18mm T vs. 23mm T image quality difference

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, glenkwells said:

Hi

 

Late to read this thread. I first bought the 18-56mm lens and for a zoom really like it is pretty sharp at all focal lengths from the respective widest apertures.

I then bought the 18mm and again I am happy with that lenses. I do like the 35mm equivalent focal length and have tried two TL 23mm lenses.

I must be having really bad luck as the first was poor in the upper right corner until F4.5 and was returned. The second one was poor in the lower right and worse than the first one until F5.

That lens was also returned. Lenses were tested on a tripod with fixed lighting and numerous shots. Very surprised by my findings given Leica reputation and the cost of these lenses. Has anyone else had issues? I am holding off trying again until I get some positive feedback.

Regards

Glen 

The first complaint of this kind that I have seen.

[SugarBubble]

I don’t use M glass but the 18 is on my CL almost all the time for quick carry and shooting. My favorites are the 35 1.4 and the 60 macro and if I am taking some “serious” pictures I use them.  Them seem equally good to me given their different missions.  I can’t give up the pancake though. So darn cute.  

[davidrc]

On 9/2/2019 at 12:58 PM, Boojay said:

Totally agree and I have tried to "like" two copies of the 23 TL.   Haven't tried the 18 or the 60 but think the 35mm is in another league to the 23mm.

 

Well, I wish i’d not taken a dealer advice and read yours first…. Forewarned is forearmed and never a truer word said for choosing lenses!

[davidrc]

On 1/22/2020 at 3:52 PM, glenkwells said:

Hi

 

Late to read this thread. I first bought the 18-56mm lens and for a zoom really like it is pretty sharp at all focal lengths from the respective widest apertures.

I then bought the 18mm and again I am happy with that lenses. I do like the 35mm equivalent focal length and have tried two TL 23mm lenses.

I must be having really bad luck as the first was poor in the upper right corner until F4.5 and was returned. The second one was poor in the lower right and worse than the first one until F5.

That lens was also returned. Lenses were tested on a tripod with fixed lighting and numerous shots. Very surprised by my findings given Leica reputation and the cost of these lenses. Has anyone else had issues? I am holding off trying again until I get some positive feedback.

Regards

Glen 

Glen, you and I, two having the same fault.  Uneven sharpness.  Sign of a de-centred lens.

[dkCambridgeshire]

On 1/22/2020 at 6:43 PM, M11 for me said:

28mm ???

TL 18mm = 28mm (ish) FF equivalent 

[serpentventis]

I have 18, 23 and summicron 35 asph I m, thinking to add 35 tl summi, all three do their own thing, 18 is fantastic for walk around before light drops in tight quarters, 23 for a bit more spacious areas later in a day, 35 cron m for indoors and people or outside when i want to capture distant things a bit more detailed. I find all 3 absurdly good on CL. I have 11-23 and wide open its sharper than zeiss batis 18mm on nikon z6ii, i’m shocked that detail difference between nikon z ff and this apsc at 24mp is like 2% up until 6400 iso, then ff pulls ahead with noise. For TL 18,23,35 sharpness and “leica look” increases progressively, but to be honest 18 is so sharp to begin with wide open (only purple fringe is downside, doesn't bother me) that i’m super happy with any lens… one thing CL did to me is made me want to buy m11ev1 asap. What a joy to shoot, you actually feel like you taking pictures, all other cameras felt like i’m just using camera equipment.