SrMi Posted March 9, 2023 Share #41 Posted March 9, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) https://www.dpreview.com/news/9657627837/leica-announces-vario-elmar-sl-100-400-f5-6-3-and-1-4x-extender 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 9, 2023 Posted March 9, 2023 Hi SrMi, Take a look here SL 100-400 f/5.6-6 Rebrand But Not the Same Lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
BernardC Posted March 9, 2023 Share #42 Posted March 9, 2023 32 minutes ago, Photoworks said: https://www.thephoblographer.com/2023/03/09/is-the-new-leica-100-400mm-lens-a-sigma-clone/ Unfortunately, that article is idle speculation, which is what we are doing here as well. He thinks that Leica's 24-70 uses a different AF motor than Sigma's version, which isn't something I've read in these pages. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoworks Posted March 9, 2023 Share #43 Posted March 9, 2023 isn't nice to have arca-swiss foot on it already? 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf4eva Posted March 9, 2023 Author Share #44 Posted March 9, 2023 1 hour ago, SrMi said: https://www.dpreview.com/news/9657627837/leica-announces-vario-elmar-sl-100-400-f5-6-3-and-1-4x-extender No zoom lock, that's very bad.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted March 9, 2023 Share #45 Posted March 9, 2023 2 hours ago, BernardC said: Unfortunately, that article is idle speculation, which is what we are doing here as well. He thinks that Leica's 24-70 uses a different AF motor than Sigma's version, which isn't something I've read in these pages. True, but he also makes a good point about the weather resistance of the Leica. That alone, were I in the market for such a lens, would make me choose the Leica over the Sigma. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pf4eva Posted March 9, 2023 Author Share #46 Posted March 9, 2023 9 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: True, but he also makes a good point about the weather resistance of the Leica. That alone, were I in the market for such a lens, would make me choose the Leica over the Sigma. I'm not sure how valuable it is in a real life. If something happens with the camera, warranty will not cover it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicholasT Posted March 9, 2023 Share #47 Posted March 9, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) I’ve owned and sold the Sigma 100-400. As others have indicated its a good but not exceptional lens. Re the Leica announced version I believe we should withhold judgement. Personally I believe Leica must have made some meaningful improvements to the lens beyond weather sealing, coatings etc. While the optical formula appears to be the same the Sigma has a 67mm filter size whereas the Leica is 82mm. Furthermore the Leica lens is considerably heavier. The weight difference is quite significant ( 1135g versus 1480 g) whereas difference between the Sigma 24-70and Leica 24-70 was rather minor. This could suggest different glass, heavier/better focusing components etc. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel C.1975 Posted March 9, 2023 Share #48 Posted March 9, 2023 The video from Leica Australia looks quite promising. No fringing and very sharp. The only downside I saw were the bit funny highlights in the foreground water-area in the backlit shot with the bird (5:30), which is an extreme situation. The rest is looking very good for the package (price, size, reach,..) 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 9, 2023 Share #49 Posted March 9, 2023 Leica has put the technical specs online (at leica-camera.com/SL/support/downloads) so you can see the cut-through picture of the many lenses inside and the promised MTFs. 400 and 200 m look a bit more detailed that 100 m and resolution falls off a bit at the edges, which is probably fine forf the centered object plus bokeh in the background sports shooting this was designed for. The plots look pretty good to me. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted March 9, 2023 Share #50 Posted March 9, 2023 26 minutes ago, pf4eva said: I'm not sure how valuable it is in a real life. If something happens with the camera, warranty will not cover it. That's why you want weather protection. I've been caught in a huge storm with my S006, and it never stopped working. All it needed was a wipe with a dry cloth after. It could have been a financial disaster if the camera and lens weren't so well protected. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsv Posted March 9, 2023 Share #51 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, pf4eva said: Oh they did many times. Of course they can't just say they re-badged, they use words better QC etc, however in reality those lenses are optically identical (sample variation may take place one way or another). Nice comment, but please provide proof. All your comments seem not to be based on any evidence. Your other statement: they are identical (from the outside) re extender is as shallow as the hull of a lense. Edited March 9, 2023 by larsv 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsv Posted March 9, 2023 Share #52 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, pf4eva said: Oh they did many times. Of course they can't just say they re-badged, they use words better QC etc, however in reality those lenses are optically identical (sample variation may take place one way or another). In addition, all your 30 something comments are aimed to spread negativity without base. Get the impression you are a troll. Edited March 9, 2023 by larsv 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicholasT Posted March 9, 2023 Share #53 Posted March 9, 2023 3 hours ago, pf4eva said: No zoom lock, that's very bad.... Leica 24-70 F2.8 which I own doesn’t have zoom lock and this is not an issue. Zoom lock is particularly important when a lens is prone to zoom creep. Leica may have ensured that this lens is not prone to zoom creep before deciding not to include zoom lock. Saying its “very bad” is unsubstantiated hyperbole, particularly when we are speculating about a lens that has just been released and that none of us has had the opportunity to handle in person. I already have a copy on order and will be pleased to report back on this or any other “real” issues. