Wanted list - new lenses for Leica SL

[Ivar B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With Photokina only a few weeks away I assume it is highly likely that the new SL 1.4/50 will be released, but I have also thought a little bit about what kind of future lenses I would like to see. I did a bit of wildlife photography in the past, and this is something I would like to take up again. I have tried the 90-280 (or held it in my hands and done some test shots that is) but it is too large and too heavy, and 280mm is too short for birds in particular. 

 

It seems that the 90-280 is not selling much at present - I see a lens has remained unsold for months here and in Germany there would be no problems with just visiting a shop and take one with you - it is not in short supply at all. Many if us will remember how we had to wait for months for a new lens in the past.

 

What I would like to see is a new 80-200, perhaps f4 like the old Elmar, so weight is below a kilo or something. It should be good for larger mammals, and would have to be supplemented by a 400/500 or so for birds.

 

Perhaps Photokina will answer my wishes.

[Budfox]

Just use the T 55 -135 (70 - 200 equivalent on the SL). It's super light and looks good too. And certainly better results that an equivalent Nikon consumer grade zoom - even without IS.

 

And don't worry about the 10MP issue - just pretend it's still 2006 where 10MP was state of the art

[thighslapper]

I think you will find that all the SL range will be big 'pro' lenses with (comparatively for zooms) reasonably fast apertures ...... like the bigger .... and heavier Nikon/Canon counterparts. 

 

There is already a T lens equivalent to the 80-200 you mention which is light, compact and produces stunning results ...... albeit at 16mpx on the T body. 

 

I can see no mileage in Leica producing anything other than leading edge/high end optics for the SL .... and they will not be cheap or light/compact......

[Ivar B]

Just use the T 55 -135 (70 - 200 equivalent on the SL). It's super light and looks good too. And certainly better results that an equivalent Nikon consumer grade zoom - even without IS.

 

And don't worry about the 10MP issue - just pretend it's still 2006 where 10MP was state of the art

I must admit I considered this, and several dealers also sell the T lenses at heavily discounted prices. I just need to convince myself that I did not buy a 24MP camera to get 10MP.

[helged]

What about a stellar WA zoom, a modern Leica incarnation of something like the now 10 yr old Nikon 14-24 f2.8? (with controlled coma for astrophotography). Or an updated version of the 280-Apo-R f4 (_WITH_ 1.4x and 2x extenders, possibly in-built as Canon offers in one of their 200-400 zooms)? Or a 60 (or 100) mm macro, or 1-2 tilt-shift lenses?

 

Everything is, of couse, available, although not in the native L-mount (or with AF on the SL, although I am more than happy with manual lenses on the SL).

 

Will be interesting to see the Leica road map in a few weeks time!

[steppenw0lf]

I'd like to get the AF lenses :

SL 2/28 , SL 2/50 (Macro), SL 2/100 (Macro). If they have OIS great, if not, no problem. And they should be "affordable". (That's priority one).

 

Second priority: Smaller midrange zoom along the lines of   SL 4/28-75   (even better if aperture 3.4) Something portable, much smaller than the 24-90, but of equal optical quality.  (I have the 90mm already in the 90-280, and I have the WATE, so no need for 24mm. So a "restricted" zoom is more practical for me.)

 

Exotic wishes:  SL 2/135 ,  SL 3.4/50-135 Macro (of highest quality)

 

Sorry forgot one detail:  AF SL 1.4 extender for the SL 90-280, or maybe also a 1.7x extender. Any time (high priority), a nice extension of the 90-280. (With 1.7 extender the lens is a SL 153-476, that's close enough to 500 for me).  

[MRJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A dedicated 1.4-2.0x zoom extender would be nice (if it is possible)

[steppenw0lf]

Just use the T 55 -135 (70 - 200 equivalent on the SL). It's super light and looks good too. And certainly better results that an equivalent Nikon consumer grade zoom - even without IS.

 

I used Nikon for the last 15 years and know the 2.8/70-200 or similar zooms in detail.

Nikon makes a new one every few years. It is probably their single most important lens.

They are professional grade, but their used prices are close to consumer grade lenses

So there is a big heap of used lenses, and all are really great and almost for chicken feed.

 

And there is one inexpensive 2.8/80-200 that is still produced and sold until today. Only one survived all the changes - and it is a gem. (So I really understand Nikon that they still produce it.)    

[Ivar B]

In the past, I owned the Vario-Elmar-R 4.0/80-200. As I recall, weight was about 1 kg and optical performance was superb and in pratice not much different from the Apo 2.8/70-180, which was close to 1,9 kg.

 

I don`t see why an SL 4/80-200 should me much heavier and larger than the R lens.

 

The Vario-Elmar was also made in Japan and had a reasonable price.

[Ivar B]

I used Nikon for the last 15 years and know the 2.8/70-200 or similar zooms in detail.

Nikon makes a new one every few years. It is probably their single most important lens.

They are professional grade, but their used prices are close to consumer grade lenses

So there is a big heap of used lenses, and all are really great and almost for chicken feed.

 

And there is one inexpensive 2.8/80-200 that is still produced and sold until today. Only one survived all the changes - and it is a gem. (So I really understand Nikon that they still produce it.)    

 

I believe that also Canon makes excellent 70-200, and with the SL/EOS adapter we have autofocus as well.

