SL2-S Example Vario-Elmar SL 1:5-6.3/100-400

[davidmknoble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not a fancy test, but I used the SL2-S (24mp) handheld at ISO 3200 (yes, very high ISO), 400mm wide open (f/6.3) and the resulting shutter speed was 1/30 second.  IBIS turned on.  I've included a full frame shot and a crop.  What impressed me most was the detail using a 24mp sensor at ISO 3200.  Falloff is good and smooth, not nervous (IMO). The focus was a little difficult, but this was inside, in the evening without a lot of light, so I am also ignoring the focus issue (this image is focused properly).  If I were using the R system with this lens, focusing in that light would be incredibly difficult.  I edited in capture one, so not OOC, but I wanted to see how the image would end up after editing.  No noise reduction and no vignetting applied.  Clarity =4 and Structure = 7.  Otherwise standard contrast sliders used.  My conclusion from this very unscientific test is that the lens will perform great outside and in lower light on the SL2S (probably better on the SL2) for long shots on the coast, i.e., egrets and the like. I trust the weatherproofing like my other S and SL lenses.  The weight is better than the 90-280, but extended to 400 puts the weight further from the camera.  I do like the built in tripod mount so I can just put in on and tighten, no adding additional pieces - always ready.  (click to view in native resolution)

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!

Edited March 24, 2023 by davidmknoble
added note to click to see full res.

[davidmknoble]

The second series, is similar to the first, except at ISO 25,000.  400mm at f/6.3 and 1/60 second, IBIS on.  The point here is that the contrast seems strong - if I can get a strong separation of details in such low light, the lens transmits light well.  The SL2-S does a super job with low light, but the lens draws really well.  My conclusion again is that in full outside light or evening/morning light, wildlife shots will work very well with this lens and the contrast should work well with similar tones (white feathers, etc). (again, click to see full resolution).

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!

[kobra]

15 minutes ago, davidmknoble said:

Not a fancy test, but I used the SL2-S (24mp) handheld at ISO 3200 (yes, very high ISO), 400mm wide open (f/6.3) and the resulting shutter speed was 1/30 second.  IBIS turned on.  I've included a full frame shot and a crop.  What impressed me most was the detail using a 24mp sensor at ISO 3200.  Falloff is good and smooth, not nervous (IMO). The focus was a little difficult, but this was inside, in the evening without a lot of light, so I am also ignoring the focus issue (this image is focused properly).  If I were using the R system with this lens, focusing in that light would be incredibly difficult.  I edited in capture one, so not OOC, but I wanted to see how the image would end up after editing.  No noise reduction and no vignetting applied.  Clarity =4 and Structure = 7.  Otherwise standard contrast sliders used.  My conclusion from this very unscientific test is that the lens will perform great outside and in lower light on the SL2S (probably better on the SL2) for long shots on the coast, i.e., egrets and the like. I trust the weatherproofing like my other S and SL lenses.  The weight is better than the 90-280, but extended to 400 puts the weight further from the camera.  I do like the built in tripod mount so I can just put in on and tighten, no adding additional pieces - always ready.  (click to view in native resolution)

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!

Thanks David, very helpful examples!

It's interesting how shallow the DOF was, even with this 'slow' lens. Of course, I know it was a close shot, but even so, one eye in focus the other out of focus... 

I agree it is plenty sharp, renders nicely and your examples show nice bokeh. 

I have the Sigma 100-400 and have had issues even though only a few weeks old, so it may be time to just trade up to this lens. 

Thanks again,

Brad

 

 

[tpenate2]

Looking good, David!  My copy arrived late yesterday - not out of the box yet - but I'm looking forward to putting it through its paces.  I had the Sigma 100-400 for some time but sold it as I never liked the images I got from it, they weren't particularly sharp and contrast was soft.  These samples are encouraging!  Hope all's well.  Take care / Tony

[davidmknoble]

12 hours ago, tpenate2 said:

Looking good, David!  My copy arrived late yesterday - not out of the box yet - but I'm looking forward to putting it through its paces.  I had the Sigma 100-400 for some time but sold it as I never liked the images I got from it, they weren't particularly sharp and contrast was soft.  These samples are encouraging!  Hope all's well.  Take care / Tony

Hey Tony!  Can’t wait to see what you do with it…. All good - need to get out and shoot some.  Hope you doing great! D.

