This topic is in the 2011 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2011Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
p.2 #1Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
Specularist wrote:
They weren't joking around when they made that tripod collar! Looks massively over-engineered. I wish the Nikkor tele-zooms were designed like that.
Its Leica, its supposed to be that way.
One doesnt understand what Leica means until he (or she) holds something from them in hands.. for example S2 can cause some serious psychic damage.
They weren't joking around when they made that tripod collar! Looks massively over-engineered. I wish the Nikkor tele-zooms were designed like that.
Its Leica, its supposed to be that way.
One doesnt understand what Leica means until he (or she) holds something from them in hands.. for example S2 can cause some serious psychic damage.
Nov 11, 2011 at 09:04 AM
p.2 #2Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
Specularist wrote:
They weren't joking around when they made that tripod collar! Looks massively over-engineered. I wish the Nikkor tele-zooms were designed like that.
The 280mm f/4 APO's tripod collar is a similar design and one of the lens' many great features. Whoever designed the tall tripod mounts on the big CaNikon lenses deserves a dunce cap.
Mescalamba wrote:
One doesnt understand what Leica means until he (or she) holds something from them in hands.. for example S2 can cause some serious psychic damage.
+1
They weren't joking around when they made that tripod collar! Looks massively over-engineered. I wish the Nikkor tele-zooms were designed like that.
The 280mm f/4 APO's tripod collar is a similar design and one of the lens' many great features. Whoever designed the tall tripod mounts on the big CaNikon lenses deserves a dunce cap.
Mescalamba wrote:
One doesnt understand what Leica means until he (or she) holds something from them in hands.. for example S2 can cause some serious psychic damage.
+1
Nov 11, 2011 at 10:28 AM
p.2 #3Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
According to our beloved Leica guru, Mr. Erwin Puts the Vario-Elmar 105-280/4,2 ia s very good lens but, as should be expected, not a match for the APO Elmarit 70-180/2.8.
Rendering seems to be similar to Vario-Elmar 80-200/4. with the better performances around the 200mm. mark. The shorter end at 105mm. is noticeable worse and also the extreme telephoto 280mm, while still very good, is inferior to the performances at 200mm.
Leica guru, Mr. Erwin Puts the Vario-Elmar 105-280/4,2 ia s very good lens but, as should be expected, not a match for the APO Elmarit 70-180/2.8. Rendering seems to be similar to Vario-Elmar 80-200/4. with the better performances around the 200mm. mark. The shorter end at 105mm. is noticeable worse and also the extreme telephoto 280mm, while still very good, is inferior to the performances at 200mm.
Nov 11, 2011 at 12:51 PM
p.2 #4Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
I just did a comparison on these two lenses.
1.All images are taken with Canon 30D.
2.Only 105mm and 180mm focal lengths are tested.
3.The 105-280 was at f/4.2, and the 70-180 was at f/4.0.
4.Standard sharpening from Camera RAW.
5.No sharpening on crop images, either.
6.5200K WB.
2011/11/19
1.Add 80-200/f4, 180/3.4, 180/2.8 APO, 180/2 APO center crops.
2.The lighting is very different from my previous test.
Two lenses are based on similar desgin. The 105-280 zoom is much longer, as expected.
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/zooms.jpg
Full 105-280 at 105mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-105l.jpg
Full 70-180 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-105l.jpg
Crop 105-280 at 105mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-105l-crop.jpg
Crop 70-180 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-105l-crop.jpg
Full 105-280 at 180mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-180l.jpg
Full 70-180 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-180l.jpg
Crop 105-280 at 180mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-180l-crop.jpg
Crop 70-180 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-180l-crop.jpg
Crop 80-200 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R80-200-105crop.jpg
Crop 80-200 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R80-200-180crop.jpg
Crop 180/3.4 at 180mm f/3.4
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-34-crop.jpg
Crop 180/2.8 APO at 180mm f/2.8
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-28-crop.jpg
Crop 180/2 APO at 180mm f/2.8
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-2-28.jpg
Crop 180/2 APO at 180mm f/2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-2-2.jpg
Edited on Nov 18, 2011 at 06:49 PM · View previous versions
1.All images are taken with Canon 30D.
