Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/11/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]A more useful test is where the subject is near infinity and should be in focus, see what the corners look like with the 35/2.0, that is where the SL may be weaker than the M... Tripods are the only way to do decent A-B testing, that is not real photography ;-) john -----Original Message----- I hate tripods. I did put the camera on the rail of the porch. I'd be glad to send anybody a full DNG or blow up any section to 100% and post it. You are probably right about the lens weight; however, I did carry around a Canon 1DMII with an 85/1.2 lens for over a year before Leica finally came out with a digital camera. That combination weighs 2623 grams and is not nearly as easy to handle as the SL and 24-90 at 2095 grams. Tina On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:24 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.fr> wrote: > That you could/should have used a tripod to get similar framing ;-) > You, looking at the DNGs, are the only one who is likely to see a real > difference..... There will be no native SL lens weighing less than > twice (more likely 3x) the weight of a 35/2.0.... > > john > > -----Original Message----- > > I took some photos in the rain to compare the SL with the R19/2.8, the > SL with the 35/2.0 Summicron and the M240 with the Summicron. As I > was carrying the cameras out to the deck, I passed the kitchen scale > so I weighed them. The SL with no lens weighed 966 grams. The M240 > with the > 35/2.0 attached weighed 961 grams, so not a huge difference. > > When I attach the M lenses, the SL automatically recognized the coded > lenses with no further attention from me. When I attach the R lenses, > I go to the menu and tell it which R lens is attached. It recognizes > the lens but does not record the correct aperture. I know I took > several at F/8 and used hyperfocal focusing, but none of them came up > as having f/8 for the aperture. > > The SL is much easier to focus. I tried out both the magnifying in > the EVF and the focus peaking. Both work fine but the magnified EVF > is much easier to see. You press the bottom right button once and it > zooms to 100% in the EVF, press it twice and it zooms to 200%. Focus > and touch the shutter button and it zooms back out and takes the photo. > > With the auto-focus SL lens, there are several focusing formats to > choose from in the SL and you can also touch the screen and have it > focus there or move the toggle switch (they call it the joystick) next > to the EFG to choose a focus spot. I find the screen and the toggle > switch to be easiest and fastest. But these are all manually focused > with M and R lenses. > > The first one is an experiment with the Noctilux last night using the > magnified EVF to focus on Tom's eyelashes instead of the glasses frame. > > http://www.pbase.com/image/161961923 > > The next three are straight from the camera as DNGs, converted to > jpegs as they are exported with no other adjustments. > > Leica SL with 19/2.8 Elmarit R: > > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/161961755 > > Leica SL with 35/2.0 Summicron M: > > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/161961757 > > Leica M240 with 35/2.0 Summicron M: > > http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/161961758 > > I did some bracketed exposures and merged the photos for HDR with each > camera and each lens. These are adjusted for color and exposure: > > *http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/leica_sl&page=7 > <http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/leica_sl&page=7>* > > The SL will also bracket the 3 exposures as DNGs and make a merged > jpeg from them automatically. I found those needed more adjusting > than making them myself. > > What do you think? > > Tina >