HOW TO DO THE MINIMUM INVEST?

[FMB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

As I ow a large range of "M" lenses with my Leica M10,  all of them used  alternatively with my SL2 at full satisfaction, I’m planning to buy two SL autofocus lenses, with the intention not to end up in total bankruptcy. One Summicron SL 35 mm. + another Summicron SL 90 mm. with the insane purpose of use them  the first one as angular 35 mm, also cropped at 50 mm and 75 mm. and the second one as 90 mm, also cropped at 135 mm and 180 mm.

 

My question is, because I’m not a specialist in that calculations, how many megapixels of resolution may I expect of the planned cropping images? What is your opinion about this elucubration? Could it work?

 

Thank you all,

Francisco.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jared]

At a 135mm crop, you should be looking at around 21 megapixels (ample for almost any purpose).  At a 180mm crop you would be a little under 12 megapixels.  That’s ample for A4 prints (approximately 8” x 10” US equivalent).  To fill a 4K monitor, though, you would need to interpolate just a bit using that 180mm crop.

I’m actually getting to be a fan of digital zooms/aggressive cropping for some purposes.  The megapixel counts are finally high enough that for a lot of my uses it works just fine.  I am happy with my Q2, for example, at 35mm or even 50mm (28mm native).  The lenses Summicron SL lenses themselves are good enough that you won’t be losing much aside from the megapixels.

[FMB]

Given that I'm only "aficionado" I thought to buy in first place the Summicron  35 mm SL Apo in order to optimally cover the street photography and  in very good level, cropping at zone 50 mm the portrait field. I've a serious dilema about if in second place I should buy a 75 mm. or a 90 mm.

Thank you Jared for your comments.

Francisco

[Jeff S]

Or you could just buy the SL 24-90, and not have to carry two (or three) primes, which presumably you already have covered with your M lenses.

Jeff

[FMB]

This lens is a "Big One" I recon with a very high quality but size, weight and  modest apertures do not marry with my Leica way. The only "Zoom" I own is one TRI-ELMAR I enjoy in many occasions.
I've fallen in love with the quality of the photographs I've seen of the Apo Summicron SL 35 mm. and I would like to start my set SL lenses with this one...

Francisco

[CharlesL]

Another way to "crop" is that you mount TL APS-C lenses on the SL. For example, a TL 23/2 uses part of the sensor and has a 35mm field of view.

 

 

[panoreserve]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 42 Minuten schrieb FMB:

This lens is a "Big One" I recon with a very high quality but size, weight and  modest apertures do not marry with my Leica way. The only "Zoom" I own is one TRI-ELMAR I enjoy in many occasions.
I've fallen in love with the quality of the photographs I've seen of the Apo Summicron SL 35 mm. and I would like to start my set SL lenses with this one...

Francisco

SL2 with SL 35&90 - that‘s exactly my current personal equipment too. An ideal setup - minimalist and, due to the SL2’s cropping capabilities, versatile. Highly recommended!

[Jared]

15 hours ago, FMB said:

Given that I'm only "aficionado" I thought to buy in first place the Summicron  35 mm SL Apo in order to optimally cover the street photography and  in very good level, cropping at zone 50 mm the portrait field. I've a serious dilema about if in second place I should buy a 75 mm. or a 90 mm.

Thank you Jared for your comments.

Francisco

I’d say the slightly more versatile approach is the 35/75 combo, then crop in to get 90.  You’ve got plenty of megapixels for that. 

Look at your own pictures, though (assuming you have both a 75mm and 90mm M currently)... Which do you use more frequently?  Do you “see” better at 75mm or 90mm?  Most people have a clear preference. That is probably more important than which system is more versatile. That is, if you like one focal length more than the other, ignore the advice in the first paragraph and go with which you like better.  Both lenses are excellent.  Technically, the 90mm is the better of the two, but not by enough to make me choose one over the other if I liked the focal length better.

[Jeff S]

I use the SL75, in part because I never bonded with the M's 75mm frame lines, so have no M counterpart (use 28, 35 and 50 on M10 and M Monochrom). It's a wonderful lens. But my use case for the SL2 is different than for the M (no street shooting with the SL2, for example). The 24-90 and 90-280 are superb, and compare favorably to my SL75 for my image and print quality requirements.  Never had zooms perform like them before, even with the Leica R system.  And the 24-90 is like 6 SL prime lenses in one; so the extra size and weight are no big deal, especially in inclement weather or other situations when I don't want to change lenses.

