Your choice for future native lenses for SL

[Sandokan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Whilst using R lenses on the SL is infinitely easier than using them on the M240 and the M lenses are still as good on the SL as they are on an M (OK, apart from not being able to see outside of the frame anymore), what lenses or focal lengths would you like to see made for the SL?

 

[Advertisement]

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

[FlashGordonPhotography]

All of them.....

 

But for my uses after the 50mm would be an 85mm 'lux, a wide zoom, and a 24mm 'lux.

 

Eventually I'd like to see a great 1:1 macro and a 17mm, 24mm 45mm and 90mm tilt shift as well. I could use most of those each week.

 

Also a set of great travel and landscape lenses. Sharp and compact. f2.4's in most of the common focal lengths, up to 135mm.

 

Leica have the advantage that unlike other manufacturers they don't need to make a set of rubbish cheap lenses like other manufacturers do.

 

Gordon

[LD_50]

- 1.4x and 2x teleconverters

- Wide 12-24 f4 zoom. 

- 1:1 macro

- Wide tilt/shift

- A set of ultra high quality and small f2.8 primes

- 200 f2 (I loved the Nikkor very much as a specialty portrait lens)

[Sandokan]

I would like 40 and 60mm lenses. For a wide - I would buy a Q and use that as my second body.

[Steve Spencer]

Well with the 24-90, the 90-280, and the 50 summilux, being full frame lenses made for the SL, and the 24 f/3.5, 30 f/2.8, 35 f/2.5, 45 f/2.8, 70 f/2.5, 100 f/2, 120 f/2.5 Macro, 120 f/5.6 TS, and 180 f/3.5 S lenses available with full AF (hopefully soon with the adapter), I think an 80 or 85 summilux, a 35 summilux, and a wide angle zoom, perhaps a 14-24mm would be the most important next steps. But first, IMO, they need to get that S adapter out. That will make a whole bunch of quality lenses available.

[steppenw0lf]

Yes, all of them. (seriously)

And if there has to be a priority, then first macro lenses.   100, 120, 60, 180

And I would like to get finally (after decades) an Apo Summicron 2/135mm . To replace my very old Elmarit-R 2.8/135mm .

I don't know why, but Leica neglected the 135 for the Reflex since the last century, even since the last millenium.

Precisely since 30 years. (Zeiss did not.)

 

Ideal would be (like Zeiss did) a 100mm f/2.0 with macro up to 1:2 .   And a 50 or 60 f2.0 macro .

 

The focal lengths between 28 and 75 are nicely served by the M cameras, so they need not be built first.

The WATE is also a very good choice at the wide end, where autofocus is not a big help. And a SL lens with AF and OIS and with the focal lengths of the WATE would be much bigger and heavier for the SL (another monster like the 24-90).  Compare with professional UWA zooms from Japan. Who desperately needs that ?

 

The big question for me is will Leica ever make the big guns for the SL: A 2.8/280, a 2.8/400 and the mandatory extenders (1.4x, 2x).

I am not sorry if they make no module system. It is extremely expensive and offers only advantages if you buy the complete gear. No wonder nobody else has this. Or will they start with a 4.0/280  - which is probably not necesssary anymore now that the 90-280 is so brilliant.

And the follow-on question, will the lenses be affordable ?

[steppenw0lf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well with the 24-90, the 90-280, and the 50 summilux, being full frame lenses made for the SL, and the 24 f/3.5, 30 f/2.8, 35 f/2.5, 45 f/2.8, 70 f/2.5, 100 f/2, 120 f/2.5 Macro, 120 f/5.6 TS, and 180 f/3.5 S lenses available with full AF (hopefully soon with the adapter), I think an 80 or 85 summilux, a 35 summilux, and a wide angle zoom, perhaps a 14-24mm would be the most important next steps. But first, IMO, they need to get that S adapter out. That will make a whole bunch of quality lenses available.

 

 

The S glass is for normal purses far too expensive. It's good if you already have a S. But for all others this is a ridiculous offer.

And the focal lengths are very limited, so for the enthusiastic 35mm camera user the S glass is worthless. (unaffordable and unattractive)

 

The S adapter comes in 3 months latest, that's confirmed. Leica would be fools not to deliver.

[Steve Spencer]

The S glass is for normal purses far too expensive. It's good if you already have a S. But for all others this is a ridiculous offer.

And the focal lengths are very limited, so for the enthusiastic 35mm camera user the S glass is worthless. (unaffordable and unattractive)

 

The S adapter comes in 3 months latest, that's confirmed. Leica would be fools not to deliver.

 

I will be very interesting to see how much cheaper the SL glass is. So far the 24-90 and 90-280 aren't really much cheaper than S glass and I don't think the 50 Summilux which is rumoured to be APO will be cheaper either. I think it would be great if they made some cheaper Summicrons, Summaries and Elmarits, but I expect expensive Summiluxes to start. I hope I am wrong. Thanks for the information on the adapter i do plan to pick up the S Macro.

[Suteetat]

The S glass is for normal purses far too expensive. It's good if you already have a S. But for all others this is a ridiculous offer.

And the focal lengths are very limited, so for the enthusiastic 35mm camera user the S glass is worthless. (unaffordable and unattractive)

 

The S adapter comes in 3 months latest, that's confirmed. Leica would be fools not to deliver.

