SL2 and one's lens needs...

[JulianHalliday]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am currently the happy owner of an SL, and an array (21, 28, 50, 90, 135) of M lenses of various vintages. One reason I got into M photography (had an M10 before the SL) was to downsize and simplify my equipment, to make a leaner walking and traveling kit; the proliferation of lenses shows how well that worked...

My question, then, is this: Given the astonishing resolution of the SL2 (as exemplified in the images in the Image Quality thread), which promises to permit quite severe crops to be perfectly usable, how few lenses might one get away with? I cannot afford, and in any case wouldn't be happy carrying, the enormous Leica 16-35, 24-90, 90-280 Vario Elmarits.

Yes, I recognize in myself too the immediate urge to say "don't throw away the gorgeous resolution you just acquired!" But realistically, I do not print many images, and those I do print are more than supported by the 24 Mpix of the SL. So I could imagine, say, shooting with a 24 and a 135, and cropping to emulate 28, 35, 50, 200, and so on. Alternatively, though I know this will be anathema to many here, there is a decent-looking Sigma 14-24 which would cover -- on this view -- everything up to, say, 50.

Is this a realistic aspiration, or am I deluded? This isn't an immediate plan of action -- need to see if my income ever comes back before I dare broach the subject of a new body!

[caissa]

For me the SL2 has two big advantages. The first is IBIS, that also helps to get steadier photos from M lenses. And related to that the multishot option. It gives you the opportunity to collect true color (all pixels have the full RGB info) by avoiding the Bayer interpolation. This is probably not so much for daily use, but if you want to archive some special photos for the future. 

And yes, it also has generally more resolution (some need that others do not). Nice to have it (especially because Leica offers few longer tele lenses), but not needed for your average family print. You can easily get away with a 16-35 and a 90-280 lens. But actually I have also a few others (50, 75, 90). This is maybe actually a bit overkill.     And I also use some M lenses (I like the tiny M 28, the Nocti and the "vintage" M 135 and the small R 50).

Edited September 17, 2020 by caissa

[Advertisement]

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

[nico4444]

47 minutes ago, JulianHalliday said:

But realistically, I do not print many images, and those I do print are more than supported by the 24 Mpix of the SL.

Keep the SL typ 601. The 24mp resolution is enough if you don't value large prints over digital at most points.

47 minutes ago, JulianHalliday said:

Is this a realistic aspiration, or am I deluded?

In my opinion, you are deluded. I think SL typ 601 + Vario-Elmarit or Sigma zooms > SL 2 + cropping, ANYDAY. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Get an M10R. Keep your lenses.

Gordon

[Gavin Cato]

Must admit i'm not a fan of cropping but if I want to use the SL2 and be relatively light, it's the 35/2 every time. 35 is such a flexible focal length, can cover a ton of different subjects.

 

[Tailwagger]

 

5 hours ago, JulianHalliday said:

So I could imagine, say, shooting with a 24 and a 135, and cropping to emulate 28, 35, 50, 200, and so on.

You're asking for way too much, IMO. Unless you're content with winding up with a few MPx, a 24mm isn't going to get you much beyond 50mm, let alone up to 135mm. By my reckoning, 50mm would be roughly 1/4 of the 24mm frame or < 11 MPx of your 47 Mpx sensor. Equally, it wont afford you the same levels of DoF or isolation, if thats important.  But the added resolution does afford more than enough latitude to be able to skip standard prime focal lengths.  So a 28mm credibly sub for a 35mm,  a 75mm for a 90mm, etc.

[ardbeg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 9/17/2020 at 6:28 PM, Tailwagger said:

But the added resolution does afford more than enough latitude to be able to skip standard prime focal lengths.  So a 28mm credibly sub for a 35mm,  a 75mm for a 90mm, etc.

 I concur. I recently switched from an M10 to an SL2 and while I used to own a 24 and a 35, I now do just fine with a 28, a 50 (well several 50s truthfully but I really like 50s), and a 90.

[Jared]

On 9/17/2020 at 1:30 PM, JulianHalliday said:

I am currently the happy owner of an SL, and an array (21, 28, 50, 90, 135) of M lenses of various vintages. One reason I got into M photography (had an M10 before the SL) was to downsize and simplify my equipment, to make a leaner walking and traveling kit; the proliferation of lenses shows how well that worked...

My question, then, is this: Given the astonishing resolution of the SL2 (as exemplified in the images in the Image Quality thread), which promises to permit quite severe crops to be perfectly usable, how few lenses might one get away with? I cannot afford, and in any case wouldn't be happy carrying, the enormous Leica 16-35, 24-90, 90-280 Vario Elmarits.

