Advice pls for new to Leica, about to buy SL

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

 

First post so pls allow me to say Hi!  I have been reading this form on and off for over a year and have learned lots from it. My photography history is film OM10 thru range of Nikons to F5. Then kids came along and downsized to small easy to carry compacts.  Back to proper cameras with Fujis: X100 - slow so switched to X100s; XPro1 (too slow for me); and XT1 with 5 or 6 Fuji lenses. The Fuji kit has been good and has delivered some good images but although well made they feel a bit toy-like. 

 

My Leica interest has been there for years. I used to long for an M6 in the days when I couldn't afford one! I nearly bought an M240 last year but - with the greatest respect to range finder lovers - I found that RF is not for me. I need to see the image I am taking. 

 

Looked closely at the Q but don't want a compact and don't want to be limited to 28mm. 

 

I went to the UK Photography Show at the NEC last wk end and played with Ms, Q and .....the SL. I had played with all of them previously at the Leica boutique in Mayfair. My impressions were that the M is a beautiful design but not for me. The Q....despite attending a demo class....still the same - too limiting for me. I had written off the SL due to size but I tried one with an M lens......WOW!! Size and weight were fine = the perfect easy carry when needed. 

 

So so I came home last wk end decided to buy the SL. I have since read lots on here which has helped inform me. 

 

Would like some help pls:

 

1. To get the most from the SL, I think I need to get the 24-90.....  My last big camera was the Nikon F5 with an 80-200 f2.8 and that was a weight so SL and lens are fine.  Any feedback from those that have carried it all day?

 

2. Been looking at which 50mm M lens to add for when I want the smaller size and lower weight. Am reading lots on here between the lux, APO and Noctilux.  I can see that the lux and APO will both be smaller than the noc. Wondering if anyone else been in same situation?

 

Thanks all

John

[Jeff S]

50 Summilux-SL is coming (late this year?) , if you prefer to also have AF, although it will be larger than the M version...   https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-SL/Lenses/LEICA-SUMMILUX-SL

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Big John]

50 Summilux-SL is coming (late this year?) , if you prefer to also have AF, although it will be larger than the M version...   https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-SL/Lenses/LEICA-SUMMILUX-SL

 

Jeff

 

Yes Jeff, aware of that thanks. Think what I need is the Elmarit and a smaller, M lens for when I want to travel light.  If I get  the 24-90, not sure I will ever get the 50 for the SL. So really looking for thoughts on merits of 50 lux v APO v Noctilux. 

[Peter H]

........................... I nearly bought an M240 last year but - with the greatest respect to range finder lovers - I found that RF is not for me. I need to see the image I am taking. 

 

................................

 

 

 

Funny you should say that: the reason I prefer the M over EVF cameras is that I need to see what I'm taking a photo of.

 

Actually, I like both forms of viewfinder, but they are certainly different and my ideal is to have the best of both available at all times, which is why the next M will be so attractive, I hope and expect!

 

Anyway, I think that the M Lenses section  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/forum/130-leica-m-lenses/ may be the best place for you to find out all you need to know about the characteristics of the three Leica 50s you interested in comparing. Lots has been written about exactly this.

 

Basically, I don't think you can go wrong but they each have their different purposes, so it's really a matter of which one best suits your photographic ideas. Many people own more than one 50 of course!

[LocalHero1953]

I have carried the SL + zoom around a city all day with a hand strap. I found it OK, but, as I still have the M240 as well, I doubt that I will do it much in future. The handstrap helped a lot, but a lot comes down to size and strength of your hand etc. I also prefer a smaller, more discreet camera when I'm being a tourist (sorry, I mean when I'm being a cool streetshooter). I bought the SL for dedicated photographic activity, not wandering around with.

 

Edit: welcome to the forum, BTW!

 

Edit 2: I can't imagine carrying the SL and zoom around for any length of time on a neckstrap, but I suspect some people do.

Edited March 26, 2016 by LocalHero1953

[ramarren]

1. To get the most from the SL, I think I need to get the 24-90.....  My last big camera was the Nikon F5 with an 80-200 f2.8 and that was a weight so SL and lens are fine.  Any feedback from those that have carried it all day?