Of all the S glasses, actually I am quite curious about 100/2 as I think the focal lenght and aparture will be very nice for SL. May be 24/3.5 but I am not sure if that will be any better than 24/3.5 M. I don't have the S and am not planning on getting one but I might try 1 or 2 lenses perhaps.

[Peter Walker]

- Very wide zoom.

- Macro.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ramarren]

I'm probably the worst person to ask because I have a very complete set of R lenses and really do prefer to use manual focus over 90% of the time. But the SL does need a good set of dedicated lenses. I also am not much of a zoom user, prefer prime lenses most of the time. 

 

- Macro :: 50-60mm and 100-120mm first, 180-200mm after

- The Standards :: 50/1.4, 85/2, 35/2, 20/2.8, 135/2.8, 180/4, 250/4, 400/4 or 5.6.

- The Zooms :: 18-35/2.8, 200-500/4-5.6 (plus the already existing 24-90 and 90-280)

- The Exotics :: 15/2.8, 16/4 Fisheye, 35/1.4, 28/1.4, 50/1.0, 100/2, 180/2.8, 300/2.8, and all the longer lenses. 

- 1.4x and 2x teleconverters. Variable Extension tubes.

 

That should take them the better part of 20 years to develop. 

[edwardkaraa]

I want a nice line up of high quality primes, from 21 to 135, but easy on the sizes and weights

[Guest]

I'm probably the worst person to ask because I have a very complete set of R lenses and really do prefer to use manual focus over 90% of the time. But the SL does need a good set of dedicated lenses. I also am not much of a zoom user, prefer prime lenses most of the time. 

 

- Macro :: 50-60mm and 100-120mm first, 180-200mm after

- The Standards :: 50/1.4, 85/2, 35/2, 20/2.8, 135/2.8, 180/4, 250/4, 400/4 or 5.6.

- The Zooms :: 18-35/2.8, 200-500/4-5.6 (plus the already existing 24-90 and 90-280)

- The Exotics :: 15/2.8, 16/4 Fisheye, 35/1.4, 28/1.4, 50/1.0, 100/2, 180/2.8, 300/2.8, and all the longer lenses. 

- 1.4x and 2x teleconverters. Variable Extension tubes.

 

That should take them the better part of 20 years to develop. 

 

And us 20 or so to afford........

[wlaidlaw]

For me:

 

1) Wide or Super-Wide Zoom - either 12mm to 35mm or 10mm to 28mm would be perfect. With the excellent sensor in the SL, no need to be particularly fast. F4 would do. 

 

2) 2X or 1.4X Tele Extender

 

3) 35mm f0.95 Noctilux but only if low light AF is improved (I have a 50mm/0.95 which works beautifully with the SL and MF). 

 

4) Coupled extender tube or tubes. 

 

Wilson

[LocalHero1953]

Concentrate on those lenses that can't easily be used on the smaller and lighter M: T/S, macro and longer telephoto.

I won't be buying them, though: 2 SL zooms perhaps plus the odd R macro lens are all I want.

[steppenw0lf]

I will be very interesting to see how much cheaper the SL glass is. So far the 24-90 and 90-280 aren't really much cheaper than S glass and I don't think the 50 Summilux which is rumoured to be APO will be cheaper either. I think it would be great if they made some cheaper Summicrons, Summaries and Elmarits, but I expect expensive Summiluxes to start. I hope I am wrong. Thanks for the information on the adapter i do plan to pick up the S Macro.

 

Exactly. You formulate my fears very precisely. The price is terrible, but at least the focal lengths are attractive.

I also thought about the 120, but it is simply too expensive for what it offers.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Whatever SL lenses are not already in the pipeline would likely take at least 2 years to reach prototype stage - so not much point in wishing for additional SL lenses right now when existing roadmap plans have not yet been fulfilled.  Just hope Leica concentrate a bit more on whatever they're developing now … e.g. get a move on with the promised R adapter L and new 50/1.4 APO Summilux SL.  Realistically cannot hope for anything more at present - unless Leica 'magic up' additional resources. Leica Camera AG might have learnt a lesson from the high demand for the Q and thus the probable market for 35mm and 50mm versions - which would require additional scarce resources to satisfy. 

 

dunk

[Ingo]

I would spend money for the 50/1.4 and a prime lens somewhere between 85-120 mm/1.4 or faster for portraits. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

And us 20 or so to afford........

 

 

I don't know that I have that much time, but as I said, I don't really need any of them! 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Now Leica has assembled a design school that combines very exotic glass with extremely complex computer corrections (hush, purists!), and shown what it can do by stretching the classic 24-70 or 28-90 zoom to be a fast AF 24-90 with significant bragging rights. I would expect the next not yet announced lens for the SL would continue the bragging rights theme.  The WATE proved that 16-21 was doable to Leica optical standards 10 years ago.    Leica's (Schneider-designed) 15/2.8 was the state of the art 5 years before that (and still is).  Olympus for M43 has put out a pretty awesome 7-14 (14-28 ff effective focal length).  So if bragging rights is driving the product plans, I would expect something like a 12-28 or even 14-35 zoom next.  More than 2:1 range, and f/2.8 throughout, or even 2.0 to 2.8, but since zooms are getting complicated with many moving groups, I don't know which end of the range would get the faster speed.  Maybe the middle.

 

Not that this is what I am desperate to have, just my hunch of what would appeal to the product planners, and what challenge they might have tossed at the design team.

 

scott