> On Nov 18, 2015, at 9:45 AM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: > > Darren Addy wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Alan C<c...@lantic.net> wrote: >>> Brilliant images, Godders, esp. the wood-grain as someone else has already >>> said. I would be very curious to see how the K-01 compares. >> >> Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible to put the Macro-Elmarit-R >> 60mm f/2.8 on the K-01 for an apples to apples comparison.
It is possible but not easy. Leica R lens mount is 49mm diameter on a 47mm mount register; Pentax K bayonet is 47mm diameter on a ~45mm mount register. There's too much mechanical interference to build an adapter for that small gap, but you can get a Leitax replacement lens mount flange for Leica R lenses that will fit them onto Pentax K mount bodies. Not that I'm ever going to do that… > Besides, in the price category it would be more fair to compare it to the > 645Z. … "If you measure everything by price, the world loses a lot of value." But about comparing the Leica SL to the Pentax 645Z… As pieces of equipment, they're not directly comparable because they are two different formats, two different target use domains, etc. The 645Z is a bigger, heavier, slower operating camera; it's more directly comparable to the Leica S series medium-format digital cameras. I haven't worked with either so I won't speculate on how they differ in function, in use, and in their performance. I can compare the Leica SL system against a Pentax 645Z system on price: Summary, buying a 645Z would have cost me more. The 645Z body is about $7000, $500 less than the Leica SL body, but I no longer have any Pentax 645 lenses. A full complement of Pentax 645 lenses, comparable to the lens range that I can use on the SL, would have cost well over $10,000. Never mind other necessary accessories. The Leica SL body is $7450. I already had a dozen top-notch Leica R lenses (from 19mm to 250mm, plus a doubler) and another half-dozen Leica M lenses to use with it. I already had the Leica mount adapters. All of my Leica R and Leica M lenses will work beautifully on the SL; I've tested them already and know this to be true. I got all the R lenses very inexpensively because the R series was discontinued by Leica about six years ago, I paid an average of $450 per lens ($5400). Consider that in 1998, when I considered buying into a Leica R8 system new, just four of these lenses would have cost me about $14,000. BTW: The resale value of the lenses I have has doubled since I bought them since the announcement of the Leica SL… Yes, I'm smiling. (Of course, Leica SL series dedicated lenses will work on this body beautifully too, providing AF, OIS, etc. My purchase included the Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90mm f/2.8-4 ASPH OIS, which cost $4750. Testing against the M and R primes in this same FL range proves it to be a *stunning* performer, competing head for head on performance. But it's a big heavy lens that I'll likely use only when its capabilities are called for. As you should know well by now, I prefer smaller, lighter prime lenses for most of my shooting; AF is nice convenience that is otherwise of little real consequence to me.) So … In the end, this equipment, or toy as you like to call it, was the right choice for what I have in mind for my photography. I don't care what it cost and what it's compared to; I've been planning and saving to buy it for a long long time. It meets my fifteen year old brief for what I wanted in a digital camera to the letter, and goes beyond it. So far, the performance I'm seeing from it is nothing short of phenomenal. That's what is important to me. Onwards! Enough words … I think I'm going to pack the SL with Elmarit-R 19mm and Elmar-M 24mm into my bag and take another walk around the block.. Maybe I'll even bring a tripod. :-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