 

2. Been looking at which 50mm M lens to add for when I want the smaller size and lower weight. Am reading lots on here between the lux, APO and Noctilux.  I can see that the lux and APO will both be smaller than the noc. Wondering if anyone else been in same situation?

 

 

The SL 24-90 is an excellent performer, if a bit bulky. The more I use it, the more accustomed I become to its bulk and weight. 

 

But personally I prefer the weight, size, and ergonomics of Leica R lenses on the SL. My bag isn't much lighter since I carry typically two prime lenses, but the camera is handier. M lenses are more compact, but I prefer the handling of the Rs.

 

I've carried both the zoom and camera (fitted with my handstrap) with two primes all day. It can get a little heavy at times, so will anything. When I carry the M, I mostly put it on a neck strap and either go single lens or a smaller bag with the other lens in it. It similarly becomes a little heavy at times, not a lot different. 

Edited March 26, 2016 by ramarren

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Funny you should say that: the reason I prefer the M over EVF cameras is that I need to see what I'm taking a photo of.

 

Actually, I like both forms of viewfinder, but they are certainly different and my ideal is to have the best of both available at all times, which is why the next M will be so attractive, I hope and expect!

 

Anyway, I think that the M Lenses section  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/forum/130-leica-m-lenses/ may be the best place for you to find out all you need to know about the characteristics of the three Leica 50s you interested in comparing. Lots has been written about exactly this.

 

Basically, I don't think you can go wrong but they each have their different purposes, so it's really a matter of which one best suits your photographic ideas. Many people own more than one 50 of course!

 

Thanks Peter. Horses for courses eh!  The X100s/t and now XPro 2 with their dual purpose VFs are certainly something to behold. If the next M has same functionality - the optical of the 240 and the EVF of the SL then...wow. 

[Big John]

I have carried the SL + zoom around a city all day with a hand strap. I found it OK, but, as I still have the M240 as well, I doubt that I will do it much in future. The handstrap helped a lot, but a lot comes down to size and strength of your hand etc. I also prefer a smaller, more discreet camera when I'm being a tourist (sorry, I mean when I'm being a cool streetshooter). I bought the SL for dedicated photographic activity, not wandering around with.

 

Edit: welcome to the forum, BTW!

 

Edit 2: I can't imagine carrying the SL and zoom around for any length of time on a neckstrap, but I suspect some people do.

Cheers Paul. I too see the 24-90 as the 'photographic trip' lens for premeditated photography - hence the need for the M lens for the  more compact and portable option.  I would carry the SL+24-90 in a dedicated holster/pouch/bag. 

[Big John]

The SL 24-90 is an excellent performer, if a bit bulky. The more I use it, the more accustomed I become to its bulk and weight. 

 

But personally I prefer the weight, size, and ergonomics of Leica R lenses on the SL. My bag isn't much lighter since I carry typically two prime lenses, but the camera is handier. M lenses are more compact, but I prefer the handling of the Rs.

 

I've carried both the zoom and camera (fitted with my handstrap) with two primes all day. It can get a little heavy at times, so will anything. When I carry the M, I mostly put it on a neck strap and either go single lens or a smaller bag with the other lens in it. It similarly becomes a little heavy at times, not a lot different. 

Thanks - this is what is making me thinks whether to buy an M lens first ......and see if if need /really want the 24-90. 

 

Btw, I see my future M lens as a v long term buy. 

[jrp]

The 24-90, which I discounted completely initially has found a place in my bag for general walk-around shooting, as the weight is comparable to 3-4 M lenses anyway. It is an excellent performer, to my surprise, but attracts attention in a way that the M lenses do not. It is, of course, AF, which is a a key consideration if you are focusing on things that move, like kids.  I tend to use the M lenses only for specialised purposes such as indoor low light or wider than 24mm or particular rendering.

 

I do do carry the zoom around my neck with the lens cradled in my hand. No one can accuse me of being limp wristed accordingly.  If I used it on a tripod, I'd need to bring a bigger one than the table top tripod that suffices with M lenses. 

[LD_50]

I have recently carried the SL and 24-90 around for a week using the supplied strap slung across my chest and had no issues with the size and weight. It's similar to the Nikon kit I used to have. 

