Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2017/06/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I carried only the SL and 24-90 and 50/1.4 to Syria. I figured if anything broke, I would use my cell phone. Nothing broke. I carried the camera with the 24-90 90% of the time. I used the 50/1.4 for portraits of kids mostly. I walked a lot carrying all of my equipment. I'm a 71 year old woman with two artificial knees. The camera and lens were never too heavy for me. I never got a sore neck or shoulder from carrying the camera. The auto-focus on this camera is phenomenal. I carried the M6 and Noctilux for many, many years with 300 rolls of film in a backpack. This is certainly equal or easier as far as I'm concerned. Two tiny little 128 GB cards held all of my photos. Tina On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:28 PM, <hopsternew at gmail.com> wrote: > Bob I should have more correctly said that the ROM functions with the R > lenses are not relevant with the M lenses and there is no mechanical > linkage for aperture operation with M lenses as we know. > And yes the M optical dot coding is relevant. > My love for the 24-90 and OIS is not undiluted I confess, or at least the > jury is still out for me. > The way I use the SL focus is to use a single AF point in AFs operating in > MF with the rear button (as I was taught for fashion/beauty with DSLRs) > But I don?t always see what I think ought to be bitingly sharp even though > I am typically f/9.5 and be there for studio. > It certainly can be but maybe I need more practice. To be fair when you > are seeing S and SL files from same environment at 100% on your editing > monitor..... > Maybe the OIS is making my slower exposures sharper but I am not noticing > it. It?s a thing to remember when I go to tripod though. > > As an aside to that let?s see if all of those acronyms provoke comments! > > Handling wise for me the SL-and 24-90 doesn?t feel appreciably lighter > that the S with say 70 and the S is much better ergonomically as far as > holding comfort. That changes if you put the battery grip on the SL > Without that it is the sharp lower edge that bites me a bit after an hour > or two and a few hundred frames. Again it obviously it depends on how you > are shooting. Sitting or kneeling on the studio floor hand-holding that > thing, align focus point compose shoot, maybe a frame every three seconds > for sets of 30 or 50. Maybe 300-500 frames in a couple of hours, more if I > am shooting with both cameras. > > > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Bob Adler > Sent: Saturday, 10 June 2017 10:01 AM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica SL lens question > > My M adapter has contacts. Also, the lens information on coded M lenses > is passed through to become part of the EXIF information. > > Relative to Aram's question, there are a couple of things that I like > about SL lenses vs third party lenses: > 1. SL lenses have OIS. I find this is very helpful in keeping the ISO > lower and the shutter speed higher by a couple of stops. > 2. The autofocus is pretty impressive, but I'm not shooting sports or > moving animals, jus grandsons... > 3. Have you added the weight of the SL/R or whatever adapter to your calcs? > 4. The SL 24-90 isn't really that large. The hood and small body make it > appear that way. My bride thinks it looks, overall, smaller than most N & C > cameras she sees. YMMV > Good luck, > Bob > > Bob Adler > www.robertadlerphotography.com > > > On Jun 8, 2017, at 9:33 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Aram you might like to research the exact functionality and cost for the > R > > adaptor as part of your considerations? Doug may be able to comment > there? > > I have the M adaptor but that has no linkages or contacts at all of > course > > > >> On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 at 2:21 pm, Aram <leica_r8 at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi. I was wondering about an alternative lens for the SL. My biggest > >> gripe (aside from price) is the weight of the system and had a thought > of a > >> way to perhaps lighten the load a bit. I have the 35-70/4 but I have > >> always thought I could use a bit more range. So, how about the Leica > 28-90 > >> ASPH? I hear it is a pretty darn good lens, weighs about 50% less than > the > >> new 24-90 for the SL and can be had for a lot less money. Does anybody > >> know how it would compare optically with the 24-90? I found some MTF > >> curves for each, and it looks like the new SL lens is better, but that > does > >> not tell me much about real life situations. True, you give up AF, but > I > >> do that now anyway using my 35-70 on my Nikon. And I played around > with an > >> SL a bit last time I was in Seattle and I was able to focus it > accurately > >> with a much higher success rate than with my Nikon D750. I was at one > time > >> tempted to get the 28-90 until I found out that Leitax does not adapt > that > >> lens to a Nikon mount. > >> > >> Aram > >> > >> > >> Aram Langhans > >> (Semi) Retired Science Teacher > >> & Unemployed photographer > >> > >> ?The Human Genome Project has proved Darwin more right than Darwin > himself > >> would ever have dared dream.? James D. Watson > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Tina Manley www.tinamanley.com tina-manley.artistwebsites.com http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html