is one stop apart and 1.4 is two stop apart. I am pointing the obvious but the bottom line is that primes are primes and zooms (however excellent) are zooms. Each with own advantages.

[sillbeers15]

2.9 and 2 is one stop apart and 1.4 is two stop apart. I am pointing the obvious but the bottom line is that primes are primes and zooms (however excellent) are zooms. Each with own advantages.

It is obvious that you have not compared the images produced from the SL zooms lately to still hang on to your old believes that Prime lenses perform better than zooms.

[wlaidlaw]

I don't think it is that zooms perform worse than fast primes but that you cannot get the same shallow DOF separation of subject and background, due to the smaller apertures on zooms.

 

Wilson

[sillbeers15]

I don't think it is that zooms perform worse than fast primes but that you cannot get the same shallow DOF separation of subject and background, due to the smaller apertures on zooms.

 

Wilson

I’m aware of that. I own the 0.95 Noctilux & 21Lux.

Here the discussion is on image quality.

[wlaidlaw]

I’m aware of that. I own the 0.95 Noctilux & 21Lux.

Here the discussion is on image quality.

 

Well no it was also on why use primes when the Leica zooms are so good. DOF is the answer. 

[Mr.Q]

Not only that but the 2 to 3.5 stops of extra light gathering when shooting with a Noctilux or Summilux.

 

IBIS can only compensate if the subject is static, thus allowing primes to shoot at lower ISO's and better IQ in low light.

[trickness]

Will you carry all of them?  Because your kit would weigh as much the 24-90mm without having the advantages of AF, weather sealing, close focusing, etc.

 

No I carry one lens, maybe two if I’m on a job shoot, in a very small bag. I get the advantages of the native lenses, but can’t see myself carrying a cannon like the 24-90 around.

[0luke1]

I just switched from Sony a7riii to M10 because I found myself leaving the excellent Sony autofocus lenses behind, in favor of antique Leica lenses. I went to the Sony from a Nikon D4 after I had a stroke and lost the use of my left hand.

 

I use the RF, EVF and LV on the back about equally.

 

I also like antique cars. Love driving them. I eschew “upgrading” drum brakes for disks, rack and pinion steering racks or power steering.

 

I’d pay more for a new Leica body if they made it in titanium or resin instead of brass, had the EFV go to projection glasses (Epson makes them for the drone pilots) - but IMO, the RF is better than anything if you have the light and don’t need more than a 90. It’s essential to the character of the brand.

 

My only beef is weight. Leica lenses and simplified use makes the M10 a real joy (the Sony is festooned with buttons, joy sticks, menus and little wheels to the point of ridiculousness).

 

Evolution without losing character is tricky, but Leica is proof that aficionados will pay a premium if it’s done right. Nobody misses servicing the 17 grease fittings on my 1960 Corvette, but the latest models aren’t the same experience. My 1960 is worth about as much as a 2018.

[sillbeers15]

For most of my business trips, it is only pure business.

Exceptionally in 2017 I carried my cameras for two trips:

 

1   In my trip to Milan . Italy I could not resist but brought along my SL +24-90 as that was the max I could afford to carry on a business trip (yes force fitted my gizo tripod along as well);

2   In my trip to Taichung, Taiwan, I brought along my M240 (before M10) + 35 lux as that was light and compact.

 

On trip 1, it was so statsifying for me as I too more than 1000 shots. On trip 2, I felt awfully restrictive with just one 35mm lux and I snaped no more than 100 shots.

 

For my experience, I would have enjoyed my trip 2 if I could bring along my 21 lux, 90 con as well. But then again why not just grab along my SL + 24-90?

 

No worries about weather as no changing of lenses. No big deal with just a little heavier. I do not wear skirt.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jmahto]

It is obvious that you have not compared the images produced from the SL zooms lately to still hang on to your old believes that Prime lenses perform better than zooms.

I am not doubting the quality of the zoom however I was pointing out faster prime’s advantages. Others pointed out the same above.

 

It is clear that some people feel more comfortable with zooms and willing to accept bulk and smaller aperture. Others feel comfortable with one or two fast primes and willing to accept restrictions on FL.

[sillbeers15]

I am not doubting the quality of the zoom however I was pointing out faster prime’s advantages. Others pointed out the same above.

 

It is clear that some people feel more comfortable with zooms and willing to accept bulk and smaller aperture. Others feel comfortable with one or two fast primes and willing to accept restrictions on FL.

 

 

I have transferred my two M lenses (M21lux & M50Noc0.95) over to my SL. I carry them along with my SL zooms. I use my M lense for specific alpplication of shallow DOF.

I had the motivation to purchase the M21lux as I was so impressed by the the M21SE which I had earlier, so I told myself that the M21lux must even be better. No, not always. I still miss my M21SE. Therefore my experience tells me not all prime lenses with shallow DOF are better than smaller aperture lenses, it all depends on application.