Leica vs Lumix Lens - Seeing things differently.

[AeroMirage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was out shooting yesterday, and A/B tested 2 lenses and saw a huge difference in the results. 

SL2 body with VARIO-ELMARIT-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 ASPH. and Panasonic Lumix S PRO 70-200mm f/2.8 O.I.S. Lens.

The same ND4 filter was used on both. 

Why is there such a difference?

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!

[SrMi]

When comparing the two lenses, you should use the same exposure (shutter speed, aperture) and brightness (ISO, EC).

[Advertisement]

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

[Al Brown]

Factors: f/stop, dramatically different shutter speed, jpeg mode, most likely AWB, two completely different lens designs

 

[AeroMirage]

I wasn't trying to do a scientific comparison. Just out shooting then saw noticeable differences when reviewing the shots in post.

Every shot I made with the Leica lens seemed to have deeper color (saturation).

Now that my curiosity is aroused.... I will have to do a controlled comparison. 

I'll A/B again using same parameters and see what happens.

[LD_50]

Looks like the scenes are different so the auto white balance will be different. Combine that with every shooting parameter being different (ISO, shutter speed, aperture, etc) and this ends up not being an A/B test. 

[Guest]

Different variables produce different results. I'm a big fan of that Pana lens, btw. Used it for an event last year on an SL2 and came away very impressed.

[AeroMirage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok. Now I did a controlled test and the results are virtually the same.

Now I see the major impact shutter speed, ISO, F stop all have.

I am glad they are essentially the same as I want to be able to choose the lens I use based on FOV and reach and not that one would deliver different image attributes.

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!

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, AeroMirage said:

Ok. Now I did a controlled test and the results are virtually the same.

Now I see the major impact shutter speed, ISO, F stop all have.

I am glad they are essentially the same as I want to be able to choose the lens I use based on FOV and reach and not that one would deliver different image attributes.

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!

I can still see the Leica shining through, even on this very small preview. But you are right the differences are less dramatic than in the first comparison.

The FL can also have an impact. Using the Lumix at 70 could be worse than comparing both at 90 mm because the extreme ends of the zooms will be their weakest points. With the excellent (and expensive) 24-90 the extreme ends will probably still perform great, while the Lumix can show  improvement from 70 to 90 and deterioration 150 to 200 or so. I do not have these lenses, so this is just an extrapolation of my experience with other zoom lenses.

[davidmknoble]

Zooms are also prone to very different problems at different focal lengths.  The strengths of the 24-90 are going to be different than the 70-200.  Many zooms are strongest somewhere in the middle 2/3’s allowing for problems on either end.  I think understanding the strengths of each lens will help decide what to use.