| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jamesdak
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 59
Location: Utah, U.S.
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:22 pm Post subject: Leica R 180/3.4 initial impression |
 |
|
jamesdak wrote:
Well, I received my Leica R 180/3.4 in the mail yesterday. Initial impression is that it is smaller thatn expected. Much smaller than the Canon 70-200/2.8 it will replace for certain shooting situations. I had a lot of homework last night so I only got the chance to do a quick comparision. I shot it on my 5D against my 70-200/2.8 set around 180. Mounted on a tripod, used MLU and a remote. Shot a plastic trashcan about 25 yards away, a house about 400 yards away, and then the mountain top over a mile away. First set was done manually focusing both lenses with a 2x anglefinder. I just shot at f/3.4 and either f/3.2 or 3.5 with the Canon. The Leica showed more detail (sharper?) in the RAW images. Then I ran one quick test where I left the 5D with the 70-200/2.8 on the tripod, let it AF on the scenes and used IS. Images were noticably poorer. I'll post samples tonight and hopefully reshoot to verify what I saw yesterday.
I should note that my real purpose for this lens is to replace the 70-200/2.8 in my long telephoto landscape work. The zoom gave me results last year that were a bit strange (too plastic) looking. So, if this lens will give me that capability that is all I need from it.
On a seperate issue. While the lens was listed as being in excellent shape it was no where near the good condition I would have gotten from a KEH excellent lens. But the optics appear fine. Just, once again, KEH is proven to me to be the most conservative rating used vendor.
_________________
MF lenses: Contax Zeiss 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.4,
85/2.8, 100/2.0, 135/2.8
Leica 50/2.0, 60/2.8 macro, 90/2.8, 135/2.8, 180/3.4, 560/6.8
Pentax SMC 50/1.4, SMC 135/3.5,
Olympus OM 24/2.8, 35/2.8 PC
Vivitar 90/2.5 macro
Nikon 800/5.6
DSLR, Canon 5D and 40D
About a dozen Minolta mf bodies and the same in Minolta MF lenses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
Any Leica lens will be able to satisfy a photographer.
Congratulations to your new gem!
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10472
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
Congrats James!
based on the Canon zoom review at photozone, it doesn't surprise me that the Leica is better
| photozone wrote: |
Two sample of this lens has been tested. The first sample performed quite poor and the 2nd sample did outperform its quality figures but not without problems. This 2nd sample has been tested once more after a calibration by the Canon service.
In the lab the lens showed a very good (f/2. to excellent performance at 70mm and 135mm However, at 200mm the resolution figures are not all that impressive for such a high-priced product. The figures are generally still very good here but frankly you can have a better performance out there. Regarding the fact that the lens has been calibrated it is viable to state that the lens is not any better than that. Regarding the quality figures at 200mm it does not seem to be advisable to use this lens with converters without hefty performance penalties |
_________________
T* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fotal
Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 282
Location: Sweden
Expire: 2013-08-21
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fotal wrote:
interesting observations about the Canon 70-200 vs. the Leica 180. I may have been to dismissive about the telephoto end.
Would love to seem some comparative samples if you have the time.
BTW, how does the Contax/Zeiss 180 couterpart stand in this competition? Anyone who knows?
_________________
Mr Scott please restrain your leaps of illogic. I have said nothing. I was merely speculating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Congrats! Please don't forget to publish nice samples!
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamesdak
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 59
Location: Utah, U.S.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:18 am Post subject: A few sample comparision shots |
|
|
jamesdak wrote:
Well yesterday was sunny and in the 70s. Today is dark, snowing and in the 20s. So here are the test shots from yesterday. Hopefully tomorrow I can post better images. I should mention these are 100% crops from the center of the RAW unprocessed image.
Leica:
70-200 autofocus:
70-200 manual focus:
More samples and comparisions will come.
