Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2017/05/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yes. I don't agree with Brian, but do with the concerns posted by others. I won't invest any more with my Sony body with Novoflex M mount. Thanks Sonny. Bob Adler www.robertadlerphotography.com > On May 8, 2017, at 11:56 AM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote: > > Brian Smith has had a discussion on the stars issue this week: Scroll down > to the middle of the page: > > http://briansmith.com/sony-releases-a7rii-firmware-update-3-30/ > >> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Bob Adler <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The terrible Sony QC of Sony lenses plus this have soured me to Sony: >> https://petapixel.com/2017/05/04/star-eater-issue-no-longer- >> recommend-sony-cameras-astrophotography/ >> We shall see... >> >> Bob Adler >> www.robertadlerphotography.com >> >>> On May 7, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> My axiom is always that if someone wants a Leica, regardless which model, >>> and can afford it, then go get it. Because we know otherwise the itch >> will >>> always be there :-) >>> >>> I no longer have the itch, lack of $$ cures that, but obviously Bob knows >>> and likes Leica, and if the SL entices, it would not make sense for him >> NOT >>> to get it. >>> >>>> On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Frank Filippone <red735i at verizon.net> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Some comments... Compared to the Sony A7rII at 42mp, the SL is not that >>>> intriguing. The advantage to higher mp cameras is that for the same >> pixel >>>> image size, you can use a shorter lens...ie, one less lens to carry. >> Ditto >>>> the M10. At our ages, travel is more fun with lighter camera bags. >>>> The SL is not that great with WA M lenses. Neither is the Sony. Bob has >>>> the thin glass cover plate modification, giving better performance than >> the >>>> stock Sony. Is it better or worse than the SL? Call it a wash. The M10 >> wins >>>> this round, hands down. >>>> If you change lenses less frequently, you will have less dust to clean >>>> from your sensor. Zooms are good. M loses out. >>>> The Sony offers better noise performance at higher ISO than either >> Leica. >>>> If you need it, it is there. >>>> IBIS allows for M lenses to be stabilized. SL has lens based IS. No IS >>>> for M lenses. >>>> I can put adapters on the Sony or the SL to use different brands of >>>> lenses. With the exception of S lenses on the SL ( I may have not >>>> remembered Hassy H lenses or maybe some other MF lenses), all lenses >>>> require the user to open up for focusing, then close down to working >>>> aperture for shooting. The Sony allows for Nikon and Canon lneses for >> auto >>>> aperture. ( basically making N and C lenses native mount. >>>> Obviously there is a price advantage to the Sony....$5k or more ain't >>>> chicken feed. >>>> >>>> I like the output from Tina from her SL images from Iran and Russia. >>>> Superb is a better word for the technical output. But can I afford a 2 >> lens >>>> system( no use for telephoto zooms). For $15k? Nope. Amateurs that do >> not >>>> sell their work can not use future revenue streams as justification. >>>> >>>> For me, the Sony body is the best current solution for travel. The >>>> question of any / all / some M lenses is the issue. I am leaning on a >>>> hybrid approach. Some native lenses, some M lenses some Nikon lenses. >> Why >>>> not? You CAN have the best of all worlds. >>>> >>>> And yes, I do love my original A7. IBIS would be nice... as I hand held >>>> at 1/15 all day yesterday. Churches are DARK, >>>> Frank Filippone Red735i at verizon.net >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sunday, May 7, 2017, Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com> >> wrote: >>>> Bob, if you want AF and zoom, even if for nothing else but for a (good) >>>> change, then SL does look appealing. It's Leica, it handles M lens well >>>> enough, it has AF zoom, it's just a bit bigger. What else do you want? >>>> Unless you must have > 24MP. Otherwise, I don't see a downside. On Sat, >> May >>>> 6, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Bob Adler <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes. Read >> that. >>>>> But I was hoping for some much better changes. A high price to pay >> either >>>>> choice! > > Bob Adler > www.robertadlerphotography.com > > > On May 6, >>>> 2017, at 1:04 PM, Leo Wesson <leowesson at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I >>>> didn't buy one but I liked the 10 much more that the 240. Starts > >> faster, >>>> wakes up from sleep quicker, better high ISO results and the > buffer >>>> doesn't clog up. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Leo Wesson > > Leowesson.com > >>> >>>> 817-733-9157 > > > >> On May 6, 2017, at 14:16, Bob Adler < >>>> rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Leo, > >> No, I'm not. I do >>>> not see much benefit over the 240. And the zoom on > the SL makes it a >>>> great travel kit for me, as well as the autofocus and IS. > >> TO ME the >>>> M10 isn't much of a change from the 240. > >> Best, > >> Bob > >> > >> >> Bob >>>> Adler > >> www.robertadlerphotography.com > >> > >>> On May 6, 2017, at >>>> 9:37 AM, Leo Wesson <leowesson at gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Bob, > >>>>>> >>>>>>> Are you not considering the M10? > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >>>>> >>>> Leo Wesson > >>> Leowesson.com > >>> 817-733-9157 > >>> > >>>> On May >> 6, >>>> 2017, at 11:29, Tina Manley <tmanley at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >>>> If >>>> you Google M240 sensor compared to SL sensor, you will get lots of > >>>>>> >>>> comparisons. Ditto with M lenses on both. > >>>> > >>>> Good luck! > >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Tina > >>>> > >>>>> On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Bob Adler < >>>> rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Desire the zooms for >> travel... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob Adler > >>>>> www.robertadlerphotography.com > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On May 5, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Richard Ma >>>> n < > richard at richardmanphoto.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I >>>> don't have the SL, nor even the M240, but is "image quality, vs > the > >>>>>>>>> M240, > >>>>>> significantly improved with M lenses" to be your >>>> primary objective? > If > >>>>> so, > >>>>>> I can't imagine how the SL >>>> would be significantly better than the > M240 > >>>>> with > >>>>>> M >> lens. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Bob Adler < >>>> rgacpa at gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hello all. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm contemplating selling some gear (M240, M21mm/1,4 ASPH, Sony > >>>> A7r II > >>>>>>> modified by Kolarivision for Leica WA lenses) plus some >>>> cash for > an SL > >>>>> and > >>>>>>> the 24-90. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> Two >>>> questions: > >>>>>>> 1. Given a large collection of recent generation M >>>> lenses, are > there any > >>>>>>> known issues? MINOR degradation at the >>>> corners of images made with > WA > >>>>>>> lenses used wide open are >> not a >>>> big deal to me. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 2. Is there a noticeable pos >>>> itive difference in raw files? What > >>>>>>> differences (positive or >>>> negative). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Bottom line, is the image quality, vs the >>>> M240, significantly > improved > >>>>>>> with M lenses to warrant this >>>> move? Not really talking about the > >>>>>>> differences in how one >> works >>>> with the two systems. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks in advance for your >> input, >>>>>>>>>>>> Bob > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Bob Adler > >>>>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> "Some People Drive, We Are Driven" >>> // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>> richardmanphoto on Facebook and Instagram >>> <https://instagram.com/richardmanphoto> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > > -- > Regards, > > Sonny > http://sonc.com/look/ > Natchitoches, Louisiana > 1714 > Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase > > USA > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information