Whyvis 18mm worse than 18 56?

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Compare to Q2, both Elmarit-TL 18mm and Summicron-TL 23mm are really worst.
 

Using a Summilux-Q 28mm f/1.7 since 2015 (original Q) change your perspective of what is an excellent lens. Q and Q2 are amazing. That’s why Q is the third best selling Leica of all time after M3 then M6. 
And Q2 wants that crown too. 

How did you compare?

[nicci78]

I owned them and tested them side by side. Same subject. 

Elmarit-TL 18 center sharpness is okay. but at the corner it is average. 
What’s worst is its contre jour performance with really poor sun stars (actually they are not stars at all) and lost of contrast. 
One positive point : it is the fastest TL lenses AF wise 

[didier]

7 hours ago, Daedalus2000 said:

Are you suggesting that the CL+18mm is better than the Ricoh?!?!   I have to say if that is true I will be very impressed

As far as IQ is concerned, yes, without hesitation (colors, resolution, high iso)

but it is a compromise, the ricoh is more pocketable

[jaapv]

11 hours ago, SrMi said:

How did you compare?

And especially, why did you compare? These are two cameras with a completely different concept.

[nicci78]

Because I once have a dream to get rid of mighty Leica Q for a couple of CL or TL2 + CL with every TL lenses 

But my dream was crushed hard against the awesomeness of the Q then Q2. 
Now my last remaining TL lens is 18-56mm. 
And I might sell my CL with it. Signifying my total exit from Leica APS-C offering. 
 

Please not that I have conducted the same side by side comparison between Q and M-P typ 240 + Summicron-M 28mm asph. 
Q was immensely superior. I did not keep M-P nor Summicron-M 28mm which was previously my favourite Leica lenses. 
 

I also did a side by side between M10 and CL with every M lenses I got at that time : Super-Elmar-M 21, Summicron-M 35 asph, Summilux-M 50 asph, APO-Summicron-M 90 asph and Tele-Elmar-M 135. 
CL was so good, that I got rid of M10. Which was a little bit better than CL. But it was not really obvious. 

Then one by one every M lenses were gone because TL lenses were extremely good. And comparison tests did not go well for M lenses. 
 

Lastly Q2 arrived and made several TL lenses redundant… That’s how I ended up with only 18-56mm. And this one is totally redundant with Q2. I guess that I will sell my CL soon. I did came to that conclusion one year ago. But still love this tiny camera, that I cannot to resolve myself to sell it yet. 
 

I’ve got a lot of fun with CL, because I was able to mount everything on it : M, TL, SL, R, Sigma and Panasonic lenses. 
With a sole Q2 I would have been bored to death by the superb 28mm. 

Edited December 6, 2021 by nicci78

[wda]

You write extensively about equipment, either owned or yearned for. Please clarify what it is you most like to photograph, and what you do with those pictures. That analysis might inform your future in photography, and save you a lot of money.

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Unplanned portraits (natural light or one flash), events (no flash), landscapes, cityscapes, architectural details, museum close ups and macro (flower, textures, etc…) 

And anything else that I fancy at the time. No limit. 
 

It is quite strange question : what to you shoot ? 
Should it be limited to only one or two things ? Obviously not. 
 

That’s why I amend my answer  : I shoot Life.  
Whatever that means. If it is in front of my eyes it is fair game. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Because I once have a dream to get rid of mighty Leica Q for a couple of CL or TL2 + CL with every TL lenses 

But my dream was crushed hard against the awesomeness of the Q then Q2. 
Now my last remaining TL lens is 18-56mm. 
And I might sell my CL with it. Signifying my total exit from Leica APS-C offering. 
 

Please not that I have conducted the same side by side comparison between Q and M-P typ 240 + Summicron-M 28mm asph. 
Q was immensely superior. I did not keep M-P nor Summicron-M 28mm which was previously my favourite Leica lenses. 
 

I also did a side by side between M10 and CL with every M lenses I got at that time : Super-Elmar-M 21, Summicron-M 35 asph, Summilux-M 50 asph, APO-Summicron-M 90 asph and Tele-Elmar-M 135. 
CL was so good, that I got rid of M10. Which was a little bit better than CL. But it was not really obvious. 

