New Leica SL Lenses & Roadmap!

[Vieri]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I think there's a valid argument for the 16-35 in a combo with the 50 (16-35, 50, 90-280) personally I agree with you. I now have the 12-24 Art and it's very good on the SL. Probably not quite as good as the Canon 11-24 but my real estate clients aren't complaining.

 

If you're going to have a triple of zooms a massive overlap doesn't make sense to me, especially when we already know that a 12-24 is possible. For sure, it's another big lens. But as you say a high quality 12-280 in three lenses isn't to be sneezed at.

 

And with a 16-35 you can do filters. The 12mm and wider lenses don't seem to allow that. Maybe that's a decision that Leica considered.

 

Or Leica could surprise us with a 35-135 f4 IS to match the 16-35. That'd make some people very happy.

 

Me, I'm very pleased with the 3 zooms I now have, S lenses a fast 50 and my TS lenses. For me the only important lens missing is a fast 85 and Sigma may have scored there as well.

 

Gordon

 

 

Gordon,

 

Just FYI, if you want better quality than the Sigma 12-24 A without forking out for the 11-24mm Canon, I use the 10mm, 12mm and 15mm Voigtlander and I am extremely happy with them. I hacked the 15mm to be able to use my 100mm filters with it, and with the Bombo adapter I can use my 100mm filters with the 10mm and 12mm as well (I wish I knew of the Bombo adapter series before cutting the 15mm's lens hood! ).

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[helged]

Gordon,

 

Just FYI, if you want better quality than the Sigma 12-24 A without forking out for the 11-24mm Canon, I use the 10mm, 12mm and 15mm Voigtlander and I am extremely happy with them. I hacked the 15mm to be able to use my 100mm filters with it, and with the Bombo adapter I can use my 100mm filters with the 10mm and 12mm as well (I wish I knew of the Bombo adapter series before cutting the 15mm's lens hood! ).

 

Best,

 

Vieri

Thanks for the Bombo adapter tip! Totally unknown for many Voigtlander users, I guess.

[Advertisement]

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

[Vieri]

Thanks for the Bombo adapter tip! Totally unknown for many Voigtlander users, I guess.

 

 

You are very welcome. The adapter works very well with the 10 and 12mm, doesn't vignette as long as you don't turn it (in horizontal) and gives you a tiny bit of leeway to turn it (in vertical) which is not bad. Best,

 

Vieri

[wlaidlaw]

I have to own up to going on an unofficial dealer's waiting list for the 16-35 and I am top of the list   The decision if have to make is whether to keep the 90-280 or not. I have no safari's planned, which might tempt me to keep it and I still would have the adequate if not spectacular 75-300 for my Olympus EP-5 (150-600 EFOV). I have used the 90-280 precisely twice in the last four months and it is an expensive lens to keep around gathering dust. 

 

Wilson

[steppenw0lf]

Do you already have a price for the 16-35 ?  (approximately)

For me it's exactly the opposite: I use the 90-280 much more frequently than the WATE. But of course  preferred subjects are individual.

 

By the way, you know that the 16-35 has no OIS ? So I will probably keep the WATE  (actually it depends on the price, for me the 16-35 is an expensive lens to keep around.)

A smaller lens (Summicron SL 28) hopefully with fast AF is what I am missing most. will take a few more years for Leica to built it ...

Edited June 19, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[helged]

By the way, you know that the 16-35 has no OIS ? So I will probably keep the WATE  (actually it depends on the price, for me the 16-35 is an expensive lens to keep around.)

A smaller lens (Summicron SL 28) hopefully with fast AF is what I am missing most. will take a few more years for Leica to built it ...

 

 

But the 16-35 is, undoubtedly for many, a very versatile wide angle focal range. Add the upcoming Sigma Art 14mm f1.8, and astrophotography is covered (at least according to the near coma-free Sigma rumours).

Edited June 19, 2017 by helged

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think Leica have made an error in not putting OIS into either the 50 Summilux or the 16-35. Given that it will be close to F4 at 35mm, if you want to keep the ISO down by low shutter speeds, OIS would be very worthwhile. I am guessing the 16-35 price will be about £4250-£4500 in the UK, dependant on how weak the pound has become by the time it is out. 

