Thanks for those links Adam. That's the best look at the zoom I've seen, so far. As far as I'm aware the current benchmark for a standard zoom is the Canon 24-70 2.8L mk2. I haven't seen a direct side by side comparison of that one yet. Which is what needs to be done. The Huff and Kristian Dowling (who both claim it's the best they've used) are Nikon shooters. Dowling is being taken on a paid tour by Leica to the launch events in Oz and NZ so, although he's a very lovely guy and great photographer, he's tempered in the way he presents the negatives of the SL. The Huff has publicly stated he doesn't want to post negative reviews, which is a nice change, but probably also has him downplay some of the negatives a bit.
At the launch Leica poured gobs of water over the camera and lens. They're very proud of the sealing. The way water is pushed completely off the front element is very impressive. It's almost impossible to get a water droplet to stick to it.
I'm still unsure whether I'll get the zoom. I've decided to wait until January 16 to decide (that's the day after the Fuji XPro2 announcement). What I really need to do is get out and take some photos for fun. Too much work getting in the way at the moment.
Gordon
* While it's easy to make personal insults from the safety of the web, I'll say this. It's been recently proven that goldfish actually have better memories than previously thought. Someone got paid a bunch of research dollars to comprehensively prove that the memory of a "goldfish" is completely normal when compared to other species of fish.
Adam, I quite like the look of the zoom in terms of character. Personally, I used to "diss" zooms as I always felt they were more function-over-character sort of lenses. I know the newly released, equally humongous, Nikon 24-70mm VR has some interesting look going on for it to based on the samples I saw when it just came out.
Side note...I didn't know Haw Par Villa was still open. It used to freak me out as a child whenever I went past it. Actually it still does - I've never visited.
I quite like the look of the zoom as well although I don't like the weight at all. I have been shooting Nikon for quite awhile but stick only with prime lenses for my usual walk around lenses and never was interested in 24-70/2.8 at all so I have no idea how 24-90 would compare. I only had a few shots with 24-90 so far
Just resized DNG in PS and convert to jpg, no other adjustment was done (sorry for the ankle).
with Noct 0.95. The picture was cropped a bit to get rid off a person on the left corner and I used shadow recovery function a bit on raw converter otherwise I did not make any other adjustment except resize and converted to jpg.
So far no really big complain except the weight of the lens. I am going away on a quick photography trip and I will take SL along with D810 and A7r ii (but not the zoom though) and will see how that will go.
rscheffler wrote:
Thanks for these Adam. Yeah, that theme park is bizarre! Dismemberment by alien-like man?
I kind of guessed where the transition to 50 APO was when I got to the ape, in part by the bokeh, but the 50 APO images also seem to generally have a bit more pop. Not sure if you processed them differently? That said, I like what I'm seeing from the zoom in these. Maybe it's not the sharpest lens at 70-90mm as some may have claimed, but I'm not seeing much from the rendering that turns me off, at least compared to other 24-70 style zooms from Canikon, etc. I do think I see Leica rendering from it, though in a general sense and not necessarily specific to certain M or S lenses....Show more →
It's to teach children to be good. The 7 levels of hell or something.. Park was built by the Tiger Balm inventor.
I think it was at the big black face. The shot just before the second set of Apes.. Then I had to switch back due to the rain at some point near the end of the images.
I processed all the images the same. But it took some work to get them the way I wanted them.
As I said. There isn't anything wrong with the zoom. But for the price I expected to see more of a Leica-esq signature. I don't really see it.
And the 50APO doesn't seem familiar on this camera. I'll have to go out and do some side by side testing with the M to figure out what is bothering me.
I guess three positive things to note from this outing.
1) The camera sure is weather sealed.
2) The AF is so quick I constantly though it didn't even focus.
3) The 50APO I made a point of focusing without magnification.. And I think only 3 shots are questionably focused. With one of them being a far away shot that I took as the rain was just starting.
Where is Erwin Puts, or Lensrentals, we need this zoom on bench with the Canikon competitors, yesterday
I've seen the zoom look every which way, because we all have our PP styles. Ron is the punch master, and DPR could make a supermodel look 80. The real issues, I think, are what they have been forever with all our lenses: how does the sharpness vary across the frame and what is the OOF rendering, and how do these change with aperture. Subtle drawing character also might apply, and saturation/noise, APO ness
telyt wrote:
Precise focus and EVF with an active subject are not incompatible.
Love that Doug I have been having much fun with my new monster Nikkors. I have a bunch of black capped chickadees around here, and I need to see if I get a few in flight. They make eagles seem easy
MF is quite a challenge but you feel like you've really made a shot when it works.
flash wrote:
It's been recently proven that goldfish actually have better memories than previously thought. Someone got paid a bunch of research dollars to comprehensively prove that the memory of a "goldfish" is completely normal when compared to other species of fish.
But not blonde goldfish?
Just kidding, I remember hearing that study on one of my science podcasts, good point, But does it apply to huffish?
zhangyue wrote:
Haha, I think you made a funny choice for the system testing, you have been really unfair to Leica, shooting under heavy rain in weird theme park.