Then one by one every M lenses were gone because TL lenses were extremely good. And comparison tests did not go well for M lenses. 
 

Lastly Q2 arrived and made several TL lenses redundant… That’s how I ended up with only 18-56mm. And this one is totally redundant with Q2. I guess that I will sell my CL soon. I did came to that conclusion one year ago. But still love this tiny camera, that I cannot to resolve myself to sell it yet. 
 

I’ve got a lot of fun with CL, because I was able to mount everything on it : M, TL, SL, R, Sigma and Panasonic lenses. 
With a sole Q2 I would have been bored to death by the superb 28mm. 

I think that all these lenses and cameras are equally capable of capturing  excellent  photographs. As I take photographs for their content, not to wow the audience with MTF curves, I tend to take more note of the concept, ergonomics and pleasure of use of the camera, than of the ultimate pixel-peep.

[wda]

55 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Unplanned portraits (natural light or one flash), events (no flash), landscapes, cityscapes, architectural details, museum close ups and macro (flower, textures, etc…) 

And anything else that I fancy at the time. No limit. 
 

It is quite strange question : what to you shoot ? 
Should it be limited to only one or two things ? Obviously not. 
 

That’s why I amend my answer  : I shoot Life.  
Whatever that means. If it is in front of my eyes it is fair game. 

However,  you have failed to answer the most important question. What is the purpose?

Commissioned or similar professional tasks? Or mainly for Web use? Personal and private pleasure? Select the appropriate  tools. Why is that so strange?

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Because I once have a dream to get rid of mighty Leica Q for a couple of CL or TL2 + CL with every TL lenses 

But my dream was crushed hard against the awesomeness of the Q then Q2. 
Now my last remaining TL lens is 18-56mm. 
And I might sell my CL with it. Signifying my total exit from Leica APS-C offering. 
 

Please not that I have conducted the same side by side comparison between Q and M-P typ 240 + Summicron-M 28mm asph. 
Q was immensely superior. I did not keep M-P nor Summicron-M 28mm which was previously my favourite Leica lenses. 
 

I also did a side by side between M10 and CL with every M lenses I got at that time : Super-Elmar-M 21, Summicron-M 35 asph, Summilux-M 50 asph, APO-Summicron-M 90 asph and Tele-Elmar-M 135. 
CL was so good, that I got rid of M10. Which was a little bit better than CL. But it was not really obvious. 

Then one by one every M lenses were gone because TL lenses were extremely good. And comparison tests did not go well for M lenses. 
 

Lastly Q2 arrived and made several TL lenses redundant… That’s how I ended up with only 18-56mm. And this one is totally redundant with Q2. I guess that I will sell my CL soon. I did came to that conclusion one year ago. But still love this tiny camera, that I cannot to resolve myself to sell it yet. 
 

I’ve got a lot of fun with CL, because I was able to mount everything on it : M, TL, SL, R, Sigma and Panasonic lenses. 
With a sole Q2 I would have been bored to death by the superb 28mm. 

I have all the lenses and cameras you mentioned, and my experience does not match yours. If I have to get rid of cameras, I would start with Q2 and end with M10. Fortunately, that is not the case, as they all fill different niches. I am enjoying all four Leica camera systems immensely.

[jcalchi]

Here is my take on this:

The CL with the little 18mm lens has been a true winner for us.

If a camera's success and worth to me and the family is measured by how many of its images actually get printed and framed, well, the CL + 18mm is the horse in my stable of thoroughbreds with the most trophies!  The race really ends with the printed-on-paper image--not the ones stuck on the server.  And that little camera knocks the socks off the others.

My wife and I just wrapped up our Christmas cards for this season.  We settled on a nice one of the kids while on vacation over the summer.  We got some popcorn and sat in front of LR on our AppleTV to chose the best ones.  There were a few black and white film candidates from the F6, a nice one from the D850...but almost all the other favorites were from the Leica CL with the little 18mm pancake lens.

