So, Who's Buying the New 35 and/or 50 SL APO Lenses & Will they Replace your equivalent M-Lenses

[ajmarton1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/26/2019 at 9:26 AM, BernardC said:

That's not what the three partners have claimed. L-mount lenses will conform to the L-mount specification, and the partners will hold regular meetings to extend that specification (for instance, with support for an "aperture ring" on the Panasonic lenses), but they will operate independently.

In other words, future Leica L lenses won't be "secret Sigmas" or "dressed-up Lumix," unless you have a reliable source that knows otherwise.

Yes, I think you are right about them working independently to some degree but I believe Panasonic is invlolved in certain aspects of the Q and it has been rumored that Sigma had a hand in some aspects of the SL lenses. But I really don’t know. The problem for me is that I was one of the first people to get the SL and then waited a very long time for the lenses to arrive. It continues to be a problem for the SL and I suspect that is why the partnership came into play. The 50 1.4 was terrible in low light or complicated light settings. I know several other owners in LA who sold their lens. I did and the fact that the Leica store took it back and gave me a full refund several months later indicates they knew there was an issue. The 24-90mm was what I ended up using most of the time or some of my M lenses with the adapter. But I bought the SL for the AF feature as I had the M10 at the time as well.  So I didn’t see the point in going manual focus with the SL. To me the larger size was justified by the AF. I love the SL design and build of the SL but the utility factor was just not enough for me to keep it.  I wanted a system that had a larger selection of AF lenses. So for now, I am with the Nikon D850 which I am finding to be a very nice system as my keepers have jumped up significantly because the camera’s ergonomics are fantastic. But I do hope to get the SL2 as I am at the core a Leica fan boy. I think Leica will face some serious competition with the Nikon Z mirrorless and Canon systems and I hope they stay on top of things. 

Edited January 27, 2019 by ajmarton1

[BernardC]

46 minutes ago, ajmarton1 said:

Yes, I think you are right about them working independently to some degree but I believe Panasonic is invlolved in certain aspects of the Q and it has been rumored that Sigma had a hand in some aspects of the SL lenses.

There are indications that some or all of the SL and TL lenses are sub-contracted, at least in part, to other manufacturers. That's not a new thing for Leica, they were selling Schneider lenses 60 years ago. What's important is that the lenses/sub-components are built to Leica's standards. The lensrentals tear-down of an SL zoom showed that it was built to very high standards, without compromise. It also used more ED and aspherical elements than competing designs, which partly explains the price and performance. Panasonic and Sigma may not be able to do this while maintaining decent margins.

I would not be surprised if the three brands shared components such as controller chips, motors, or IS actuators. Those kinds of components get cheaper and more reliable with volume, and they don't contribute directly to optical performance.

[Jeff S]

7 minutes ago, BernardC said:

 

I would not be surprised if the three brands shared components such as controller chips, motors, or IS actuators. Those kinds of components get cheaper and more reliable with volume, and they don't contribute directly to optical performance.

Maybe that could have prevented the S system AF motor debacle. We’ll likely never know the responsible party or decision.  The SL system has, however,  seemed more reliable in general than the much more costly S.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

11 hours ago, panoreserve said:

Reg. the 24/90 Vario: bulk could be another reason to go for the Summicrons as well as better background isolation (f2 vs. f3.1 resp. f3.6). Last but not least: even though all 3 SL Varios are optically  outstanding the new f2 Primes will be superior- which is rather unimaginable😇.

The flip side is that the 24-90 has OIS.  And for handholding, sometimes technique has as much or more effect than optical quality.

Jeff

[Fedro]

I am looking at the 35 but it would not replace anything (as it is not one of the most used for me on the M)

50 I have the SL Lux which I love - and I think it is great to have a native low light option - so I am not looking at the Cron version

After that I will consider the 21and at that point I may sell the 24-90: much as it is a spectacular lens, I take it out less and less given size but also it feels really nose heavy when fully extended

[jplomley]

41 minutes ago, Fedro said:

I am looking at the 35 but it would not replace anything (as it is not one of the most used for me on the M)

50 I have the SL Lux which I love - and I think it is great to have a native low light option - so I am not looking at the Cron version

After that I will consider the 21and at that point I may sell the 24-90: much as it is a spectacular lens, I take it out less and less given size but also it feels really nose heavy when fully extended

Agree completely, was not a fan of the extension of the 24-90, hence my decision to go with the 16-35 and 75 SL lenses. The 16-35 bests my M lenses of equivalent focal length when at similar apertures. Really quite remarkable, and certainly justifies the jaw-dropping cost of the 16-35 lens. The 75 SL is unparalleled by anything in the M line-up.