[349A]

"Been looking at which 50mm M lens to add for when I want the smaller size and lower weight. Am reading lots on here between the lux, APO and Noctilux.  I can see that the lux and APO will both be smaller than the noc. Wondering if anyone else been in same situation?"

 

I own all three as well as a new SL. With the high iso ability of the SL, its not necessary to have the fastest lens. So it will come down only to rendering preference, do you like/want the isolation of the Noctilux's .95? Same again for the lux's 1.4? Optically, the APO to my eyes is the knock out. All three are excellent but the APO has a certain magic to it. The APO is also light and rather compact. Its a wonderful combo of technical excellence and much, much more importantly beautiful rendering. 

 

Your best bet is to look at images from all three to get a sense of how they render. All three are some of the best lenses available. No wrong choice! You also might want to look at the older Noctilux F1 which I quite enjoy. The character of the old F1 makes it unique in 50mm lenses. 

[Big John]

"Been looking at which 50mm M lens to add for when I want the smaller size and lower weight. Am reading lots on here between the lux, APO and Noctilux.  I can see that the lux and APO will both be smaller than the noc. Wondering if anyone else been in same situation?"

 

I own all three as well as a new SL. With the high iso ability of the SL, its not necessary to have the fastest lens. So it will come down only to rendering preference, do you like/want the isolation of the Noctilux's .95? Same again for the lux's 1.4? Optically, the APO to my eyes is the knock out. All three are excellent but the APO has a certain magic to it. The APO is also light and rather compact. Its a wonderful combo of technical excellence and much, much more importantly beautiful rendering. 

 

Your best bet is to look at images from all three to get a sense of how they render. All three are some of the best lenses available. No wrong choice! You also might want to look at the older Noctilux F1 which I quite enjoy. The character of the old F1 makes it unique in 50mm lenses. 

 

Thanks v much. EVERYTHING I M reading on the APO singles it out as a very special lens. I guess I am a bit torn between that and the Noctilix, as the Noc has always been in my eyes the pinnacle. Snag is that they are not that far apart in terms of cost. 

 

Initial decision I need to make is: buy the 24-90 with the SL or buy the SL and an M and they try for a while. 

[349A]

Its a very personal decision. If I was starting over and didn't already own any M lenses, knowing ehat I know now, I would buy the 24-90mm (covers most situations, IS, excellent quality, AF etc), wait to see what the new 50/1.4 TL lens is and then decide on which 50mm I wanted. The new TL 50/1.4 might top them all.

 

In order of usage for me, my APO is first, then my Noctilux F1, then the Lux and last is the Noctilux .95 

 

its a slippery slope and you will likely end up with multiples of each like many on this forum. 

[Suteetat]

I use my SL a lot more often with 50/2 apo, Zeiss 35/1.4 zm or 21/1.4 lux than 24-90. I like the flexibility of 24-90 but I don't like the weight at all. I use it sometimes

when I know I only need to carry a camera only for a couple of hours but if it is a whole day thing, 24-90 is left at home ( I also have D810 but never bother to get 24-70/2.8 for the same

weight reason). SL shutter is so quiet, using it with small M lenses make it really unobtrusive and most people don't even notice when I take a picture.

IQ of 24-90 is excellent, if it is not because of the bulk and weight, I would definitely use it much much more. If size and weight is not an issue, I would not

hesitate to recommend it at all.

[Peter Walker]

 

1. To get the most from the SL, I think I need to get the 24-90.....  My last big camera was the Nikon F5 with an 80-200 f2.8 and that was a weight so SL and lens are fine.  Any feedback from those that have carried it all day?

 

2. Been looking at which 50mm M lens to add for when I want the smaller size and lower weight. Am reading lots on here between the lux, APO and Noctilux.  I can see that the lux and APO will both be smaller than the noc. Wondering if anyone else been in same situation?

 

Thanks all

John

 

 

1. I often walk for hours with the SL and 24-90 strapped to my hand, both city and trekking - and I am not a super fit person.  I have a LowePro holster bag, which it fits like a glove, if I need to be hands-free (with just enough room for the 16-20mm WATE, wrapped in a lens cover, at the bottom of the bag).  I have never found it to be too heavy and I like the mass for stability.  About the only time that my arm gets tired is shooting upwards, when the arm muscles are in an awkward position.