 

Wilson

[thighslapper]

I think OIS in a lens like the 50/1.4 with big heavy lens elements (which is why AF is slower) is a bridge too far.... and a real technical challenge which is why Leica excluded it. 

 

Whilst I can just about see the usefulness of OIS at 35mm, it is a bit redundant at anything below. If it is good enough to be a serious landscape or architectural lens than most will be using a tripod anyway .....

[John Black]

OIS is an optical group at the rear of lens and is pretty small.  A picture of Canon's - 

 

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/l-lens/technology/is.html

[Alo Ako]

If the question ist better optical image quality or OIS I`d like prefere better image quality.

Edited June 20, 2017 by Alo Ako

[steppenw0lf]

I think Leica have made an error in not putting OIS into either the 50 Summilux or the 16-35. Given that it will be close to F4 at 35mm, if you want to keep the ISO down by low shutter speeds, OIS would be very worthwhile. I am guessing the 16-35 price will be about £4250-£4500 in the UK, dependant on how weak the pound has become by the time it is out. 

 

Wilson

 

The price you mention is very moderate - that is about the level of the 90-280. I am actually expecting anything 30 to 50 percent higher. It is just a feeling, but UWA were never cheap with Leica (even adding up on their usual level).

This price alone would be good news. But we will see ......

 

About OIS - I think (another feeling) that Panasonic is developing IBIS for FF sensors. It could be ready for the next SL (in a year or two - I expect one 3-4 years after the first announcement of SL) Or latest for the one afterwards.

I always liked Tamron for their aggressive OIS (I forgot their name) strategy - they have it in macros and also in fast primes. Too bad they are not developing for Leica SL.   (Their name is VC = vibration compensation)

But for the SL 50 "enough is enough" - no need for an even bigger lens with OIS.   

Edited June 20, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[steppenw0lf]

I think OIS in a lens like the 50/1.4 with big heavy lens elements (which is why AF is slower) is a bridge too far.... and a real technical challenge which is why Leica excluded it. 

 

Whilst I can just about see the usefulness of OIS at 35mm, it is a bit redundant at anything below. If it is good enough to be a serious landscape or architectural lens than most will be using a tripod anyway .....

 

 

ES gives even less vibrations, so maybe it is not necessary to use a tripod. I prefer a beanbag anyway. (Relying on trees, stones or any sort of pole.)

Edited June 20, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[helged]

With northern Summer Solstice just around the corner, the Leica APO-Summicron-SL 75mm f/2 ASPH. should be released, sooner than later. But the rumours are as silent as Jono  ... Based on previous experiences, the the latter indicates that something is coming, though. Any info out there?

[wlaidlaw]

The price you mention is very moderate - that is about the level of the 90-280. I am actually expecting anything 30 to 50 percent higher. It is just a feeling, but UWA were never cheap with Leica (even adding up on their usual level).

This price alone would be good news. But we will see ......

 

About OIS - I think (another feeling) that Panasonic is developing IBIS for FF sensors. It could be ready for the next SL (in a year or two - I expect one 3-4 years after the first announcement of SL) Or latest for the one afterwards.

I always liked Tamron for their aggressive OIS (I forgot their name) strategy - they have it in macros and also in fast primes. Too bad they are not developing for Leica SL.   (Their name is VC = vibration compensation)

But for the SL 50 "enough is enough" - no need for an even bigger lens with OIS.   

 

 

Now that the shutter shock problem has been sorted on the IBIS on my Olympus EP-5, which as I understood it, was a form of heterodyning between the vibration of the shutter and the frequency of the actuator motors for the IBIS, it is extraordinarily effective. It is much more apparent in effect than the OIS of the SL. Now this may be that it is dealing with a much lighter combo of body and lens, so that the apparent vibration speed that you can see in the EVF is more readily apparent than the slower mass damped vibrations of the SL and say the 90-280 lens. I have OIS/IBIS quick on/off on a custom button on both cameras (for tripod use), so you can easily see the effect of turning it on. The downside of IBIS is that it is quite noisy. The other big upside of IBIS is that you can use it with any lens. The lens I am looking forward to using it with is my recently acquired Leitz 8.5cm f1.5 Summarex. I thought I did not have the Olympus with me in France but found it yesterday under the passenger seat in my car, when I was looking for a pen that had rolled away. I use every cubic inch of space in the car when I transition between UK and France twice a year, as it is not a big car. 