As for Zoom, I have seen at least two review claim it is the best zoom in the world. but without showing us any beef: where is the comparison? This is really poor act from review point of view that making bold claim without proof.
I don't see any special from SL so far personally, but we shouldn't, as other than color,(not seeing special as well) all digital camera now days are about the same anyway. The user experience still is the key.
For anything involve people and moving, I still way prefer OVF. I feel dizzy through EVF and the feeling really distract me. so it is not about magnification only, the subtle delay is very noticeable and annoy to me, I way prefer I can capture a moment without perfect nailing focusing then a 100% focused lifeless image. Is that make sense? ...Show more →
Totally agree with you on all points.
I wouldn't say it's a bad zoom. But I can't claim it's the best. Since I have not tried the new Nikon 24-70E lens yet. So until I use it, I wouldn't make claims that it's the best FF zoom in the world. Let's put it this way, I'd buy the 35-70mm Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH f/2.8 in a heartbeat if it were an AF lens But we all have different objectives. And I'd personally prefer the 50LuxL
No special colors. But again, nothing bad. The JPG files are annoying. The user experience is one of the best. I may be bias coming from the M and S systems.
I also feel that the OVF is more intimate. Especially in the S where it's bigger and feels more true to life (not claustrophobic like DSLRs). I think there is room for both an S and an SL. And Leica will make it easier on us when the S-Adapter L comes out.
flash wrote:
Thanks for those links Adam. That's the best look at the zoom I've seen, so far. As far as I'm aware the current benchmark for a standard zoom is the Canon 24-70 2.8L mk2. I haven't seen a direct side by side comparison of that one yet. Which is what needs to be done. The Huff and Kristian Dowling (who both claim it's the best they've used) are Nikon shooters. Dowling is being taken on a paid tour by Leica to the launch events in Oz and NZ so, although he's a very lovely guy and great photographer, he's tempered in the way he presents the negatives of the SL. The Huff has publicly stated he doesn't want to post negative reviews, which is a nice change, but probably also has him downplay some of the negatives a bit.
At the launch Leica poured gobs of water over the camera and lens. They're very proud of the sealing. The way water is pushed completely off the front element is very impressive. It's almost impossible to get a water droplet to stick to it.
I'm still unsure whether I'll get the zoom. I've decided to wait until January 16 to decide (that's the day after the Fuji XPro2 announcement). What I really need to do is get out and take some photos for fun. Too much work getting in the way at the moment.
Gordon
* While it's easy to make personal insults from the safety of the web, I'll say this. It's been recently proven that goldfish actually have better memories than previously thought. Someone got paid a bunch of research dollars to comprehensively prove that the memory of a "goldfish" is completely normal when compared to other species of fish....Show more →
Goldfish are just greedy. That's why they write positive reviews and eat food until they explode
Kidding.. Who brought up goldfish BTW, I remember reading it yesterday, but I have goldfish memory
I had the Canon zoom. I was using it for a bit before I sold off the remaining Canon gear. Not a bad lens at all. In fact, pretty nice all around. One area where I feel Canon suffers is in it's focusing accuracy. When you shoot wide open at different distances, sometimes the lens just won't hit focus. These are design problems, I've done the testing. I use to blame the bodies but after 15 years of body upgrades, I realised it's the lenses. Subtle, but happens. And that was one of the reasons I walked away from Canon the first time.. And then again, the second time.
Nikon suffers less so from this. But the lenses I use tend to not be super sharp. And have lens correction problems, so all that gets in the way of judging critical focus anyway.
One area where I need to give Leica credit. Their AF lenses don't do this. At least not the ones I own. And the zoom is no exception. That thing is accurate and FAST. Far away, close up. It just NAILS critical focus. Well, critical is a lot easier with a 2.8-4 lens. But still.. It just works without leaving me wondering if I'm doing something wrong. I also have a feeling it's a higher resolving lens (can anyone confirm this?) Since I find that it tends to keep the details when pixel peeping (something we all do with new gear).
Also I know that Leica has built in CA corrections and etc. But I haven't seen any problems with the zoom that jump out at me. So maybe the reviewers are right.. Maybe the lens is the best zoom they've ever used. I wouldn't make that claim until I've used all the FF zooms.
*I can say that I'm happy with the zoom from a performance point of view. But for me, when I buy Leica. I'm buying because of a specific look. Which is why I choose one lens over the other, I never care about speed or FL. With the zoom, I'm robbed of this choice since it's the only lens in town.
Adam had mentioned in a post a couple of days ago that he was having issues with the camera when using the M adapter; well, so am I. I unboxed my copy of the camera and adapter this morning, and charged the battery, after which I changed a few settings to my liking, mounted the adapter and APO Cron-M 90, flipped the On switch, composed a shot, and pressed the shutter button. Nothing happened.
I tried again. Nothing. I remounted the lens and adapter; still nothing. Removed and reinserted the battery. Nothing. Changed to another M lens. Nothing. That's when I remembered seeing somewhere in the menu hierarchy an option to reset the camera. I found the option again, reset the camera, and it worked. Since then I have tried three different lenses (two Ms and one ZM), and so far I have not had the problem reoccur.