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted March 9, 2023 Share #54 Posted March 9, 2023 Lenses with an identical optical design do not have to have identical optical performance. Does anyone actually think that Sigma deliberately designed a middle of the range lens design rather than an excellent one? Give me a break! Not to mention that for decades we’ve seen examples of different performance from the same design. Almost every modern lens design can provide extraordinary optical performance. What we end up with in hand is more a product of budgetary constraints and quality control rather than the design. It is entirely possible that just by changing the barrel construction we get completely different performance due to different thermals. Same with lens coatings. Same with construction tolerances. Even two copies of the same lens can have different performance if the build is sloppy. And most manufacturers share/steal/buy designs and get others to build lenses. Been that way since forever. This lens does share the same design as the Sigma. Performance may be similar. It may not. Users report the 24-70’s are different enough to be noticeable. Likely this will be the same. Only testing side by side will tell. I intend to test them side by side but I expect the Leica version to have some improvement over the Sigma due to the tighter build and metal construction. The larger front element is interesting as well. Gordon 6 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted March 9, 2023 Share #55 Posted March 9, 2023 2 hours ago, larsv said: 5 hours ago, pf4eva said: Oh they did many times. Of course they can't just say they re-badged, they use words better QC etc, however in reality those lenses are optically identical (sample variation may take place one way or another). In addition, all your 30 something comments are aimed to spread negativity without base. Get the impression you are a troll. In this case you can hardly speak of a rebrand. Weather sealing alone makes it different. And 30% weight difference is an other major difference. I am confident all this will show in the optical performance as well as the mechanical performance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicholasT Posted March 9, 2023 Share #56 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said: Lenses with an identical optical design do not have to have identical optical performance. Does anyone actually think that Sigma deliberately designed a middle of the range lens design rather than an excellent one? Give me a break! Not to mention that for decades we’ve seen examples of different performance from the same design. Almost every modern lens design can provide extraordinary optical performance. What we end up with in hand is more a product of budgetary constraints and quality control rather than the design. It is entirely possible that just by changing the barrel construction we get completely different performance due to different thermals. Same with lens coatings. Same with construction tolerances. Even two copies of the same lens can have different performance if the build is sloppy. And most manufacturers share/steal/buy designs and get others to build lenses. Been that way since forever. This lens does share the same design as the Sigma. Performance may be similar. It may not. Users report the 24-70’s are different enough to be noticeable. Likely this will be the same. Only testing side by side will tell. I intend to test them side by side but I expect the Leica version to have some improvement over the Sigma due to the tighter build and metal construction. The larger front element is interesting as well. Gordon +1 Very well stated! If Sigma had targeted a higher price point they surely could also deliver even higher build quality and performance. In their version of the 100-400 Sigma built a quality lens at an affordable price point. Leica has double the price to “play” with and is still well within the price point of its target audience. Part of the difference is surely going to pay for the brand name, profits etc but that still leaves considerable margin with which it can do many of the things you mention i.e build a better product with roughly the same lens design. There is little question in my mind that Leica produced a better lens, the open question is better in what ways? Build, weather proofing, coatings? Optical performance with better glass? Better focusing performance? All or some of the above? We’ll probably never know exactly the answer, but we should have a much better idea once the lens can be tested side by side with the Leica 90-280, the Sigma 100-400, Panasonic Lumix 70-300 among others. In the meantime Leica Australia has provided what I found to be reasonably compelling “initial” evidence that this is a capable well built lens. Edited March 9, 2023 by NicholasT Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cboy Posted March 9, 2023 Share #57 Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) No matter what additional features and tweaks that was value added it's still end of the day a sigma rebrand (made in Japan) that still lives up to name of Leica standard and quality. It's not to say it's inferior to any OG Leica lens that came before it. Anyway seems like a top notch daylight lens. Also it seems they resolved some AF issues that Sony users had when when using the sigma lens Edited March 9, 2023 by cboy 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn30 Posted March 10, 2023 Share #58 Posted March 10, 2023 This is the point… Until now the only native option for a 100-400 was was the contemporary Sigma. If you wanted a top quality 100-400 you had to go with something like the Canon EF 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6L IS II USM. My guess is that the Leica 100-400 will be a native lens closer to the Canon in performance. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristofferpaulsen Posted March 10, 2023 Share #59 Posted March 10, 2023 i think maybe the point of it is that people who dont want to spend TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS on a fuckin zoom lens have another option (said as someone who bought the 90-280) that has a red dot on it.. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted March 10, 2023 Share #60 Posted March 10, 2023 (edited) 6 hours ago, Shawn30 said: This is the point… Until now the only native option for a 100-400 was was the contemporary Sigma. If you wanted a top quality 100-400 you had to go with something like the Canon EF 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6L IS II USM. My guess is that the Leica 100-400 will be a native lens closer to the Canon in performance. ... or Canon RF 100–500mm F4.5–7.1L IS USM. A splendid telezoom; little more reach, comparable f-stop, comparable weight, more expensive than Leica 100-400. If the latter is optically comparable, and if the new SL-bodies greatly improves on continuous af (like Pana S5 II indicates), then Leica 100-400 is an interesting substitute. Would be interesting to compare the two lenses/lens+body systems! Edited March 10, 2023 by helged 1 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.