[drjonb]

SL2-S, simple test with Sigma 100-400 and 1.4x extender.  iso400; f8; 1/640; 254mm; handheld.  DNG opened in PS, no processing other than exporting to .jpg with resizing to 800 pix on long side.

Seems plenty sharp.

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!

[drjonb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

as above, 407mm; f9; 1/200

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!

[drjonb]

273mm; f8; 1/80

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!

[drjonb]

358mm; f9; 1/250

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!

[tpenate2]

1 hour ago, drjonb said:

SL2-S, simple test with Sigma 100-400 and 1.4x extender.  iso400; f8; 1/640; 254mm; handheld.  DNG opened in PS, no processing other than exporting to .jpg with resizing to 800 pix on long side.

Seems plenty sharp.

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 don't disagree with you...  and I'm aware that some copies work perfectly fine for many that use it.  I own and use various Sigma L mount lenses and am very pleased with them.  But at least my copy of the 100-400 failed to deliver as expected...

[drjonb]

Just now, tpenate2 said:

I don't disagree with you...  and I'm aware that some copies work perfectly fine for many that use it.  I own and use various Sigma L mount lenses and am very pleased with them.  But at least my copy of the 100-400 failed to deliver as expected...

I am sorry to hear about your copy, my one seems very good.  I think it is clear that one of the reasons for the price disparity (understatement I know!) between Leica and Sigma for similar lenses is the quality control and sometimes the weather proofing.  But, in my inexpert amateur opinion, when you have a good Sigma example, the disparity in optical performance, where there is one, in no way justifies the price premium for the Leica equivalent.  I have the Sigma 70mm 2.8 Macro, outstanding images from this lens.  I cannot see any difference with close-ups taken with my Leica VE 24-90 zoom.

 

And having owned many M and Leica SL lenses over the years and changed them often as we amateurs do, I never seem to hang onto a lens long enough to test the longevity/quality of the non-Leica options!  I am sure that a professional photographer would have a quite different opinion.  My daughter isn a professional and I wince everytime I see her manhandling her cameras and lenses!

[drjonb]

8 minutes ago, tpenate2 said:

I don't disagree with you...  and I'm aware that some copies work perfectly fine for many that use it.  I own and use various Sigma L mount lenses and am very pleased with them.  But at least my copy of the 100-400 failed to deliver as expected...

By the way, I do not think the images I posted do justice to the quality.  Any chance you can advise how best to prepare images for this site.  Thanks.

[tpenate2]

I'm afraid I've never attempted to post an image!  While I read this forum quite a bit I don't usually post.  So my advice is not worth much.  But I'll try to post now - not sure results are going to be any good but here are two shots taken with Sigmas...  the first one of girl smoking is with the 90 2.8, second one by pyramid is with 24 2.0 - no complaints here!  Both with SL2...

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!

[drjonb]

51 minutes ago, tpenate2 said:

I'm afraid I've never attempted to post an image!  While I read this forum quite a bit I don't usually post.  So my advice is not worth much.  But I'll try to post now - not sure results are going to be any good but here are two shots taken with Sigmas...  the first one of girl smoking is with the 90 2.8, second one by pyramid is with 24 2.0 - no complaints here!  Both with SL2...

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!

Very nice shots, nothing wrong with the optical quality here!  I love black and white, as does my daughter.  

[tpenate2]

Thank you very much!  I agree, they're excellent lenses, light to travel with, and the price...  no complaints!  David, I promise to post what I find out in my initial testing of the 100-400...

 

[davidmknoble]

13 hours ago, drjonb said:

.  But, in my inexpert amateur opinion, when you have a good Sigma example, the disparity in optical performance, where there is one, in no way justifies the price premium for the Leica equivalent.

I think you hit the point.  You have to get a good Sigma example, and that justifies the price for a Leica…. IMHO.

The point of my original post was to show the quality of extremely fine details in low light at high ISO’s.  This is where a lens can most easily fail, so I also showed some zoomed in crops.  I dont’ have a sigma copy to compare, but that wasn’t really the point either, it was about the Leica lens.

[kobra]

My experience with the Sigma 100-400 has been a bit disappointing. I did not get a good copy the first time, but the second example seemed ok. But then I ordered a Sigma TC1411 and that seems to have started a 'lens communication error' that seems to have bricked the lens now.

