Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

It has been out in fairly wet conditions without any ill effects but obviously I did no formal test. All reviews mention weather resistance as a plus. However, I use it without the foot and I don’t trust the sealing of the lens on that spot when without,  so I sealed it there with water-resistant tape. 
 

 

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!

Better sealing is a plus for the SL 90-280. A friend borrowed mine for an Iceland trip and it got drenched with no ill effects. So I sold it to him, as size/weight limited my use.  Considering a replacement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I rather doubt that there is a difference in sealing between the two. The 70-200 was drenched during a couple of days of  tropical downpours in an open vehicle without any problems. Just leave the foot on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, jaapv said:

I rather doubt that there is a difference in sealing between the two. The 70-200 was drenched during a couple of days of  tropical downpours in an open vehicle without any problems. Just leave the foot on. 

I would guess that all the buttons, aperture ring, etc present more opportunities for issues than the clean exterior of the SL. The 90-280, with internal zooming like the Sigma, is surely even better sealed than the 24-90, which impressed Roger, as it should.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/02/a-peak-inside-the-leica-vario-elmarit-sl-24-90mm-f2-8-4-asph/?srsltid=AfmBOoqq4PO4ionHfrlM8xNEi-WKF0O-5z8-kWpaf4kYOoqjBIW_BS3R

Leica had to match the camera’s IP 54 rating.

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t recall an IP rating for the 90-280, the lens is too much of a brick for me anyway. I can only say that the Sigma was just fine in the most severe conditions that I will encounter. I’m not taking it diving. IP 54 is good, but not watertight. It is splashing water from all directions for half an hour. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I don’t recall an IP rating for the 90-280, the lens is too much of a brick for me anyway. I can only say that the Sigma was just fine in the most severe conditions that I will encounter. I’m not taking it diving. IP 54 is good, but not watertight. It is splashing water from all directions for half an hour. 

I’m just saying that the Leica is most likely better sealed, whether or not you can see any benefit for your personal use (prudent of you not to go diving with it).

The 90-280 was released at about the same time as the original SL, which is IP 54 rated, unlike most any major camera line I can name.  Karbe emphasized the robust build for the camera and 90-280, and Leica’s own marketing language for the lens, while not IP rated, says “dust proof and waterproof.”  The Sigma is advertised as “dust and splash resistant.”  A simple observation; not worth  all the argument. 

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That is nearly identical to the official  words of IP54. However, the reason that I prefer the Sigma, quite apart from the price,, is that it I a more convenient focal length, a constant 2.8, considerably lighter and smaller, built like a tank, and of comparable IQ. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, which is why I only cited weather sealing as a Leica advantage. The Sigma’s hood attachment, obstructing part of the zoom ring does, however, seem a misstep.  Do you routinely use the hood? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Replaced it by a rubber hood from Amazon. 

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The original hoods from Sigma for their long lenses are worthless. As soon as there is any lateral force the plastic holding the set screw shatters. I replaced the 150-600 one by a screw-in metal one, the 70-200 by a rubber one, , the Panasonic 1.8/35 ( which is solid but fugly) by a nice vented one and the Summicron 2.0/50 which has an ugly metal tulip one which chips its coating will have a rectangular Haoge one. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the SL2S

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

... I have something yellow and green too. Very nice lens. No wonder why Leica rebadged it ...

 

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

... more yellow and green :) 

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

... and a bit yellow and white ... the lens is also very good at short distances.

 

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

... "Come Fly With Me"  - in our little village we have some Highland - Cattle. The flies on the nose are also impressive - even if they are outside the depth of field (f/2,8) - and no Eye-AF :) 

 

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 by TeleElmar135mm
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

... and a gourmet teenager (169mm/2,8)

 

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!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

... and something in b/w from our garden.

 

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
16 hours ago, xdharmax said:

is anyone using this sigma with sl3/s ? please share it how about the ibis is it work or just in body that work ?

I have used Sigma 70-200mm on SL3 (and SL3-S) for a long time. Excellent stabilisation, despite only lens stabilisation as far as I can tell. No problem with shutter at 1/60 s at 200mm (which is fine+ in my book). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

... and one more more in b/w.

 

 

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 by TeleElmar135mm
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...