2.Only 105mm and 180mm focal lengths are tested.
3.The 105-280 was at f/4.2, and the 70-180 was at f/4.0.
4.Standard sharpening from Camera RAW.
5.No sharpening on crop images, either.
6.5200K WB.
2011/11/19
1.Add 80-200/f4, 180/3.4, 180/2.8 APO, 180/2 APO center crops.
2.The lighting is very different from my previous test.
Two lenses are based on similar desgin. The 105-280 zoom is much longer, as expected.
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/zooms.jpg
Full 105-280 at 105mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-105l.jpg
Full 70-180 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-105l.jpg
Crop 105-280 at 105mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-105l-crop.jpg
Crop 70-180 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-105l-crop.jpg
Full 105-280 at 180mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-180l.jpg
Full 70-180 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-180l.jpg
Crop 105-280 at 180mm f/4.2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R105-280-180l-crop.jpg
Crop 70-180 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R70-180-180l-crop.jpg
Crop 80-200 at 105mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R80-200-105crop.jpg
Crop 80-200 at 180mm f/4.0
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R80-200-180crop.jpg
Crop 180/3.4 at 180mm f/3.4
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-34-crop.jpg
Crop 180/2.8 APO at 180mm f/2.8
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-28-crop.jpg
Crop 180/2 APO at 180mm f/2.8
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-2-28.jpg
Crop 180/2 APO at 180mm f/2
http://kspqm.kymco.com/roller/index/resource/johnny/R180-2-2.jpg
Edited on Nov 18, 2011 at 06:49 PM · View previous versions
Nov 12, 2011 at 04:49 AM
p.2 #5Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
Even allowing for the exposure difference, it's quite clear which one most would use, up to 180mm. How far away were you from the building would you say?
Much better handled contrast and crispness in the second, the first lens looks listless and flat and compressed, poor distant detail also. If this is the character of the 80-200/4 I am happy not to have bought it.
In the second lens here, I see better shadow detail, more credible colour, better colour tonality, leading to more depth..and this sustains across the image. Definitely the better choice in any high pollution or ultra violet prone environment!
But if the cost/benefit does not get the 280/4 there, what about a great APO 1.4 TC? Do they even make one? Just found this, truth unknown:
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good), if it was me, good TCs work great on already great fast long lenses...less load on your Sherpa's back too, presuming you wish to retain some mobility.
Only you can judge re the focus ring compliance, it may not have had much use close up perhaps, tight tolerances etc. but if there is other damage, that's evidence building up. Then again, 'minor wear' to one person is another's 'mint'. Thanks for these photos.
Much better handled contrast and crispness in the second, the first lens looks listless and flat and compressed, poor distant detail also. If this is the character of the 80-200/4 I am happy not to have bought it.
In the second lens here, I see better shadow detail, more credible colour, better colour tonality, leading to more depth..and this sustains across the image. Definitely the better choice in any high pollution or ultra violet prone environment!
But if the cost/benefit does not get the 280/4 there, what about a great APO 1.4 TC? Do they even make one? Just found this, truth unknown:
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good), if it was me, good TCs work great on already great fast long lenses...less load on your Sherpa's back too, presuming you wish to retain some mobility.
Only you can judge re the focus ring compliance, it may not have had much use close up perhaps, tight tolerances etc. but if there is other damage, that's evidence building up. Then again, 'minor wear' to one person is another's 'mint'. Thanks for these photos.
Nov 13, 2011 at 12:28 AM
p.2 #6Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
I'd call it a massive win at 105mm for the 70-180, but the 105-280 does MUCH better at 180mm even if it still trails the 70-180's performance. Remember the 105-280 is wide-open here vs 1 stop down for the 70-180, I'd expect an advantage for the latter just for that. I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.
Nov 13, 2011 at 07:32 AM
p.2 #7Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
philip_pj wrote:
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good)...
