Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 on SL2

[NightPix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Has anyone tried an Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 m-mount on an SL2 or SL2-s using the Leica m to L adapter. I’m thinking of picking up one of these lenses to go with my other m-mount lenses, and I’m one curious how the older lens does on the newer body and with the higher res sensor. 

[Photoworks]

Any reason why?

I use the 21 SEM on the SL2 and it does ok.

but the Panasonic 20-60 zoom has the same quality even wide open 

[Advertisement]

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

[S/W]

Yes, occasionally I use the combination SL2-S and Tri Elmar 4.0/28-35-50 (II). The speed is more than sufficient in combination with the S and the weight speaks for itself, but I actually prefer the Vario-Elmarit SL 2.8/24-70 Asph because of the autofocus.

Nevertheless, attached is a photo in the combination SL2-S and Tri-Elmar 4.0/28-35-50 (II):

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!

Leica SL2-S * Leica Tri-Elmar M 4.0/28-35-50 Asph (II) * 28mm * ISO 100 * 1/640 sec * f/8.0 * C1 * NiK SEP3

 

[NightPix]

Thanks for the comments! I have the Leica 24-70 and love the autofocus, especially when I’m moving around a lot or there’s action. When I’m taking my time to visualize and compose properly I like manual focus, but I hate changing lenses all the time, so I tend to go with whatever m-lens I have on the camera, and then end up cropping in post. I thought maybe the tri-elmar would make life a bit simpler. It’s good to know that it will work, so now maybe I’ll start shopping for a good copy. 
 

Before you ask, yes I did consider getting an m11, but my old eyes struggle with rangefinder focusing. I may rent one for a month just to see if I can manage. 
 

Again, thanks for the comments. 

Edited December 4, 2022 by NightPix

[Jean-Michel]

I have the WATE and the SL2. Combination works just fine, as do all my M lenses with the SL2. Still, I will mostly use the WATE with my M-P (240) and EVF.

[Snap Happy]

On 12/4/2022 at 2:17 PM, Jean-Michel said:

I have the WATE and the SL2. Combination works just fine, as do all my M lenses with the SL2. Still, I will mostly use the WATE with my M-P (240) and EVF.

Interesting to hear. I have an 18mm Super Elmar-M, a 21mm Super Elmar-M and a 28mm Elmar-M in my wide-angle collection and I would love to know how they perform on the SL2S, compared to my M10-P. I do a lot of architecture and interior work, but rarely have recourse to tripod or lights, so the IBIS and low light performance of the SL2S appeals. I need to be sure that my M glass will perform as well as they do on my M.

[Jean-Michel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, Snap Happy said:

Interesting to hear. I have an 18mm Super Elmar-M, a 21mm Super Elmar-M and a 28mm Elmar-M in my wide-angle collection and I would love to know how they perform on the SL2S, compared to my M10-P. I do a lot of architecture and interior work, but rarely have recourse to tripod or lights, so the IBIS and low light performance of the SL2S appeals. I need to be sure that my M glass will perform as well as they do on my M.

HI,

Until recently I have used my SL2 with only M lenses, and even an old Canon FD 70-200 (using a an adapter to fit M and then theta L adapter). The M lenses used are: current versions of the Tri-Emar WATE, 35 and 50 Summicron, 90 Macro-Elmar and an old 135 Elmarit, which looks rather funny with its goggles on the SL2! All those lenses perform as well as on my M9,  and M-P.  

The IBIS is definitely very helpful. 

I do not worry much about low light performance – I am one of those who considered ISO 400 as high speed, and only rarely used a super high speed emulsion – ISO 1600. So any of the higher ISO on digital cameras are just wow! That said, I made some casual people images at ISO 6400 with the SL2 and on small prints they are fine. I do not have an SL2S so have no idea of how it performs.

 

 

Edited December 8, 2022 by Jean-Michel
Forgot the WATE in list

[01af]

Am 13.11.2022 um 22:03 schrieb NightPix:

... and I’m one curious how the older lens does on the newer body and with the higher-res sensor. 

It will do as well as on any other sensor, if not better ...

As a hard and fast rule, lenses don't do worse on higher-resolving sensors.

