Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/10/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The picture they show, on my monitor, is just about full size. Using that as a guide, I measured the length of the lens at 125mm. Quick size specs on the 50 SL Lux is..... About 86mm max diameter by 125mm long. The 50 M Lux is 50mm diameter by 55mm long. Or... more than twice as long and 50% fatter. In general, lenses without AF motors are a lot less fat than their AF counterparts. Motors require space. Leica lenses were particularly compact. So maybe the physical size is not as surprising as first thought.... Presumably the optical design is the same. There is little reason that the length of the lens would be so much longer..... ( Back to my theory that BIGGER IS BETTER, and YOU WILL PAY MORE FOR BIGGER, however I will refrain from Oligarch comments) Read Erwin Puts writeup on the Otus and Lux for an optical comparison. Yes, styling is S influenced. No more curvy beauty as in the R8/9. Frank ( the other one) had said that it may have been stylized for ease of manufacture... Frank Filippone Red735i at verizon.net They look to be going for the Zeiss Otus market? Have you seen the size of the 50mm Summilux, and it won't be available for a year! http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-SL/Lenses/LEICA-SUMMILUX-SL Very similar styling in the lenses to the S range john