scott kirkpatrick Posted January 27, 2020 Share #141 Posted January 27, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Like this? Well, I didn't tilt it, but the original 100% is posted on Flickr, Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! P1022720 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr and here's an 100% extracted section from the far left hand edge: P1022720 copy by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr I shot these before the SL2 arrived, with the S1R and 35 SL SC. Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! P1022720 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr and here's an 100% extracted section from the far left hand edge: P1022720 copy by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr I shot these before the SL2 arrived, with the S1R and 35 SL SC. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305622-leica-apo-summicron-sl2035mm-average-performer/?do=findComment&comment=3900525'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 27, 2020 Posted January 27, 2020 Hi scott kirkpatrick, Take a look here Leica Apo-Summicron-SL2.0/35mm - average performer?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mr.Q Posted January 27, 2020 Share #142 Posted January 27, 2020 That's certainly better, but something like this with comparisons would be ideal: https://www.vieribottazzini.com/2018/05/leica-super-vario-elmar-sl-16-35mm-f-3-5-4-5-asph-in-depth-review.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 27, 2020 Share #143 Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) Wait for a nice clear Saturday morning, when I can get some time and access to that viewpoint, with both bodies and stable lighting. Looking at the left edge of the shot above, I think there is room for the SL2 to show a slightly sharper edge performance. Still it will be an imperceptible difference in any normal use. For lenses and sensors this good, I am willing to compare things wide open, but see no reason to explore stopping down further, which I know is necessary to get the best results from older lenses. Edited January 27, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 27, 2020 Share #144 Posted January 27, 2020 4 hours ago, Sohail said: All we have is your cocksure untested assertion about any random image under the same conditions. If the discussion is going to degenerate to this level then I wish no further part in it. 4 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted January 27, 2020 Share #145 Posted January 27, 2020 43 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said: Wait for a nice clear Saturday morning, when I can get some time and access to that viewpoint, with both bodies and stable lighting. Looking at the left edge of the shot above, I think there is room for the SL2 to show a slightly sharper edge performance. Still it will be an imperceptible difference in any normal use. For lenses and sensors this good, I am willing to compare things wide open, but see no reason to explore stopping down further, which I know is necessary to get the best results from older lenses. Stopping down isn't only for older lenses but often necessary to achieve the largest possible DOF. Performance from F4 to F8 is more important than wide open performance for landscapes, architecture, and anything that requires edge to edge sharpness with sufficient DOF. I admire that the 35 SL can claim to be the sharpest lens at F2, but if it's surpassed by other lenses from F4 onwards, it's safe to say that there are better lenses for that sort of photography. And that's OK. Just like many other gear, there is no perfect lens. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaR10 Posted January 27, 2020 Share #146 Posted January 27, 2020 Thighslapper, I certainly agree with your assessments. More importantly, your superb landscape photographs posted many times throughout the forum are proof enough on many levels. Personally, I ignore people who push a technical narrative when they clearly do not understand it is the content of photograph that is most important. Last, I enjoy viewing your most excellent photographs. Keep creating. r/ Mark 8 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 27, 2020 Share #147 Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 19 minutes ago, Mr.Q said: Stopping down isn't only for older lenses but often necessary to achieve the largest possible DOF. Performance from F4 to F8 is more important than wide open performance for landscapes, architecture, and anything that requires edge to edge sharpness with sufficient DOF. I admire that the 35 SL can claim to be the sharpest lens at F2, but if it's surpassed by other lenses from F4 onwards, it's safe to say that there are better lenses for that sort of photography. And that's OK. Just like many other gear, there is no perfect lens. We're never going to get all the options on the table, as I only have L- or M-mount cameras and lenses of this calibre. The SL SC 35 gets even sharper at f/5.6, which I would use for landscapes, but depth of field isn't an issue when all of the interesting parts are over half a km away. In fact I prefer to have any stray bit of foliage in the foreground go into the bokeh bag. And the only potential difference between the S1R and SL2 is the claimed extra glass thickness over the sensor, which has its strongest effect when the lens is wide open. Comparison of shots taken with ~50MPx sensors, thus limited to 4-8 microns of resolution in the image plane, aren't going to separate the latest 12+-18 element lenses. What matters is how they render, and I really like the separation of planes that the Karbe Summicrons provide at middle distances. Edited January 27, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albireo_double Posted January 27, 2020 Share #148 Posted January 27, 2020 I don't care about what DXO say and I have purchased the SL 35 Apo today. 