_________________
MF lenses: Contax Zeiss 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.4,
85/2.8, 100/2.0, 135/2.8
Leica 50/2.0, 60/2.8 macro, 90/2.8, 135/2.8, 180/3.4, 560/6.8
Pentax SMC 50/1.4, SMC 135/3.5,
Olympus OM 24/2.8, 35/2.8 PC
Vivitar 90/2.5 macro
Nikon 800/5.6
DSLR, Canon 5D and 40D
About a dozen Minolta mf bodies and the same in Minolta MF lenses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 842
Location: Boston, Ma USA
Expire: 2014-11-22
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bruce wrote:
Yeps... Lika the Leica!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheve
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 182
Expire: 2011-12-06
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
cheve wrote:
torture test#1(wide-open)
test #2(at f5.6)
Cheers
_________________
Adaptall-2: 17/3.5(51B),80-210/3.8-4(103A),60-300/3.8-5.4(23A) C/Y: CZ 35-70/3.4,RMC Tokian 80-200/4.5
EXk: Topcor Re Auto 35/2.8(broken),135/3.5, Steinheil Culminar 135/4.5 Leitz-R: 50/2,90/2,180/4,180/3.4,Angenieux 35-70/2.5-3.3
M42: pentacon 135/2.8,135/2.8(preset),Super-Takumar 55/1.8,Meyer-Optik 50/1.8 FD: Voigtlander 125/2.5 SL
K: smc 50/1.2, porst 55/1.2, Takumar(Bayonet) 135/2.5 Minolta: rokker 58/1.4,58/1.2 nikkon: Nikkor H Auto 300/4.5
OM: 21/2,21/3.5,28/3.5,50/1.2,300/4.5,500/8,35-70/3.6, viv 17/3.5,viv 28/1.9,viv 135/2.3
Rollei: Voigtlander Color-Ultron 55/1.4 AR T: Tele-Astranar 135/3.5
EF: 30/1.4(Sigma),50/1.8,28-70L,80-200L,24-105L,70-300DO,18-200OS(Sigma)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
The Apo-Telyt-R will not just win the comparison with your Canon lens. It will blow it away.
Have you ever seen a Canon lens rendering this type of detail wide open?:
http://forum.mflenses.com/apo-telyt-r-180-chris-visit-t20638,highlight,apotelytr.html
-
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cheve
Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 182
Expire: 2011-12-06
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cheve wrote:
I fully agree. So, now when my picture looks bad, you know the faults are all mine  Wait there is still one more equipment issue - there is a little bit of play with my current adapter.
_________________
Adaptall-2: 17/3.5(51B),80-210/3.8-4(103A),60-300/3.8-5.4(23A) C/Y: CZ 35-70/3.4,RMC Tokian 80-200/4.5
EXk: Topcor Re Auto 35/2.8(broken),135/3.5, Steinheil Culminar 135/4.5 Leitz-R: 50/2,90/2,180/4,180/3.4,Angenieux 35-70/2.5-3.3
M42: pentacon 135/2.8,135/2.8(preset),Super-Takumar 55/1.8,Meyer-Optik 50/1.8 FD: Voigtlander 125/2.5 SL
K: smc 50/1.2, porst 55/1.2, Takumar(Bayonet) 135/2.5 Minolta: rokker 58/1.4,58/1.2 nikkon: Nikkor H Auto 300/4.5
OM: 21/2,21/3.5,28/3.5,50/1.2,300/4.5,500/8,35-70/3.6, viv 17/3.5,viv 28/1.9,viv 135/2.3
Rollei: Voigtlander Color-Ultron 55/1.4 AR T: Tele-Astranar 135/3.5
EF: 30/1.4(Sigma),50/1.8,28-70L,80-200L,24-105L,70-300DO,18-200OS(Sigma)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Olivier
Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 5083
Location: France
Expire: 2015-08-06
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Olivier wrote:
James, you shouldn't use IS when using a tripod.
I'd love to see the pictures you posted above, but they're missing. 
_________________
Olivier - Moderator 
Dslr : Olympus Pen E-P2 - Fujifilm X-Pro2 - Canon 5D MkII.
SLr and MF lenses : for feedback and helping people, cameras and lenses I own : full list here http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1442740.html#1442740 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pirius
Joined: 28 May 2009
Posts: 133
Location: SoFla
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
pirius wrote:
I found Elmarit-R 180/2.8 second gen to be even better, so I sold my APO-Telyt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| pirius wrote: |
| I found Elmarit-R 180/2.8 second gen to be even better, so I sold my APO-Telyt. |
I have this Elmarit-R 2nd gen, it's one nice lens in a compact package. It's a Sonnar inside by the way, same optical construction as pre-ED Nikkor 180/2.8.
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009
Posts: 385
Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:22 am Post subject: .... |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
i want this !
http://galactinus.net/vilva/retro/eos350d_al180.html
_________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 29545
Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:38 am Post subject: Re: .... |
|
|
Orio wrote:
From what I heard it is as good as the Apo-Telyt-R
But probably the Apo-Telyt-R is cheaper now.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 2318
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
| Olivier wrote: |
James, you shouldn't use IS when using a tripod.
I'd love to see the pictures you posted above, but they're missing. |
The thread jumped 18 months, from April 08 to now, which is probably why they are missing.
They say the IS version of the Canon 70-200/2.8 is softer than the non-IS, which is a very good lens.
_________________
View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