The front element of the Leica 1.4x APO extender protrudes into the mount of the lens it's attached to. I don't have a 70-180 APO to confirm, but the position of the lens' rear element in many cases prevents the Leica 1.4x from being used. This is the case with the 100 APO and early versions of the 180mm f/2.8 APO. This isn't a problem that Grimes or Leitax could fix.
mawz wrote:
... I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.
At f/8 the zoom is probably past its peak performance.
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good)...
The front element of the Leica 1.4x APO extender protrudes into the mount of the lens it's attached to. I don't have a 70-180 APO to confirm, but the position of the lens' rear element in many cases prevents the Leica 1.4x from being used. This is the case with the 100 APO and early versions of the 180mm f/2.8 APO. This isn't a problem that Grimes or Leitax could fix.
mawz wrote:
... I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.
At f/8 the zoom is probably past its peak performance.
Nov 13, 2011 at 07:51 AM
p.2 #8Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
telyt wrote:
At f/8 the zoom is probably past its peak performance.
Which zoom? This was a comparison of the 70-180/2.8 to the 105-280/4.2
mawz wrote
... I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.Which zoom? This was a comparison of the 70-180/2.8 to the 105-280/4.2
Nov 13, 2011 at 07:58 AM
p.2 #9Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
:S 1800$? I used to see 280/4 APOs for that not 3 years ago.
Nov 13, 2011 at 08:01 AM
p.2 #10Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
mawz wrote:
At f/8 the zoom is probably past its peak performance.Which zoom? This was a comparison of the 70-180/2.8 to the 105-280/4.2
Sorry; the 70-180
telyt wrote
mawz wrote
... I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.Sorry; the 70-180
Nov 13, 2011 at 08:15 AM
p.2 #11Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
mawz wrote:
I'd call it a massive win at 105mm for the 70-180, but the 105-280 does MUCH better at 180mm even if it still trails the 70-180's performance. Remember the 105-280 is wide-open here vs 1 stop down for the 70-180, I'd expect an advantage for the latter just for that. I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.
I think my test confirmed what Erwin Puts has said in his review. The 70-180 is at its best around 100mm, whereas 105-280 has best resolution at around 200mm. My old 30D only has 8M pixels, should have bought the 5D2 or 7D already.
Telyt is right about the diffraction on 70-180. I found this zoom really shines from f/4~f/5.6. At f8, I can see the contrast drops a bit. Same thing applies on 180/2 and 180/2.8 APOs.
I'd call it a massive win at 105mm for the 70-180, but the 105-280 does MUCH better at 180mm even if it still trails the 70-180's performance. Remember the 105-280 is wide-open here vs 1 stop down for the 70-180, I'd expect an advantage for the latter just for that. I wonder how they'd compare at f8 where both should be at their absolute best.
I think my test confirmed what Erwin Puts has said in his review. The 70-180 is at its best around 100mm, whereas 105-280 has best resolution at around 200mm. My old 30D only has 8M pixels, should have bought the 5D2 or 7D already.
Telyt is right about the diffraction on 70-180. I found this zoom really shines from f/4~f/5.6. At f8, I can see the contrast drops a bit. Same thing applies on 180/2 and 180/2.8 APOs.
Nov 13, 2011 at 08:45 AM
p.2 #12Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
philip_pj wrote:
How far away were you from the building would you say?
I am about 60M from the building.
If this is the character of the 80-200/4 I am happy not to have bought it.
I had the 80-200. I will take the same shot and post it later.
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good), if it was me, good TCs work great on already great fast long lenses...less load on your Sherpa's back too, presuming you wish to retain some mobility.
As telyt mentioned, the 1.4x APO extender does not work with the 70-180, even my 180/2.8 apo. I know the prime can be converted to fit, but I just don't want to. I have strong feeling that the position of the rear element do affect the image quality. I'd like the rear element to be closer to image plane.
How far away were you from the building would you say?
I am about 60M from the building.
If this is the character of the 80-200/4 I am happy not to have bought it.
I had the 80-200. I will take the same shot and post it later.
