maidenfan84 Posted September 6, 2023 Share #1 Posted September 6, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) I currently use the T Summicron 23mm f2 and thinking about adding another lens to the collection. What is your experience with the Leica 18-56 lens? Is it a worthwhile purchase, or does it have too many downfalls to it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 6, 2023 Posted September 6, 2023 Hi maidenfan84, Take a look here What’s your experience with the Leica 18-56?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Torpille Posted September 7, 2023 Share #2 Posted September 7, 2023 Hi, the zoom 18-56 is very good. No discussion and it’s my all around lens for the CL. I love it and it produce some very nice rendering. As i see you own a tl2 and I use too have one too and before a T701. I was never comfortable using the vario on it. I think the best lens to fit a T/Tl2 is a fix lens because of the rear screen shooting experience. Maybe it’s just me. You have to give a try ! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted September 7, 2023 Share #3 Posted September 7, 2023 Combining my most used focal lengths, the Leica standard zoom is my most used lens on my CL. I only switch to primes when I need their unique qualities. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted September 7, 2023 Share #4 Posted September 7, 2023 It’s the default on my CL. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeLD Posted September 7, 2023 Share #5 Posted September 7, 2023 My default on my CL is the 23mm F2 which is excellent, I also tried the Leica 18-56mm, but I was not satisfied with the performance. So, I switched my zoom to the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 with its constant aperture which I find has much better results for me. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted September 7, 2023 Share #6 Posted September 7, 2023 Please explain what aspects of performance disappointed you. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick in CO Posted September 9, 2023 Share #7 Posted September 9, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) On 9/7/2023 at 1:44 PM, wda said: Please explain what aspects of performance disappointed you. Not the person you asked, but I found the 18-56 Leica zoom on the TL-2 quite outstanding in good available light - images had nice definition, color, and contrast that even translated nicely into B&W. However, in low light, using even with moderately bumped-up ISO, photos had heavy noise which could not be removed even with processing. This may be more of a consequence of the camera, as it is the same with the CL in my hands. Having an f2 lens available for those low light shots would be the way to go, IMO. The 18-56 is a very nice travel/walkabout lens, as is the 18-50 f2.8 Sigma. I have owned both and have been somewhat satisfied with each. The Leica lens has that "look" as mentioned above, the Sigma lens is just as sharp, is slightly faster, and images can be post-processed to be similar as those with the Leica lens. A toss-up, IMO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indeepthought Posted September 9, 2023 Share #8 Posted September 9, 2023 (edited) 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 picked up the 18-56 for an upcoming vacation. Tested it around our gardens and generally found it an excellent lens. Colors as per Leica, great IQ. No regrets. Edited September 9, 2023 by Indeepthought 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I picked up the 18-56 for an upcoming vacation. Tested it around our gardens and generally found it an excellent lens. Colors as per Leica, great IQ. No regrets. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/381726-what%E2%80%99s-your-experience-with-the-leica-18-56/?do=findComment&comment=4853363'>More sharing options...
wda Posted September 9, 2023 Share #9 Posted September 9, 2023 11 hours ago, Rick in CO said: Not the person you asked, but I found the 18-56 Leica zoom on the TL-2 quite outstanding in good available light - images had nice definition, color, and contrast that even translated nicely into B&W. However, in low light, using even with moderately bumped-up ISO, photos had heavy noise which could not be removed even with processing. This may be more of a consequence of the camera, as it is the same with the CL in my hands. Having an f2 lens available for those low light shots would be the way to go, IMO. The 18-56 is a very nice travel/walkabout lens, as is the 18-50 f2.8 Sigma. I have owned both and have been somewhat satisfied with each. The Leica lens has that "look" as mentioned above, the Sigma lens is just as sharp, is slightly faster, and images can be post-processed to be similar as those with the Leica lens. A toss-up, IMO. Exactly. That is why I have a prime for low- light situations. You cannot justifiably blame the zoom lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dopaco Posted September 9, 2023 Share #10 Posted September 9, 2023 All lenses have their hot spot at f, it's best to guess what it is and work on it. If you have to work in low light, a flash or plugin would be a solution. Indoor photo TL2+Tl 18.56. ISO 3200, f3.5.18mm, v 1/60 Edited with Photoshop. 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 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/381726-what%E2%80%99s-your-experience-with-the-leica-18-56/?do=findComment&comment=4853816'>More sharing options...
Dopaco Posted September 9, 2023 Share #11 Posted September 9, 2023 Here the church door in the original photo was dark with no details, I raised shadows and the details appeared. Leica TL2+T 18-56 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! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/381726-what%E2%80%99s-your-experience-with-the-leica-18-56/?do=findComment&comment=4853871'>More sharing options...