Jeff

Edited July 23, 2020 by Jeff S

[FMB]

Hello,

Charles: APC-S could be an option but I'm a full format lover.

panoreserve: I'm afraid your ideal setup willl be the mine.!!!!

Jared: Thank you for your thoughts about my doubts,  my road wiill end up with the combo 35&90 because, as you say, I "see" better at 90 mm. above all if it is excellent.

Jeff:  The more rational and cheapest solution it's yours but i'm used since my several  M3, M4, M5, M7, M8, M9, M 240 and finally M10,  to change my lenses and work with a fixed frame,  although  the mind and my money would ask for the 24&90 zoom.

Then for me that's all, if you don't want to add anything.

Francisco.

[Jeff S]

Of course, there is no right or wrong; whatever suits.  The beauty of the SL system is the flexibility to use a variety of lenses (Leica and other, native or adapted) and shooting methods.
 

I, too, have used M cameras for 35 years.  For me, the SL2 complements the M, a totally different approach, much like using the R system did decades ago alongside my film Ms.

Jeff

[jyrkialanen]

On 7/21/2020 at 1:17 PM, FMB said:

 

As I ow a large range of "M" lenses with my Leica M10,  all of them used  alternatively with my SL2 at full satisfaction, I’m planning to buy two SL autofocus lenses, with the intention not to end up in total bankruptcy. One Summicron SL 35 mm. + another Summicron SL 90 mm. with the insane purpose of use them  the first one as angular 35 mm, also cropped at 50 mm and 75 mm. and the second one as 90 mm, also cropped at 135 mm and 180 mm.

 

My question is, because I’m not a specialist in that calculations, how many megapixels of resolution may I expect of the planned cropping images? What is your opinion about this elucubration? Could it work?

 

Thank you all,

Francisco.

I hope I don't sound rude by saying this, butI don't quite understand the idea of owning a 6000e FF camera body and then trying to save money with the native lenses by planning to crop so much that only a quarter of the sensor would be used (that would be the case if you cropped from 35 to 70 or from 90 to 180).  And as you know 35mm lens can't replace  a 75mm lens anyway, regardless of the cropping. If you wan't a 75mm field of view and compression for example for portraits, you can't achieve it with 35mm lens.

Leica 24-90 is the best ff normal zoom lens in the world, so I strongly recommend you to get that one and use the full potential of the camera at least between 24 and 90mm.

Best regards, Jyrki

 

[Jeff S]

16 minutes ago, jyrkialanen said:

I hope I don't sound rude by saying this, butI don't quite understand the idea of owning a 6000e FF camera body and then trying to save money with the native lenses by planning to crop so much that only a quarter of the sensor would be used (that would be the case if you cropped from 35 to 70 or from 90 to 180).  And as you know 35mm lens can't replace  a 75mm lens anyway, regardless of the cropping. If you wan't a 75mm field of view and compression for example for portraits, you can't achieve it with 35mm lens.

Leica 24-90 is the best ff normal zoom lens in the world, so I strongly recommend you to get that one and use the full potential of the camera at least between 24 and 90mm.

Best regards, Jyrki

 

One can certainly make this case (especially depending on print size), but even the chief designer, Peter Karbe, likes to promote the cropping (zooming, he says) ability and use of the SL Summicrons. I don’t think the marketing/sales department wants to promote this approach!

See 1hr, 33 min mark...

Jeff

[nicci78]

He already made his case about the absence of teleconverter months ago. 
Just use APS-C mode to crop 1.5x. Better than any TC in terms of IQ. 
 

More reasonably is to choose 35mm then use APS-C mode to crop into 52.5mm

Then buy 90mm and crop it with APS-C mode into 135mm. 
 

No need for 75mm. You can skip it. 75 and 90mm is so close. Both APO-Summicron-SL 75 & 90 will give you the same magnification. So why bother with 75mm. 

[nicci78]

Or even better. Go the 2 lenses/bodies way : 
- Q2 with its excellent Summilux-Q for 28-35-50mm. 
- SL2 with APO-Summicron-SL 75mm (crop 112.5mm) or 90mm (crop 135mm)

They both share the same battery. You get a spare body and Q2 is around the same price as APO-SL 35mm. 