3 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caissa Posted January 27, 2020 Share #149 Posted January 27, 2020 On 1/23/2020 at 9:07 PM, jaapv said: 2480 pixels wide not good enough for you? Is there now a higher resolution ? I did not know. What are the details exactly ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted January 27, 2020 Share #150 Posted January 27, 2020 17 minutes ago, caissa said: Is there now a higher resolution ? I did not know. What are the details exactly ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob L Posted January 27, 2020 Share #151 Posted January 27, 2020 With regard to landscape use at infinity, according to what I have read, the SL APO 35 is pretty close to optimal wide open and stopping down makes little difference in sharpness. Diffraction on a 47 megapixel camera starts to affect things around 5.6. I think this is born out by the MTFs, if those are to be believed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Lane Posted January 27, 2020 Share #152 Posted January 27, 2020 I’m just starting to build an L system and began with the 75 f2 APO on my TL2. Next up will be the 35. I have seen and read enough about it to buy in confidence irrespective of DXO’s “findings”. I cannot believe for one minute that 1) Leica would bring to market something that falls short of the standards set by other L f2’s and 2) Peter Karbe would personally endorse something that is sub standard. If anything it makes me want to purchase the 35 sooner than I intend simply to dispel some of the nonsense. Problem is, it will mean a longer wait for my SL2 😄 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 27, 2020 Share #153 Posted January 27, 2020 Well, you won't regret the 75/2. A cashflow alternative would be to pick up an SL, and save more for the 35/2. The SL is a different camera. Don't be seduced just by IBIS and 41MP. The SL has better button layout (with 4 programmable buttons around the LCD screen) and built in GPS, to name but two points of difference. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbealnz Posted January 27, 2020 Share #154 Posted January 27, 2020 And as we all know, it is affordable, at least I think so John. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 27, 2020 Share #155 Posted January 27, 2020 The SL primes? I agree - compared to the M primes, the SL primes are a good price, and fantastic quality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbealnz Posted January 27, 2020 Share #156 Posted January 27, 2020 Sorry, no, I meant the SL as a decent buy now. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 27, 2020 Share #157 Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) I never understood the protocols or methodology or how the scores are arrived at by DxOMark. I don’t see any transparency about that on their site. I looked at that test to try to see their reported results. There does seems to be some hyperbole in their site claims to me. For example “Evaluation of real-world performance from a user point of view”. That appears to me to be opposite to any lab test. My experience with the one I own is not extensive, perhaps a thousand frames on the SL and SL2. For how I use it, wide open or nearly so, available light, I am thrilled with the results. “Hundreds of individual test results for each device are combined into one score called the DXOMARK score.” would seem improbable for testing this lens. Unless they mean hundreds of test numbers from one example of the lens? I do have a basic grasp of what the MTF charts show and those appear at odds with DXOMARK report to me. As I understand it that wide open peak is a remarkable achievement in any lens design. Edited January 27, 2020 by hoppyman 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4nest Posted February 1, 2020 Share #158 Posted February 1, 2020 Am 27.1.2020 um 09:46 schrieb scott kirkpatrick: Wait for a nice clear Saturday morning, when I can get some time and access to that viewpoint, with both bodies and stable lighting. Looking at the left edge of the shot above, I think there is room for the SL2 to show a slightly sharper edge performance. Still it will be an imperceptible difference in any normal use. For lenses and sensors this good, I am willing to compare things wide open, but see no reason to explore stopping down further, which I know is necessary to get the best results from older lenses. Today was a clear sunny day in Vienna and I used my beloved SL-35 ... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305622-leica-apo-summicron-sl2035mm-average-performer/?do=findComment&comment=3904037'>More sharing options...
leicamr Posted February 1, 2020 Share #159 Posted February 1, 2020 (edited) Yesterday I bought an SL with a new 35 f2 APO SL. The picture was taken at f2. It appears sharp right into the bottom left corner. I can't see any nasty chromatic aberrations anywhere in the image. This is a smallest resolution Jpeg straight out of the camera. https://photos.app.goo.gl/vHnFhnEFsgSkt1b18 The Bokeh is lovely too https://photos.app.goo.gl/9KyD224NFw2seWfs7 Mark Edited February 1, 2020 by leicamr 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted February 2, 2020 Share #160 Posted February 2, 2020 (edited) If the 35 APO is sharper (even By just a bit) than the 75 APO, look at the PCMag.com’s test of the 75 APO on imatest and use it for reference. Both pcmag and dxo tested the Nikon Z7 with 50/1.8 (37mpx on dxo and 4500 score for pcmag’s highest imatest), and the Z7 is 46mp vs the S1r and SL2 at 47mp). The 75 SL showed 4300 on pcmag’s highest imatest result (f2.8) and 32 on dxo was the 35 APO’s sharpness result. if the 35 is sharper than the 75, even by just a hair, the imatest (75 APO vs. 50Z) 4300 vs 4500 test results are not proportional to the (35 APO vs 50Z) 32 vs 37 dxo test results (almost 15% different on dxo vs 4% different on imatest/pcmag). tl;dr: use the 75 APO for a stand in test result on pcmag to compare the 35 apo vs the 50Z on DXO and PCMag, to see if the test results are accurate or precise between diff testing outfits. It is neither accurate nor precise. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/nikon-nikkor-z-50mm-f18-s https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/leica-apo-summicron-sl-75mm-f2- https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-NIKKOR-Z-50mm-F18-S-on-Nikon-Z7-versus-LEICA-APO-SUMMICRON-SL-35mm-F2-ASPH-on-Panasonic-Lumix-DC-S1R__1998_1270_2043_1294 Edited February 2, 2020 by NRKstudio Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.