"The Leica APO-Extender-R 1.4x does not fit Leica 70-180mm". I'd ask someone like Grimes or Leitax about fitting it (or something about as good), if it was me, good TCs work great on already great fast long lenses...less load on your Sherpa's back too, presuming you wish to retain some mobility.
As telyt mentioned, the 1.4x APO extender does not work with the 70-180, even my 180/2.8 apo. I know the prime can be converted to fit, but I just don't want to. I have strong feeling that the position of the rear element do affect the image quality. I'd like the rear element to be closer to image plane.
Nov 14, 2011 at 02:19 AM
p.2 #13Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
phuang3 wrote:
As telyt mentioned, the 1.4x APO extender does not work with the 70-180, even my 180/2.8 apo. I know the prime can be converted to fit, but I just don't want to. I have strong feeling that the position of the rear element do affect the image quality. I'd like the rear element to be closer to image plane.
My 180mm APO-Elmarit-R is an older model converted to accept the 1.4x APO-Extender-R. I have no complaints with the image quality.
with extender:
I wish it had a built-in rotating tripod collar like the 70-180 APO has but otherwise it's an outstanding lens.
As telyt mentioned, the 1.4x APO extender does not work with the 70-180, even my 180/2.8 apo. I know the prime can be converted to fit, but I just don't want to. I have strong feeling that the position of the rear element do affect the image quality. I'd like the rear element to be closer to image plane.
My 180mm APO-Elmarit-R is an older model converted to accept the 1.4x APO-Extender-R. I have no complaints with the image quality.
with extender:
I wish it had a built-in rotating tripod collar like the 70-180 APO has but otherwise it's an outstanding lens.
Nov 14, 2011 at 06:39 AM
p.2 #14Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
telyt,
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica. You may not know, but it was me who sent you the images taken by 250/f4 (v1). (the grey heron & deer shots)
Edited on Nov 14, 2011 at 11:44 PM · View previous versions
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica. You may not know, but it was me who sent you the images taken by 250/f4 (v1). (the grey heron & deer shots)
Edited on Nov 14, 2011 at 11:44 PM · View previous versions
Nov 14, 2011 at 10:05 PM
p.2 #15Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
phuang3 wrote:
telyt,
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica. You may not know, but it was me who sent you the images taken by 250/f4 (v1). (the grey heron & dear shots)
Ah! I remember now! Sorry about leading you into a life of financial ruin
telyt,
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica. You may not know, but it was me who sent you the images taken by 250/f4 (v1). (the grey heron & dear shots)
Ah! I remember now! Sorry about leading you into a life of financial ruin
Nov 14, 2011 at 11:39 PM
p.2 #16Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
phuang3 wrote:
telyt,
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica...........
+1
telyt wrote:
Sorry about leading you into a life of financial ruin
Your review and images of the 280 APO was my saving grace, once I located one and bought it, the desire and need to buy anymore Leica's ended.
telyt,
I am always fascinated by your wild life images. In fact, it was your web site which leads me into the world of Leica...........
+1
telyt wrote:
Sorry about leading you into a life of financial ruin
Your review and images of the 280 APO was my saving grace, once I located one and bought it, the desire and need to buy anymore Leica's ended. Nov 15, 2011 at 06:51 PM
p.2 #17Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
It was telyt's hare shot (by 250/4 II?) which got my attention, and later bought my Leica lenses, 35/2 E48, 50/1.4 E48, 135/2.8 S7, and 250/4 I.
Before that, I was quite happy with my Canon L lenses. When the 1st time I touched the 135/2.8, I was amazed by the smoothness of its sliding lens hood. (after 30 years!) The craftsmanship of Leica is just unbelievable.
Before that, I was quite happy with my Canon L lenses. When the 1st time I touched the 135/2.8, I was amazed by the smoothness of its sliding lens hood. (after 30 years!) The craftsmanship of Leica is just unbelievable.
Nov 15, 2011 at 11:41 PM
p.2 #18Leica 105-280/4.2 for $1800 Yes or NO?
More test shots are added. (80-200,180/3.4,180/2.8,180/2)
Nov 18, 2011 at 06:53 PM