[nicci78]

To help visualised what kind of results, we can expect from Q2+SL2 combo. 

Q2 =
- Summilux 28mm with 47MP. 
- Summicron 35mm with 30MP
- Elmarit 50mm with 15MP
- Elmar 75mm with 7MP

SL2 + APO-Summicron-SL 90mm =
- Summicron 90mm with 47MP
- Elmarit 135mm with 21MP

Do you really need APO-SL 35mm when Q2 on crop mode can give you similar results ? 
FYI SL2 + APO-Summicron-SL 35mm =
- Summicron 35mm with 47MP
- Elmarit 50mm with 21MP
- Elmar 75mm with 10MP
So Q2 will give you similar depth of field at 35mm, 50mm and 75mm crops. 

These two bodies are made for each other. With similar :
- user interface. 
- 47MP sensor. 
- battery. 
- weathersealing
 

 

Edited July 24, 2020 by nicci78

[SJH]

This was my approach in that I thought about the SL35 but then decided that buying the Q2 to go alongside my SL2 made more sense to me. Shortly afterwards though I did buy the Sigma 35mm 1.2 which is one third of the price and I have to say is superb lens and gives me 1.2 when I need it compared to the Q2 at 35 F2. I also have the 24-90 which works very well for me as well as my M lenses. I think my next lens will therefore be the SL50 in actual fact as my Q2 handles 28 and 35 superbly, I have a 35 1.2 for when I need that (and probably Sigma’s outstanding lens on an SL2) and then the 50SL can do 75 if I need it with the 24-90 giving me real flexibility. I’m also toying with getting the Sigma 135 so have both this and 200 in APSC mode with a 1.8 lens. 

[FMB]

O.K. I feel I must to go deeper explaining my circunstances.

I'm 82 y.o. and have  been a user and follower of Leica M for 38 years then… I've a full collection of M lenses plus 100 mm macro R plus 180 mm Telyt R with an added handicap of my trembling hands. Suddenly appears the SL2 camera with "Ibis"  and I can take pictures 1/125 sec   without tripod, "the Heaven is opened": I can use all my M lenses and also is opened the possibility of  trying autofocus lenses.

After this short prolog may be all of you will understand part of my thoughts and ""my necessity? "" of cropping. Actually i dont need to cropp, all is if….given a photographic opportunity when I use that or other lens  I could take profit of a lot of megapixels.

Ahhh! Meanwhile I am trying to collect all the money I'll  need to buy one or more lenses I''ll have more time to decide which lens will be my predilect.

Sorry if after reading this lines you feel having lost your time or disappointed.  For me there has been a great opportunity to learn of your wise and experienced comments.

Francisco. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[thighslapper]

I personally don't see any benefit of adding two more prime lenses with just the addition of AF ..... you are duplicating what you have as M lenses and they can be used just as easily manually on the SL/SL2 as on the M10.

Just get a 24-90 .... and you have the benefits of a single lens, multiple focal lengths, AF and stabilisation.

If it seems too heavy, consider one of the 3 Panasonic L mount zooms ..... 20-60/3.5, 24-70/2.8 or 24-105/4 ..... all are good performers and considerably lighter and cheaper than the SL 24-90. 

Excellent as the 35/2 and 90/2 are, they are very overpriced when you consider the quality differential in comparison to Sigma and Lumix L mount offerings.

I was a hardline Leica buyer till the late appearance of the SL2 made me buy a Panasonic S1R ...... which is essentially an SL2 for half the price. Leica lenses are still a step up from most of the competition, but the gap is constantly narrowing. The Lumix (and Sigma) lenses are excellent and in real world use and you would not notice any significant image quality differences. 

see here on another thread: 

 

Edited July 24, 2020 by thighslapper

[FMB]

What you say in your  two first lines is the behavior I followed till now and, of course, I've no complains about  all my M lenses used in my SL2. I tell you more, I'm positive assuring that non of the Sigma o Lumix lenses are surpassing their quality to justify any sustantive reason to change them, but they are not "autofocus".

But also as I'm getting older more and frequently have difficulties to focus the lenses quickly. Then  autofocus it's in my case very justified.

Yes, I've to invest if I want to use large apertures and if I want to achieve the quality of the Summicrons at their full opened optical results.

I don't know if  you will agree with my arguments....

Francisco