Rick in CO Posted September 10, 2023 Share #12 Posted September 10, 2023 23 hours ago, wda said: Exactly. That is why I have a prime for low- light situations. You cannot justifiably blame the zoom lens. Not blaming the zoom at all, just acknowledging its limitations. My 28/35/50 MATE is backed up by a 50 APO Summicron for exactly that reasoning. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nrj Posted September 12, 2023 Share #13 Posted September 12, 2023 I use the 18-56 on a T701. It works well, I like the rendering, and it’s a very good walk around lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 12, 2023 Share #14 Posted September 12, 2023 On 9/9/2023 at 4:37 AM, Rick in CO said: Not the person you asked, but I found the 18-56 Leica zoom on the TL-2 quite outstanding in good available light - images had nice definition, color, and contrast that even translated nicely into B&W. However, in low light, using even with moderately bumped-up ISO, photos had heavy noise which could not be removed even with processing. This may be more of a consequence of the camera, as it is the same with the CL in my hands. Having an f2 lens available for those low light shots would be the way to go, IMO. The 18-56 is a very nice travel/walkabout lens, as is the 18-50 f2.8 Sigma. I have owned both and have been somewhat satisfied with each. The Leica lens has that "look" as mentioned above, the Sigma lens is just as sharp, is slightly faster, and images can be post-processed to be similar as those with the Leica lens. A toss-up, IMO. Maybe the processing is at fault If you convert the DNG in DXO and then go to LR or ACR the results are excellent. Topaz is quite good as well. ACR /LR has also sen quite a bit of improvement in the latest iteration Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick in CO Posted September 12, 2023 Share #15 Posted September 12, 2023 3 hours ago, jaapv said: Maybe the processing is at fault If you convert the DNG in DXO and then go to LR or ACR the results are excellent. Topaz is quite good as well. ACR /LR has also sen quite a bit of improvement in the latest iteration Perhaps, I am not in any way an expert with Photoshop and DeNoise. My comment related to maybe 2% of the pictures I took with the 18-56 lens, either indoors or at dusk. Again, the 18-56 is a great walk-about lens, if still using I might have the 23mm f2 in my pocket for those low light shots. I keep my CL for a long focal length zoom (safari/wildlife) and a couple of f1.4 Sigma primes which are large in size, but quite good at f2-2.8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandyfaf Posted September 12, 2023 Share #16 Posted September 12, 2023 I bought the Leica 18-56 when I first got my CL. The reason was I didn’t know if I wanted the 23 or 35 and couldn’t afford both. I have been a photographer for 30 years or so and this was my first ever zoom. I bought it second hand so was confident of a decent resale value. After the trip I was on I went through my LR exif data and most images were shot at 23mm. I traded it in for that lens. Problem was I really didn’t get on with it at all (23mm), may have been a bad copy and I preferred the rendering of the 18mm which I also have. Now, having looked back on the files from that trip I’m on the hunt again for a decent 18-56. It does have its limitations but the qualities I was after were for sure there in abundance. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 12, 2023 Share #17 Posted September 12, 2023 1 hour ago, Rick in CO said: Perhaps, I am not in any way an expert with Photoshop and DeNoise. My comment related to maybe 2% of the pictures I took with the 18-56 lens, either indoors or at dusk. Again, the 18-56 is a great walk-about lens, if still using I might have the 23mm f2 in my pocket for those low light shots. I keep my CL for a long focal length zoom (safari/wildlife) and a couple of f1.4 Sigma primes which are large in size, but quite good at f2-2.8. Yes I used it for Safari a number of times with the 105-280 R, then the Sigma 100-400 and now I went for a used SL and Sigma 150-600. I must say that the pleasure of using ascends with this series of combos. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawman Posted September 12, 2023 Share #18 Posted September 12, 2023 6 hours ago, jaapv said: Yes I used it for Safari a number of times with the 105-280 R, then the Sigma 100-400 and now I went for a used SL and Sigma 150-600. I must say that the pleasure of using ascends with this series of combos. And so does the weight 🤪 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 12, 2023 Share #19 Posted September 12, 2023 Well, the 105-280 R is no lightweight… Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick1955 Posted September 13, 2023 Share #20 Posted September 13, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 4:03 AM, mikeLD said: My default on my CL is the 23mm F2 which is excellent, I also tried the Leica 18-56mm, but I was not satisfied with the performance. So, I switched my zoom to the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 with its constant aperture which I find has much better results for me. Same here for my CL - Summi 23 plus sigma 18-50mm. Although I don't use the CL any where enough as I can't seem to leave the house without my M10-R. 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.