Those images maybe weren't as technically perfect as ones from the D850 if you zoomed in to 100%...but I smile as I write this.  If cameras could talk to each other after you closed the cabinet door, my Leica CL is teasing the D850 and my other Nikons in a proud German accent and saying: "all your flashy speed and megapixels doesn't matter, my fancy, fat big brothers from Japan...all that matters is the wife chose my photographs for their Christmas card!" Then he drops the mic and walks away.

The D850 with a 300mm f/2.8 makes astonishing action images for me, but you can't just grab that monster and throw it over your shoulder and head out:). That's what the CL with a tiny little lightweight lens on it is for.

Good luck,

jcalchi

[Rusty]

2 hours ago, jcalchi said:

Here is my take on this:

The CL with the little 18mm lens has been a true winner for us.

If a camera's success and worth to me and the family is measured by how many of its images actually get printed and framed, well, the CL + 18mm is the horse in my stable of thoroughbreds with the most trophies!  The race really ends with the printed-on-paper image--not the ones stuck on the server.  And that little camera knocks the socks off the others.

My wife and I just wrapped up our Christmas cards for this season.  We settled on a nice one of the kids while on vacation over the summer.  We got some popcorn and sat in front of LR on our AppleTV to chose the best ones.  There were a few black and white film candidates from the F6, a nice one from the D850...but almost all the other favorites were from the Leica CL with the little 18mm pancake lens.

Those images maybe weren't as technically perfect as ones from the D850 if you zoomed in to 100%...but I smile as I write this.  If cameras could talk to each other after you closed the cabinet door, my Leica CL is teasing the D850 and my other Nikons in a proud German accent and saying: "all your flashy speed and megapixels doesn't matter, my fancy, fat big brothers from Japan...all that matters is the wife chose my photographs for their Christmas card!" Then he drops the mic and walks away.

The D850 with a 300mm f/2.8 makes astonishing action images for me, but you can't just grab that monster and throw it over your shoulder and head out:). That's what the CL with a tiny little lightweight lens on it is for.

Good luck,

jcalchi

I think you have hit the nail on the head. I have just bought a used mint condition  CL + 18mm and it seems to me the compactness is the big drawcard with this camera. The images it produces are lovely and the 18mm is a really nice lens. It seems very sharp to me but I'm no expert. Some of the other lenses look like they have great IQ but are very big. I suspect my future lens purchases will be influenced by size and IQ rather than just the best IQ. Cheers

[nicci78]

16 hours ago, SrMi said:

I have all the lenses and cameras you mentioned, and my experience does not match yours. If I have to get rid of cameras, I would start with Q2 and end with M10. Fortunately, that is not the case, as they all fill different niches. I am enjoying all four Leica camera systems immensely.

Hopefully Leica offers many configurations for every tastes. 
My main focal is 28mm that’s why I love Q and Q2 so much. 
If not it may not be the right tool for me too. 

[nicci78]

Actually I really love my 18-56mm. 
The range is perfect. It is light and compact. 
Having 28 to 85mm really makes the difference against Q2 crops. 
I also use TL 18-56mm with SF-24D indoor and ELPRO-52 for macro works. 
The flash gives a different look to my indoor photos. It is very nice. 
What I like about SF-24D ? It has a screen displaying the flash range. With this information, set you aperture, shutter speed and ISO accordingly and you will be sure to never blow up your image. 
For some situations having some specular highlights in your image is really desirable. 
 

SF-24D is also very useful for my Q2 outdoor. As a way to lift up shadows. It works very well with Q2 ability to shoot at 1/500th with flash. It can go higher but I notice a loss of flash power. So I stick to 1/500th max. 

[nicci78]

16 hours ago, wda said:

However,  you have failed to answer the most important question. What is the purpose?

Commissioned or similar professional tasks? Or mainly for Web use? Personal and private pleasure? Select the appropriate  tools. Why is that so strange?