[steppenw0lf]

I believe that also Canon makes excellent 70-200, and with the SL/EOS adapter we have autofocus as well.

 

 

On paper yes, but I cannot remember that anybody has made a test with one of the 2.8/80-200 and was happy. (EOS on SL)

Volunteers to the front !   Glad to hear if it works fine.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

50mm 1.4

 

85mm 1.4

 

14-24mm f4 zoom

 

120 f2.8 mm macro

 

300mm 2.8

 

All with IS please.

 

Thanks Leica.

 

Gordon

 

p.s. after that I think a really good set of small but stellar f4 primes and zooms would be super for those wanting to keep the size down and for travel.

[Guest VVJ]

50mm 1.4

 

85mm 1.4

 

14-24mm f4 zoom

 

120 f2.8 mm macro

 

300mm 2.8

 

All with IS please.

 

Thanks Leica.

 

Gordon

 

p.s. after that I think a really good set of small but stellar f4 primes and zooms would be super for those wanting to keep the size down and for travel.

 

 

+1.  The only lens that I would add to this is a relatively lightweight f2 or f2.8 28mm.

[ramarren]

The folks at Leica Store SF seem to be selling the 90-280 briskly. It's actually lighter and handier than I expected. Perhaps the fact the there's plenty of stock is that Leica have made an effort to manufacture a good supply of them, as they ought to.

 

What other native lenses would I like? 35/2, 60/2.8 macro, 90/2, 16/4, 150/4 macro, 350/4, and matched 1.4x teleconverter for use with both of the teles. I don't like zooms as much. But in all honesty, I don't need any at all, my R lenses do me well. I could consider the 90-280, actually, because the OIS would make it more versatile sans tripod.

[LocalHero1953]

I still have my M which I use for travel and walking/hiking, so I would not be in the market for a suite of lightweight lenses for such uses. I wonder how much Leica's lens plans may be influenced by such considerations i.e. assign a low priority to small/light lenses?

 

For my SL I have been thinking about the wide angle and macro options.

 

For macro, I have just acquired a Marumi close up attachment for the 24-90SL. However, I can already see that a macro lens that does not extend during focusing is more practical. OTOH, given that manual focus and tripod use are more relevant to macro photography, one of the R or M macro lenses would do the job just as well. I wonder if they expect the new TL macro to be bought by SL users: for considered tripod macro work, cropping in post is less likely, so the sensor crop factor on the SL needn't be a big drawback.

 

Similar considerations apply at wide angle: a wide angle zoom is an obvious option, but given that focusing is much easier in most scenarios, I think I would get the WATE instead of an SL w/a zoom - it would also fit in my current bag with the two zooms - no need for a new bag  .

 

I really would like a range extender for the 90-280. I don't do a lot of wildlife photography, so a compact add-on would be much more attractive than a new long telephoto.

 

In summary, I'm as open to temptation as any Leica owner, but there is no new SL lens that I'm hoping for immediately.

[Vieri]

Ivar,

 

since Leica already has the 90-280mm f/2.8-4 in the lineup, I think the possibility that they'll produce an 80-200mm f/4 at this point in time (if not in general) is pretty close to zero.

 

I think that the next lens for the SL, after the 50mm Summilux, will be a much needed WA zoom: probably a 12-24mm f/4; better if they'll make it f/2.8-4 to be consistent with the existing zoom lineup, but I think it'd be difficult to make and quite big. 

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[Ivar B]

Ivar,

 

since Leica already has the 90-280mm f/2.8-4 in the lineup, I think the possibility that they'll produce an 80-200mm f/4 at this point in time (if not in general) is pretty close to zero.

 

I think that the next lens for the SL, after the 50mm Summilux, will be a much needed WA zoom: probably a 12-24mm f/4; better if they'll make it f/2.8-4 to be consistent with the existing zoom lineup, but I think it'd be difficult to make and quite big. 

 

Best,

 

Vieri

 

This may indeed be true. Buying the R lens (which I now regret selling) is another option, or a Nikon/Canon lens. It is not urgent so I have time to consider this carefully.

[tom0511]

Ok,

here we go:

 

35/1.4 /or2.0) compact prime

50/2.0 compact prime

80-200/4.0 compact Tele or a 180/2.8 compact prime

 

I have all three as manual Leica lenses but the reason I have the SL is to use AF.

The 90-280 is excellent but so big and I dont often need the 200-280mm range

 

[meerec]

Here is my case for not having 1.4x-2x extenders and for a 500+ telephoto.

 

I own the 90-280 zoom and like it as it yields awesome results. I don't like its size, and its weight though, especially now that I shoot with M lenses most of the time, having ditched all Canon L lenses and bodies. However, the 280mm end is too short for my desire to shoot wildlife, especially birds. Wildlife (birds) shooting starts at 500mm and longer. Instead, if you shoot elephants that are so big and slow and don't run away, then like Nick Brandt you can shoot "this" kind of,wildlife with a 35mm lens or wider. I wish I had a 1.4x or even 2x extender for my 90-280 zoom but it would in fact make little sense. A 2x extender would make the 90-280 zoom a very slow lens at f/8. 560mm would be OK to get started for birds but the aperture would be too small.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[adli]

I am already pretty covered with the 24-90 and  prime R-lenses I have. The only lens I would by would be a 80/85/90 1.4 portrait lens with AF. But it will compete with the R-80 lux which does a very deasent job, so it should be more than just an other lens.