I have included a few hand-held test shots, none of which will be a featured thread winner, and would like your comments. I am a little surprised at the amount of noise in each of these images at ISO 3,200, 800, and 1,000, respectively. All were converted to JPG in Lightroom with no other processing.
90 Cron, 1/250 @ f/2.4 ISO 3200
90 Cron, 1/250 @ f/2.0 ISO 800
35 Lux, 1/60 @ f/1.4 ISO 1000
Dec 01, 2015 at 10:12 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
relms wrote:
Adam had mentioned in a post a couple of days ago that he was having issues with the camera when using the M adapter; well, so am I. I unboxed my copy of the camera and adapter this morning, and charged the battery, after which I changed a few settings to my liking, mounted the adapter and APO Cron-M 90, flipped the On switch, composed a shot, and pressed the shutter button. Nothing happened.
I tried again. Nothing. I remounted the lens and adapter; still nothing. Removed and reinserted the battery. Nothing. Changed to another M lens. Nothing. That's when I remembered seeing somewhere in the menu hierarchy an option to reset the camera. I found the option again, reset the camera, and it worked. Since then I have tried three different lenses (two Ms and one ZM), and so far I have not had the problem reoccur.
I have included a few hand-held test shots, none of which will be a featured thread winner, and would like your comments. I am a little surprised at the amount of noise in each of these images at ISO 3,200, 800, and 1,000, respectively. All were converted to JPG in Lightroom with no other processing.
Interesting shots and interesting story about the adapter. Obviously some recognition issues could be improved. About the shots I like the shot of the bulldog and I am not bothered at all by the noise for ISO 3200. I think that would print quite nicely. The stuff dog at ISO 800, I think the colours look flat. Maybe it is the lighting, but I was less impressed by that shot and although the noise didn't bother me it was more than I would like for that ISO. I like the 35 Lux shot and wasn't bothered by the noise there either--although the CA with that lens (and the bokeh) in that situation would bother me.
Adam: Thank you for sharing such comprehensive and ongoing thoughts about the SL. I'd be curious to see your comparison of the 50APO on the M versus SL. I'm also curious to see if your opinion of the 24-90 changes over time, like it has with the S 100.
I can say that Leica set up the SL just right for me because my mind is now contemplating: drop the R, get a used S system? Get an M system with a nice 28 'cron, plus adapters etc? SL and the R's that I've come to love? In other words, their products seem to be asking for all of my disposable income, and what higher compliment could I offer a product manager?
Congratulations Robert! Indeed I read about some problems with adapter/lens coding on other forums. Most users are not using peaking as it seems. If it's anything like the M240, the peaking is rarely visible at normal magnification unless well stopped down. It can easily be seen in magnified view though.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Congratulations Robert! Indeed I read about some problems with adapter/lens coding on other forums. Most users are not using peaking as it seems. If it's anything like the M240, the peaking is rarely visible at normal magnification unless well stopped down. It can easily be seen in magnified view though.
That's too bad. The focus peaking, although not always accurate, was one of the few things I liked about the Sony alphas.
relms wrote:
That's too bad. The focus peaking, although not always accurate, was one of the few things I liked about the Sony alphas.
I found the peaking on the alphas too sensitive to be useful even at lowest settings. The Leica is not sensitive enough. No one seems to have found the right balance
JonPB wrote:
Adam: Thank you for sharing such comprehensive and ongoing thoughts about the SL. I'd be curious to see your comparison of the 50APO on the M versus SL. I'm also curious to see if your opinion of the 24-90 changes over time, like it has with the S 100.
I can say that Leica set up the SL just right for me because my mind is now contemplating: drop the R, get a used S system? Get an M system with a nice 28 'cron, plus adapters etc? SL and the R's that I've come to love? In other words, their products seem to be asking for all of my disposable income, and what higher compliment could I offer a product manager?
I'm in the same boat. Wondering what sacrifices I should make.
I have a plan in my head. But I believe it's much to boring and chaotic to share. But Leica has definitely opened up a lot of options to consider.
Bottom line. The SL is encouraging enough to make me want to keep all my favourite lenses (M, S, R, SL). And the zoom is good enough that I could get by work wise if I sold off everything else including the M and S bodies (which I obviously wouldn't do).
I do believe the SL+zoom+flash has met my basic work needs.. So anything and everything else beyond that is just stuff I keep for the joy it brings me. I suppose the same could be said for my Nikon kit (which consists of 9 pieces and still cost less then the SL+Zoom) but it doesn't make me as happy.
Even though I am annoyed with the SL for quite a few reasons, I'm still happier to be using it then the other options I've used/am using.
flash wrote:
* While it's easy to make personal insults from the safety of the web, I'll say this. It's been recently proven that goldfish actually have better memories than previously thought. Someone got paid a bunch of research dollars to comprehensively prove that the memory of a "goldfish" is completely normal when compared to other species of fish.
it's just a saying ffs
apologies to Mr Huff for the anonymous insult
Spyro
XXX
But we all have different objectives. And I'd personally prefer the 50LuxL 
