Big John Posted March 4, 2017 Share #1 Posted March 4, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi guys, Very happy with my SL. It weights about 900g but the 24-90 is over 1250g. The 24-90 has given me some wonderful images but the size and weight mean that I am not using my SL as much as I would like. So wondering whether to go for M lenses - but on the occasion I have tried them I have found them a little bit small on the SL and the aperture rings lack the positivity I would like. First lens I need is 35mm. So am looking closely at Zeiss and given that my main aim is reduced size, wondering if the f2 biogon is better compromise than the 1.4 distagon - both way lower price that summicron or summilux. But also looking for feedback from Zeiss owners pls. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 4, 2017 Posted March 4, 2017 Hi Big John, Take a look here 24-90 is great but the weight...... Zeiss?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jeff S Posted March 4, 2017 Share #2 Posted March 4, 2017 Or wait a year for the pre-announced SL 35 Summicron. 75 and 90, too, probably sooner. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 4, 2017 Share #3 Posted March 4, 2017 The SL with smaller lenses (than the zooms) works well. I don't have the Zeiss 35mm lenses, but the Distagon 35/1.4 was well written up here, as I recall. The SL with larger M lenses (Noct & 21 Summilux) and the 15 Distagon is nicely balanced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #4 Posted March 4, 2017 Hi guys, Very happy with my SL. It weights about 900g but the 24-90 is over 1250g. The 24-90 has given me some wonderful images but the size and weight mean that I am not using my SL as much as I would like. So wondering whether to go for M lenses - but on the occasion I have tried them I have found them a little bit small on the SL and the aperture rings lack the positivity I would like. First lens I need is 35mm. So am looking closely at Zeiss and given that my main aim is reduced size, wondering if the f2 biogon is better compromise than the 1.4 distagon - both way lower price that summicron or summilux. But also looking for feedback from Zeiss owners pls. Thanks. I have the same thoughts as you regarding the 24-90. I accept its weight for the AF capability, which is sometimes necessary. But, I've also purchased several MF lenses and am quite happy with them. The size is not an issue for me. FWIW I have a Zeiss 50mm F2 planar and a Zeiss 35mm F2 biogon, along with some Leica lenses . I would recommend the Zeiss lenses as excellent alternatives, particularly from the standpoint of price if that is an issue. Colors are terrific. Very nice pop to the photos. (Since I have now purchased a Leica 35 1.4 FLE I am selling my Zeiss 35mm so if you are interested send me a note). Some shots with the Zeiss 35 f2 follow. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/270015-24-90-is-great-but-the-weight-zeiss/?do=findComment&comment=3226895'>More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #5 Posted March 4, 2017 A couple of others with the Zeiss 35mm f2 biogon Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/270015-24-90-is-great-but-the-weight-zeiss/?do=findComment&comment=3226899'>More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #6 Posted March 4, 2017 And one more with the Zeiss 35mm f2 biogon Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/270015-24-90-is-great-but-the-weight-zeiss/?do=findComment&comment=3226900'>More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 4, 2017 Author Share #7 Posted March 4, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Biogon looks v nice. Not sure I need the potentially extra IQ of the distagon given the combo of size/weight/cost. Thanks. (Can Admin sort the typo in my title of this thread pls, thanks) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #8 Posted March 4, 2017 Here's my Zeiss 35 f2 on the SL. It is not bulky whatsoever. Focus is quite easy. I paid $850, new. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/270015-24-90-is-great-but-the-weight-zeiss/?do=findComment&comment=3226914'>More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #9 Posted March 4, 2017 front shot The lens hood was less than $5.00 including postage. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/270015-24-90-is-great-but-the-weight-zeiss/?do=findComment&comment=3226915'>More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted March 4, 2017 Share #10 Posted March 4, 2017 I have quite some M lenses as a long time M user but I use 90% the 2490 on the SL. AF, flexibility. I only use M lenses if I need a faster lens in low light. On the other side if you own the SL and no M or other smaller camera why not add a small lens for those times when the 2490 is too big. I would recommend the Summarit 35. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted March 4, 2017 Share #11 Posted March 4, 2017 Much as I like my M lenses, the SL 24-90 is practical, flexible, and surprisingly high performing, despite the weight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phovsho Posted March 4, 2017 Share #12 Posted March 4, 2017 I'm finding myself using the 24-90 more than I expected. Though the faster Ms give the system the flexibility I want. Would be frustrated if the zoom was my only option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 5, 2017 Share #13 Posted March 5, 2017 Hi guys, Very happy with my SL. It weights about 900g but the 24-90 is over 1250g. The 24-90 has given me some wonderful images but the size and weight mean that I am not using my SL as much as I would like. So wondering whether to go for M lenses - but on the occasion I have tried them I have found them a little bit small on the SL and the aperture rings lack the positivity I would like. First lens I need is 35mm. So am looking closely at Zeiss and given that my main aim is reduced size, wondering if the f2 biogon is better compromise than the 1.4 distagon - both way lower price that summicron or summilux. But also looking for feedback from Zeiss owners pls. Thanks. I've been using mostly R system lenses on the SL. They work very well and fit the ergonomics of the camera perfectly. The Summicron-R 35mm f/2 is a beautiful performer and quite compact. The controls are in just the right places to use on the SL too. But ... The more I use the SL24-90, the lighter it seems to become, and it outperforms most of my R lenses and M lenses alike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 5, 2017 Share #14 Posted March 5, 2017 The same is true of the 90-280 SL lens. I have the R's 180/2.8 and 280/4 but have stopped using them. The 280/4 Telyt APO is probably just a bit better than the SL long zoom at its limits but not as flexible. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phovsho Posted March 5, 2017 Share #15 Posted March 5, 2017 This might be a silly question... Do any users walk around with the 90-280 or is it primarily used as a tripod mounted or stay in one place lense? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 5, 2017 Share #16 Posted March 5, 2017 This might be a silly question... Do any users walk around with the 90-280 or is it primarily used as a tripod mounted or stay in one place lense? Leica use the available demographics of their customers in designing products and rightly concluded that as most will drive a car both the 24-90 and the 90-280 are within tolerance weight wise. But please refer to your cars handbook regarding load weights and towing capacity. Purely anecdotally I find I can drive many miles with the 24-90 and in many cases can almost get close enough to take a photography. Edit - I should have said I drive an SUV, I wouldn't want people to think carrying Leica SL lenses is possible in an electric town car for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted March 5, 2017 Share #17 Posted March 5, 2017 This might be a silly question... Do any users walk around with the 90-280 or is it primarily used as a tripod mounted or stay in one place lense? The OIS is effective, so you can carry it around, shoot from boats, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lins-Barroso Posted March 5, 2017 Share #18 Posted March 5, 2017 I am buying my Leica SL next month! As I know the future new SL's primes will have a long, long way to arrive on the shelves, I've decided to buy too... the newest 2016 M-Summicron 35/2. I read on the ReidReviews that the newest generation of Summicrons - issued in the beggining of 2016 - are much, much better than the former generations, specially when used on mirrorless cameras like the SL and the Sony a7R II. Its bokeh was improved too. The reason is because they were calibrated for the digital cameras. I think Leica will do it with all of its M-Lenses over the years. I read too from an experienced Leica's user that even the older M-Summicron 35mm are sharper than the M-Summilux 35mm. We - only SL Owners - must think that in some years will have smaller SL Primes with superb performance/autofocus and what is need now is a bridge until there. In my opinion, after a long time thinking about, the 2016 Summicron 32/2 is PERFECT! - It is a complete new and modern Leica Generation for better results on mirrorless cameras. - Smaller and sharper than the M-Summicron 35/1.4. - The Manual focus is easier and more accurate than with the M-Summicron 35. - Have a good price comparing with the very expensive M-Summicron 35. - You will have the very best Leica Experience: A Leica Camera with a Leica Lens. - And because its portability, even when the amazing SL 35/2 arrive next year, I am sure, you will not sold this 2016 M-Summicron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 5, 2017 Share #19 Posted March 5, 2017 This might be a silly question... Do any users walk around with the 90-280 or is it primarily used as a tripod mounted or stay in one place lense? It's a funny question to me ... I have long R lenses (180 and 250 mm) that I don't carry around enough because not only are they just as heavy ... and big ... as the SL90-280, I need a tripod to stabilize them at anything except very short exposure times. I'm selling them and buying the SL90-280 because its image stabilization makes the SL with it fitted far more hand-holdable. A superb if somewhat heavy kit to carry is going to be the Tenba Cooper 13DSLR with Leica SL, SL24-90, SL90-280, and Super-Elmar-R 15mm lenses. Once the SL90-280 gets here, I'll put it all together, photograph it, weigh it, and post the results. Yes, I'm signing up at the local gym with a trainer... and I don't think my car will have any problems with the carrying the weight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 5, 2017 Share #20 Posted March 5, 2017 I am buying my Leica SL next month! As I know the future new SL's primes will have a long, long way to arrive on the shelves, I've decided to buy too... the newest 2016 M-Summicron 35/2. I read on the ReidReviews that the newest generation of Summicrons - issued in the beggining of 2016 - are much, much better than the former generations, specially when used on mirrorless cameras like the SL and the Sony a7R II. Its bokeh was improved too. The reason is because they were calibrated for the digital cameras. I think Leica will do it with all of its M-Lenses over the years. I read too from an experienced Leica's user that even the older M-Summicron 35mm are sharper than the M-Summilux 35mm. We - only SL Owners - must think that in some years will have smaller SL Primes with superb performance/autofocus and what is need now is a bridge until there. In my opinion, after a long time thinking about, the 2016 Summicron 32/2 is PERFECT! - It is a complete new and modern Leica Generation for better results on mirrorless cameras. - Smaller and sharper than the M-Summicron 35/1.4. - The Manual focus is easier and more accurate than with the M-Summicron 35. - Have a good price comparing with the very expensive M-Summicron 35. - You will have the very best Leica Experience: A Leica Camera with a Leica Lens. - And because its portability, even when the amazing SL 35/2 arrive next year, I am sure, you will not sold this 2016 M-Summicron. Another funny post ... and I do mean 'ironic', not peculiar. I'm the peculiar one on this ... My favorite Leica 35mm lens is the 1972 Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v2. It has so many aberrations wide open it's astounding, yet it produces incredibly lovely images. Stopped down to f/5.6, it is razor sharp everywhere. Produced years before digital cameras were even seriously thought of, it's a typical Walter Mandler design and so, so nice. I'm sure the new Summicron M 35mm f/2 ASPH is absurdly wonderful in a Peter Karbe kind of way, but Walter and I get along well. When I want something a bit sharper wide open and just as small, I fit the Voigtländer Nokton 40mm f/1.4. It's amazingly good and pretty darn cheap; I haven't figured out the best lens profile to work with it yet, but even un-profiled it works very well. The Summicron-R 35/2 type II is also a wonderful lens if you want something in the middle on price and quality, and a better ergonomic fit. Fun stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.