My rain rant the other day supplanted what should have been about the 250mm f/4 Telyt-M.
Before the rain came I managed to get an outing with the lens and 2X on the CL, where I shot it at f/8. Anecdotally it is as dark a lens as the 350mm is bright. Its performance was miserable, both with TC and without. It reminded me of the first version of the lens, except that CA was merely bad, not heinous.
With the SL2-S, I stopped it down to f/5.6 (eff. f/11 with 2X), where Mr. Hyde turned into Dr. Jekyll, capturing sharp, vivid images. But 500mm f/11 with a dark lens was . . . ummm, too dark. Its departure has already been arranged, and I haven’t even received the import tax bill for it yet.
The Leica Compendium lumps the two lenses together as having both similar design and performance. It’s probably the starkest difference I’ve encountered between that resource and my actual experience. The 350mm is a spectacular lens, especially for that era. The 250mm—run of the mill at best.
My SL2-S has almost become like a backup for the CL pair, and now gives me a crick in my neck whenever I strap it instead of harnessing it. Recalling that my original plan after ditching the M10-R was to get an M10 or possibly an M10-P, I’m now mulling that over. If I’d had the second CL before I ditched the M10-R, things might have worked out differently.
Tough to part with an EVF like the one on the SL2-S, though. More thought is needed . . .