Yes, I recognize in myself too the immediate urge to say "don't throw away the gorgeous resolution you just acquired!" But realistically, I do not print many images, and those I do print are more than supported by the 24 Mpix of the SL. So I could imagine, say, shooting with a 24 and a 135, and cropping to emulate 28, 35, 50, 200, and so on. Alternatively, though I know this will be anathema to many here, there is a decent-looking Sigma 14-24 which would cover -- on this view -- everything up to, say, 50.

Is this a realistic aspiration, or am I deluded? This isn't an immediate plan of action -- need to see if my income ever comes back before I dare broach the subject of a new body!

It’s an intriguing question, isn’t it? Whether higher megapixel counts really can serve as a substitute for particular focal lengths? As with virtually everything in photography, the answer is, “it depends.”

Many eons ago when Kodak was first pushing APS-C cartridge film over 35mm their argument in favor of the smaller negative was if 99.5% of images are never printed above 4x6 size, why the additional size and weight for a larger system? They were right—to a point. For many people the more convenient format was a boon. But it missed a critical point: for many photographers the 0.5% of images that were printed larger were the only important images. Their best shots, their keepers, were the ones where they cared about technical quality.

So you have to ask yourself something. For the photographs you care about, your favorite images, your best work, what is the importance of technical image quality, and what aspects of image quality are relevant? It’s not intended to be a leading question. There isn’t a right answer that would apply to all or even most photographers.

For me, the megapixels in the SL2 (and the Q2) and the quality of the lenses do, indeed, provide more flexibility in terms of a digital crop. I am perfectly content, for example, using either camera as though it were one format smaller/one focal length longer. For example, I don’t mind using my Q2 as a ‘dual lens’ 28mm f/1.7 and 35mm f/2.1. The lens is good enough, and the resulting image has all the resolution, micro contrast, and depth of field control I want.  But the 75mm crop? It’s effectively a 6.5 megapixel f/4.6 camera. That’s not ideal, particularly the effective focal ratio. The 50mm crop is somewhere in between.

So, I think an SL2 with a 24mm could easily cover one’s needs to 35mm with a judicious crop. One could simply put it in APS-C mode to be able to visualize the results at 35mm equivalent, and those aren’t focal lengths that generally require narrow depth of field so getting a slightly ‘slower’ equivalent would be fine.But I would really miss not having something I could use at 50 - 90mm. Those are great focal lengths! And while a 50mm crop on the SL2 might be workable, it would be far from ideal both because of the inability to visualize the results without a zoomed in EVF or frame lines and because f/4 equivalent (assuming one was using a 24mm f/2) simply wouldn’t give me the control over depth of field I would want. 75mm and 90mm crops would be comparatively poor and those are two of my favorite focal lengths.  Nope, I don’t see a way to cover everything with just two focal length lenses. I’m a fan of cropping as megapixel counts climb, but there are limits. 

[JulianHalliday]

Thanks to the many thoughtful respondents here; for the most part you confirm what I suspected -- asking too much. Jared makes a telling point about the importance of image quality for the work I care most about, and in the end that is non-negotiable; which gives the definitive answer, really. Over the weekend I went for a pleasant walk with my wife, a couple of friends, and our greyhound, downtown here in Columbus. I hadn't been out with the camera for a while, and it was such a fine day I thought some urban views might work well. Put my 21mm Elmarit on the SL, where normally I'd use the 28mm Summicron. Anyway, working on the images later in the evening I was reminded once more of what wonderful image quality this camera puts out; and this was a bracing reminder that, as competent as my telephone's cameras may be under many circumstances, they still do not approximate what I get from the Leica. Attempting to overcome my terror at exposing my work here, the first linked sample image from Sunday has, admittedly, been subjected to a rather extreme preset, but nonetheless I'm pleased with it. Also included a photo I call Wall-E...

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!

 

[otto.f]

On 9/17/2020 at 10:43 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Get an M10R. Keep your lenses.

Gordon

I agree. You say that you miss your M because the SL is too heavy and not streetwise. What is the logic then in wanting an SL2? Sooner or later you will see that the basic aperture of zoom lenses is not wide enough for you. Zoom lenses are full of compromises and you already tasted one of Leica’s specialties: let the light come in and don’t stop down.

Edited September 22, 2020 by otto.f

[WeiterWinkel]

vor 22 Stunden schrieb JulianHalliday:

Attempting to overcome my terror at exposing my work here,

No need for terror, those are excellent fotos. Show us more, please.