 

2. I am waiting for the 50 Summilux-SL to see if I need a low-light wide-open lens.  But with the low-light abilities of the SL, combined with the quality and convenience of the 24-90mm, the 50 Summilux-SL will have to be amazing to cause me to buy it.  I am happy with the WATE on the SL for very wide angle shots but, as it has a huge DoF, it doesn't need AF.  For 50mm and longer lenses, I would miss AF as my eyes are not what they used to be.

 

But, as you can see from the responses, there's a thousand viewpoints so we all need to make our own choices.

 

Regards

Peter

Edited March 27, 2016 by Peter Walker

[thighslapper]

Thanks v much. EVERYTHING I M reading on the APO singles it out as a very special lens. I guess I am a bit torn between that and the Noctilix, as the Noc has always been in my eyes the pinnacle. Snag is that they are not that far apart in terms of cost. 

 

Initial decision I need to make is: buy the 24-90 with the SL or buy the SL and an M and they try for a while. 

 

The only reason to get a Noctilux is to use it at 0.95 for the particular rendering it imparts ......which is unsuitable for most situations and becomes a bit tiring in picture after picture. It is not remotely a compact or lightweight 50mm alternative. It is a speciality lens for special purposes ..... 99% of the time you would be using f2 or above so it is not a good choice unless you have very deep pockets and get it as well as something more sensible.

 

If I was forced to own just one M lens it would be the 50 APO ...... I could live without the rest .... 

 

A good wider lens like the 18 or 21 SEM .... which work well on the SL would complement the 24-90 zoom

[Big John]

The only reason to get a Noctilux is to use it at 0.95 for the particular rendering it imparts ......which is unsuitable for most situations and becomes a bit tiring in picture after picture. It is not remotely a compact or lightweight 50mm alternative. It is a speciality lens for special purposes ..... 99% of the time you would be using f2 or above so it is not a good choice unless you have very deep pockets and get it as well as something more sensible.

 

​Thanks - this is helpful.  I am looking for the M lens to be the lighter weight alternative to the 24-90 and for it to be a good all rounder.  Sounding like the APO is the better choice.

[Jared]

I have never owned a Noctilux because I find their benefits come at too high a cost. F/1 is kind of cool for certain situations, but most of my photographs need more depth of field than the Noctilux provides wide open, and the lens is too big and heavy to be a good general use lens. Then, there is the price, of course...

 

As far as the Sumilux and Summicron APO go... They are both fantastic lenses and I have owned both. Neither would be a mistake on the SL. However, there is no question in my mind that the Summicron APO is truly special with this body. The micro contrast is truly outstanding, and if your technique is really good the rewards are astonishing. Good monochrome conversions generate transitions in tones that I find amazing. Plus, the lens is small, light, and is more flare resistant than the Sumilux (ignoring the ceiling flare issues with many of the early release lenses). That's not to say it's flare proof. It isn't. But the light has to be hitting the lens at just the wrong angle to create a problem.

 

If your budget will allow it, I'd get the Summicron APO. If your budget won't allow it, The Sumilux is also fantastic. Heck, even the regular Summicron is no slouch, though I've never used it on the SL. The strengths of the Noctilux, in my opinion, are too infrequently used to overcome the size and weight penalty. However, if you love a really narrow depth of field there is no substitute.

 

As far as the 25-90 goes, I suppose it depends on your style of photography. For example, when photographing my daughter at a riding lesson, it's the only lens I would even consider using with the SL. However, on a recent hiking trip in Patagonia I think it may have been the only lens I left behind. When I have leisure I prefer my M lenses. If I need speed, it's the only game in town. Oh, don't overlook the T lenses either for certain uses. In most cases, 10 megapixels is ample, so I find myself choosing the T 18-56 often as a walk-about lens. Probably wouldn't buy it for the SL if I didn't already own it for the T, but it actually does a nice job.

 

- Jared

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

This thread inspired me to fit my Summilux 35 v2 on the SL and give it a try. It works fine, but I'll never use it on the SL...

To me, such a small lens with such a small focus tab just feels wrong on this body. Fit the Summicron-R 35, and it feels made for the SL body.