Ultimately is it really that important? 
I used to work as event photographer. But not anymore. 
For event I go for no flash : with a Sony RX1 and a M Monochrom + Summilux-M 50mm. 
Then it becomes Q + M Monochrom. 
My clients really likes the intimate looks of the photos (no flash) and the dual styles : colour and B&W. Two moods for one night. 
10000 ISO on Monochrom give a beautiful film grainy look. 
Q 28mm proves better than RX1 35mm for events. 
 

now it is for me. I print in A3 or A2 the best pictures for display. 
I now discovered charcoal piezo prints. it is awesome. I need a Monochrom camera again. 

[wda]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Ultimately is it really that important? 
I used to work as event photographer. But not anymore. 
For event I go for no flash : with a Sony RX1 and a M Monochrom + Summilux-M 50mm. 
Then it becomes Q + M Monochrom. 
My clients really likes the intimate looks of the photos (no flash) and the dual styles : colour and B&W. Two moods for one night. 
10000 ISO on Monochrom give a beautiful film grainy look. 
Q 28mm proves better than RX1 35mm for events. 
 

now it is for me. I print in A3 or A2 the best pictures for display. 
I now discovered charcoal piezo prints. it is awesome. I need a Monochrom camera again. 

What you regard as unimportant has proved my point. Your background and aspirations do influence your current decisions. Even though you are likely to dispute my questioning, you will always hanker after early professional standards. There is no shame in that.  I was merely trying to hone in what you actually need now. It is your personal decision.  Only you know what capabilities you need at this stage of your life. My approach has helped others who have asked similar questions.

 

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Actually I really love my 18-56mm. 
The range is perfect. It is light and compact. 
Having 28 to 85mm really makes the difference against Q2 crops. 
I also use TL 18-56mm with SF-24D indoor and ELPRO-52 for macro works. 
The flash gives a different look to my indoor photos. It is very nice. 
What I like about SF-24D ? It has a screen displaying the flash range. With this information, set you aperture, shutter speed and ISO accordingly and you will be sure to never blow up your image. 
For some situations having some specular highlights in your image is really desirable. 
 

SF-24D is also very useful for my Q2 outdoor. As a way to lift up shadows. It works very well with Q2 ability to shoot at 1/500th with flash. It can go higher but I notice a loss of flash power. So I stick to 1/500th max. 

You may also have a look at Sigma 18-50/2.8. My initial analysis shows similar quality as 18-56, but I have not formed a final opinion yet.
The Sigma has a maximum reproduction ratio of 1:2.8, which classifies it as a macro. For example, 18-56 with ELPRO-52 has a maximum reproduction ratio of 1:2.

[nicci78]

Please compare them side by side against the sun. 
Then also compare AF speed and especially reliability. 
 

My L-mount Sigma’s are not good enough in contre jour. And AF can be impossible to use in certain condition such as sunset or sunrise. 
 

For example I prefer TL 18-56mm at 56mm against Sigma 56mm DC DN. just because the Leica’s AF is more dependable. It never failed me. But Sigma’s can from time to time. 

 

Also be aware of chromatic aberrations. More pronounced on Sigma than Leica’s especially longitudinal ones. Which are almost impossible to correct in post  

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by nicci78

[SrMi]

55 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Please compare them side by side against the sun. 
Then also compare AF speed and especially reliability. 
 

My L-mount Sigma’s are not good enough in contre jour. And AF can be impossible to use in certain condition such as sunset or sunrise. 
 

For example I prefer TL 18-56mm at 56mm against Sigma 56mm DC DN. just because the Leica’s AF is more dependable. It never failed me. But Sigma’s can from time to time. 

 

Also be aware of chromatic aberrations. More pronounced on Sigma than Leica’s especially longitudinal ones. Which are almost impossible to correct in post  

 

Dustin Abbott did a review of Sigma lens with Sony mount. You may find your answers there.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[nicci78]

Thanks, but I review lenses myself. I just found that every reviewers only test what cares for them. 
Therefore I got my own benchmark and procedure. 
I may or may not test the Sigma 18-50mm. We’ll see. 
But one thing for sure, it is too short at 50mm (75mm) I really love 56-60mm (85-90mm) My Lightroom statistics proved it. And I usually dislike 75mm M lenses, but love 90mm ones