[Krycek]

I have two questions about this lens: if the Tri-Elmar is 6-bit coded:
- it will transmit the focal length to the camera (to be visible in the Exifs)?
- It will transmit the focal length to the SL2 stabilizer in order to activate the stabilization of the camera for the right focal length (28-35-50)?

Thanks

[davidmknoble]

On 3/21/2023 at 2:53 AM, Krycek said:

I have two questions about this lens: if the Tri-Elmar is 6-bit coded:
- it will transmit the focal length to the camera (to be visible in the Exifs)?
- It will transmit the focal length to the SL2 stabilizer in order to activate the stabilization of the camera for the right focal length (28-35-50)?

Thanks

No to both.  The M-L adapter does not have the frame lines mechanics built in.  The reason the Tri Elmar MATE (28-50-35) works on the M camera is that it selects the right framelines.  The Tri Elmar WATE (16-18-21) does not select framelines because there are none that wide on the M.  In both cases, the lens will be stored in the EXIF on the SL system, but not the focal length selected.

The R lenses on the R-L adapter that include the ROM will transmit the focal length and f stop used in the lenses, including zooms, because the ROM was designed to transmit that information to the R8 and R9 cameras for automatic modes.  

 

[Bikie John]

On 3/21/2023 at 6:53 AM, Krycek said:

I have two questions about this lens: if the Tri-Elmar is 6-bit coded:
- it will transmit the focal length to the camera (to be visible in the Exifs)?
- It will transmit the focal length to the SL2 stabilizer in order to activate the stabilization of the camera for the right focal length (28-35-50)?

Thanks

What David just said. I have just tried it using the Leica M to L adapter on an SL2-S and as far as I can see it recognizes the lens correctly. I can't see how to tell what focal length it is using for IS, but it looks as though it always records the focal length in the EXIF data as 28mm.

This is a bit of a pain. Because it recognizes the lens it won't let you set the focal length manually for IS. You can go into the lens selection bit of the menu (under "Camera settings") and choose an option like "Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 ASPH. @ 35mm" . It will then record the lens name and focal length correctly in the EXIF, so I hope it will also use the correct focal length for IS. But it considerably reduces the convenience of using the Tri-Elmar in the first place.

I think older M cameras worked like this too. At least they sorted it out by the time the M10 came along.

John

[davidmknoble]

2 hours ago, Bikie John said:

What David just said. I have just tried it using the Leica M to L adapter on an SL2-S and as far as I can see it recognizes the lens correctly. I can't see how to tell what focal length it is using for IS, but it looks as though it always records the focal length in the EXIF data as 28mm.

This is a bit of a pain. Because it recognizes the lens it won't let you set the focal length manually for IS. You can go into the lens selection bit of the menu (under "Camera settings") and choose an option like "Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 ASPH. @ 35mm" . It will then record the lens name and focal length correctly in the EXIF, so I hope it will also use the correct focal length for IS. But it considerably reduces the convenience of using the Tri-Elmar in the first place.

I think older M cameras worked like this too. At least they sorted it out by the time the M10 came along.

John

The image stabilization (or IBIS) inside the camera is lens independent. It will not matter what lens is attached to the camera, it will perform the same function.

What the lens selection may or may not do, is adjust the resulting JPEG for light falloff or distortion known on the identified lens.

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, davidmknoble said:

The image stabilization (or IBIS) inside the camera is lens independent. It will not matter what lens is attached to the camera, it will perform the same function.

What the lens selection may or may not do, is adjust the resulting JPEG for light falloff or distortion known on the identified lens.

IBIS must know the focal length, or it will not work correctly.

[helged]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

IBIS must know the focal length, or it will not work correctly.

+1. Without knowing the focal length, the IBIS will not work properly.

[davidmknoble]

I stand corrected.  I do see that for longer focal lengths, IBIS is typically better in the lens (i.e., the sensor cannot move fast and far enough to counteract longer focal lengths as well).  It also appears the there is a little room to play in the wider angles.

So, back to the post about the Tri Elmar, it does seem that using the 35mm focal length for IBIS would be reasonable on the 28 and the 50, given the circumstances.

Thanks for the correction!

[jaapv]

I suppose that you mean OIS. Yes, that works better with long focal lengths. A combination of the two works best. 

[davidmknoble]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I suppose that you mean OIS. Yes, that works better with long focal lengths. A combination of the two works best. 

Yes.