I started a separate thread on this, so won't go into the details. However at this point, I am getting a bit of a run around by Sigma support, and I basically have to send them the lens on my dime, then wait to see if the issue is covered by warranty or not; all this in spite of my detailed information that the lens worked fine before using the TC, and that I was hoping for some assistance to troubleshoot this issue. One concern is that they said it would not be covered by warranty if there was dirt in the lens... so considering this is not a weather resistant lens, and all lenses can get dust in them, at what point does dust in the lens become seen as "dirt" and void the warranty (in case this is an issue)? They would not say. 

I will see how it goes from here as the lens is off to Sigma now. 

Brad 

[NicholasT]

On 3/24/2023 at 6:36 PM, davidmknoble said:

The second series, is similar to the first, except at ISO 25,000.  400mm at f/6.3 and 1/60 second, IBIS on.  The point here is that the contrast seems strong - if I can get a strong separation of details in such low light, the lens transmits light well.  The SL2-S does a super job with low light, but the lens draws really well.  My conclusion again is that in full outside light or evening/morning light, wildlife shots will work very well with this lens and the contrast should work well with similar tones (white feathers, etc). (again, click to see full resolution).

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!

+1

Many thanks for sharing your thoughts and posting the images.

As they say…a picture is worth a thousand words. 

 

[davidmknoble]

10 hours ago, kobra said:

My experience with the Sigma 100-400 has been a bit disappointing. I did not get a good copy the first time, but the second example seemed ok. But then I ordered a Sigma TC1411 and that seems to have started a 'lens communication error' that seems to have bricked the lens now.

I started a separate thread on this, so won't go into the details. However at this point, I am getting a bit of a run around by Sigma support, and I basically have to send them the lens on my dime, then wait to see if the issue is covered by warranty or not; all this in spite of my detailed information that the lens worked fine before using the TC, and that I was hoping for some assistance to troubleshoot this issue. One concern is that they said it would not be covered by warranty if there was dirt in the lens... so considering this is not a weather resistant lens, and all lenses can get dust in them, at what point does dust in the lens become seen as "dirt" and void the warranty (in case this is an issue)? They would not say. 

I will see how it goes from here as the lens is off to Sigma now. 

Brad 

Brad, I have newly acquired the 16-24 f/2.8 Sigma lens to try.  It is disheartening to hear your story (and I read your original post).  While sometimes Leica takes longer than I wish, they always seem to provide a good repair and sometimes even just replace things out of warranty.  That is one reason I don't mind spending the money on the Lecia lens and one reason I think they hold their value.  I do hope it works out for you, but I am also glad I got the Leica 100-400.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[kobra]

1 hour ago, davidmknoble said:

Brad, I have newly acquired the 16-24 f/2.8 Sigma lens to try.  It is disheartening to hear your story (and I read your original post).  While sometimes Leica takes longer than I wish, they always seem to provide a good repair and sometimes even just replace things out of warranty.  That is one reason I don't mind spending the money on the Lecia lens and one reason I think they hold their value.  I do hope it works out for you, but I am also glad I got the Leica 100-400.

I agree David, and I was hoping for more given that the Sigma lens is only a few weeks old and that I could describe exactly what triggered the issue. I have the Sigma 20mm ART and it's a beautiful lens 

Personally, where I've landed on these 100-400 lenses and what might be worth more money is this...

-the Leica lens has weather sealing so would make me comfortable to use the lens outdoors (even landscapes with this lens make me nervous and I cover a lot of dirtier outdoor sports also)

-other companies warranty processes that I've used in the past was much more thorough than Sigma, and yes I did expect an offer to just replace the lens as it is so new (it was less than 7 weeks old when the issue came up). I had a Leica repair on my Q2 last year (totally my fault with a drop onto concrete), and while the process was slow, it was straightforward, including sending me prepaid labels and box, then charging a very reasonable fee back to me. For Sigma, I filled out a form and a person replied with a long, poorly written email with unclear directions on the process, that I could be charged but not idea how much I would be charged, and maybe it would be warranty but here's a long list of reasons why it would not. "Underwhelmed" would be a step up from how that process made me feel. 

I do realize I may be dealing with a newer support person, but even that goes back to the company to develop stronger processes and training; Leica is worlds better from my brief experiences with each.

... 

BTW, I do have the new Sigma 20 ART, and it is beautiful. I am really trying to get more into night sky photography and the lens is designed for this. The only issue with that lens so far is the guy behind the lens, not the lens  

So, I'm not ready to write off Sigma; I think they have an important place in the L mount and Leica SL world. But I do hope they step it up when it comes to service. 

Brad