 

Wilson

[wlaidlaw]

I will not be trying the Summarex on my EP-5 to see how the IBIS works. Although I have the camera, its battery is flat and the charger (with the spare battery sitting in it) must be back in the UK as it does not seem to be in France  . No great tragedy as I am back to the UK next week. 

 

Wilson

[sillbeers15]

Reading through the treads of this forum sim to make me think most users of SL either use mainly M lenses on SL or ask for SL Primes with preference over the existing two zoom lenses sighting bulk & weight as the main turn off.

 

For thoughts: unless the 24-90mm is no good, which many do not think so. It would be either carrying a 24, 28, 35, 50, 75 & 90mm prime lenses against one. How can the total weight & bulk be less than carrying all against one zoom lens? Not to mention having to change lenses in between bad weather and environment which the SL is designed to be punished upon.

In weight & bulk constraint on travel, I personally experienced carrying my SL + 24-90mm on my business trip to Milan last month and carrying my M240 + 35lux on my business trip to Taiwan last week.

I took more pics and enjoyed more with my SL + zoom compared to feeling so limited with my M w. one prime. I felt very inadequate although enjoyed much less bulk.

But still there are times I only want my M with my primes.

 

So for me, SL w. both zooms & my M with 21, 35, 50, 90mm primes are mutually exclusive and not one system replacing the other.

[thighslapper]

I have to agree ...... logic dictates the 24-90 is the sensible default choice unless you have specific needs for a fixed focal length with characteristics you can't find on the zoom.

 

I have a pile of lenses (SL,T,M,R, Zeiss,Voigt,Sigma) but once the novelty of using a specific lens wears off (usually rapidly) I stick the 24-90 back on and am happy again.

 

If the 16-35 is as good optically as the 24-90 I suspect I will have a 2 lens system that will be used 95% of the time.

[wlaidlaw]

Reading through the treads of this forum sim to make me think most users of SL either use mainly M lenses on SL or ask for SL Primes with preference over the existing two zoom lenses sighting bulk & weight as the main turn off.

 

For thoughts: unless the 24-90mm is no good, which many do not think so. It would be either carrying a 24, 28, 35, 50, 75 & 90mm prime lenses against one. How can the total weight & bulk be less than carrying all against one zoom lens? Not to mention having to change lenses in between bad weather and environment which the SL is designed to be punished upon.

In weight & bulk constraint on travel, I personally experienced carrying my SL + 24-90mm on my business trip to Milan last month and carrying my M240 + 35lux on my business trip to Taiwan last week.

I took more pics and enjoyed more with my SL + zoom compared to feeling so limited with my M w. one prime. I felt very inadequate although enjoyed much less bulk.

But still there are times I only want my M with my primes.

 

So for me, SL w. both zooms & my M with 21, 35, 50, 90mm primes are mutually exclusive and not one system replacing the other.

 

Not me. I rarely use anything for regular use on the SL than the 24-90. The only M lenses I ever use on it are the 50/.95 Noctilux for evening and night, where it works beautifully on the SL and very occasionally, the 18 SEM. If I get the 16-35, I may well sell the 18 SEM. I would not then really use it enough on my M's to warrant the cost. I also have the 90-280 but unless I was away on a safari, I cannot see it being much used. It is too heavy to pack for a trip unless you are fairly sure it is going to be well used. I am not into taking pictures of birds and really am much more of a wide angle than tele user. 

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

The 90-280 is too short for serious safari use, Wilson. Leica needs to release a 1.4x Apoextender SL, and a 2.0x one as well.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[helged]

The 90-280 is too short for serious safari use, Wilson. Leica needs to release a 1.4x Apoextender SL, and a 2.0x one as well.

 

 

...or, preferably, a 400mm f4 (or thereabout) with APO-extenders. Extenders to the existing 90-280 would be welcome, as well.