Leica Telyt 400mm f6.3

[stingOM]

This Leica lens is really looking very promising...

My original post
http://forum.mflenses.com/my-new-leica-telyt-400mm-f6-3-aquisition-t44648.html
http://forum.mflenses.com/camera31-austria-aandand-t44883.html

I know this a very poor comparison, but what I can say so far is this. The Leica lens is f6.3, but when I looked through the view finder I was surprised to find a much brighter screen than with the Tokina ATX SD lens. In fact I found it almost impossible to focus the Tokina lens. Also it flared very badly...I think it will do better in day light. Don't get me wrong, I think the Tokina lens is not bad...but clearly this Leica lens surpasses it.

G1, ISO 1600, night time, street lighting. WB adjusted to the best I can in LR3. Very slight sharpening and adjustment.

Leica 400mm f6.3 @6.3


Tokina 400/5.6, @5.6

[stingOM]

I spoke too early.. I realised the bloody Tokina lens was stopped down. That is why it was so hard to focus. I was in a dark room with no light so I could not see what I was doing when I took the original shots. Here's a retake of the Tokina. They seemed to be very close. It is hard to call. Could have focus errors or camera shake. The Leica lens seems a little sharper, but not by much.

I know this is a highly subjective "non-scientific" observation. So the result can't be taken seriously.

Attila, may be you are right after all there is no difference!

[Attila]

Crappy light makes all lens to crap, a daytime test in good light will be better, but I still believe there will be no significant differences.

[stingOM]

Yeah, Attila I will report back again later. Got to try to take some shots of birds in the day time. If I don't see any difference, then it is not worth keeping...

Slightly off topic. This is what the Tokina lens is capable to producing. Whilts it is not in the Canon L glass league, its not bad to my eyes.

[Attila]

[stingOM]

[Attila]

Tokina 400mm is a well known good lens I think as you prove it with these samples. I always confused why people believe 2x crop factor double focal length. 2x crop factor means your camera crop center part of image nothing else which is not a better solution at all even a telephotos. Sound looks good an 50mm f1.8 lens like a 100mm f1.8 lens on G1 , which is not true , that is still an 50mm lens just you loose edges of frame.

[stingOM]

Hi Attila. I have been down this road before. I don't mean to miss lead anyone. I guess technical you are more accurate. I am really referring to the image frame crop factor as oppose to the true increase in "lens reach" or "image magnification" factor you get with increasing focal length.

[uhoh7]

the telyt is extremely strong and unique due to being a doublet

http://www.wildlightphoto.com/400r68.html

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_R4_400_telyt-R_68.html













I don't know about the tokina, but my nikkor 300/4.5 AI ED IF does not equal this lens.

and they both go for about the same price

re leica R; I have certainly been very impressed by the 60 macro--though I do not own one.

[stingOM]

Hi uhoh7,

Thanks for the info. Dough's skill does demand respect and admiration.

The only draw back I find with the Telyt is that you really need long arms Whilst that push-pull focusing system is very effective, I find myself horizontally challenged to achieve focus! With the Tokina lens, I can simply roll my thumb backwards and forwards to achieve focus.

BTW, did you see this post:
http://forum.mflenses.com/leica-telyt-400mm-f6-3-and-tamron-500mm-f8-t44895.html#1185588