Edited January 27, 2019 by jplomley

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Maybe that could have prevented the S system AF motor debacle. We’ll likely never know the responsible party or decision.  The SL system has, however,  seemed more reliable in general than the much more costly S.

Maybe, but they also use completely different AF motor implementation. The S lenses are much easier to focus manually, compared to the SL lenses.

The S also has a moving mirror, which makes it more susceptible to impact damage, and it uses CF cards, which are prone to bent pins. The S2 and S-006 used Kodak CCD sensors that can corrode (just like the same type of sensor did on the M9). The cherry on the cake is the S's moulded rubber skin, which is frightfully expensive to replace out of warranty, and has to come off to do any other repair.

I think the AF motor issue was simply caused by a gear material that degraded over time, irrespective of usage. The fundamental design is sound, but they got stung by material quality. Other brands use similar gears.

Leica seems to have learned from all these choices when it came time to design the SL. No CF card, no moving parts other than the shutter, rubber covering that is cut from flat pieces.

[Jeff S]

The gears didn’t just degrade; many broke new out of the box, particularly after the FW upgrade that sped up the AF.  A picture of the part was shown in a thread on the S forum, and it was cheaply made. My comment was somewhat sarcastic, with the inference that Leica could have benefited from an alliance with a smarter partner, not that the parts were transferable from the SL. The SL did however benefit from technology partnerships, including Panasonic. I don’t know about the S, particularly  the S2 and S006.

Jeff

Edited January 27, 2019 by Jeff S

[BernardC]

3 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The gears didn’t just degrade; many broke new out of the box, particularly after the FW upgrade that sped up the AF.

I got a great deal on one such lens that was bad "from new." Saved a few thousand by delaying my gratification by a few weeks, while the lens went back to Germany. That's why I think that time was the culprit, rather than use. All lenses started failing around the same time.

I am speculating, but it would make sense that Leica used a single batch of AF gears from the start of S lens production. It's the type of component that is provisioned in bulk quantities and costs a few Euro cents per unit.

The firmware upgrade could be a coincidence. Users had the same lens issues on the S2, which has slower AF.

[Danno_photoguy]

I have and SL (got it to replace my corroded M9), but no SL lenses as yet.  I do use the SL, but with M and R lenses to date.  I am interested in the 35mm SL lens, but what I really want is the 35mm M Noctilux, which is due out soon (I hope).  I never plan to get rid of any of my M lenses.  

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

I got a great deal on one such lens that was bad "from new." Saved a few thousand by delaying my gratification by a few weeks, while the lens went back to Germany. That's why I think that time was the culprit, rather than use. All lenses started failing around the same time.

I am speculating, but it would make sense that Leica used a single batch of AF gears from the start of S lens production. It's the type of component that is provisioned in bulk quantities and costs a few Euro cents per unit.

The firmware upgrade could be a coincidence. Users had the same lens issues on the S2, which has slower AF.

We’re guessing (and off topic....apologies to others), but I’ve always believed in Roger’s (and his dealer’s) thoughts on the issue...

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271009-af-drive-problems-leica-s-lenses-official-statement-by-leica/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-3248525

An excerpt (from Roger Dunham)....

”Lets establish what the real problem is first .  The original AF module (including the plastic gear that strips) was designed for the S2 .  Some lenses did fail but most didn t .  It was after the S 007 was released with faster AF and the firmware was updated on the S 006 .  At this point the load became too much for the AF gear and it stripped frequently .  New lenses that were stiff or moved a lot of elements failed early .  The 120 and 24 failed frequently when brand new . 

 

I have 9 Leica S lenses .  My dealer who has more experience with this issue than anyone on this forum (because he has a lot of S customers ) ...predicted which lenses would fail BEFORE we mounted them .  Five of the lenses failed immediately ....another two after some modest use .  Two more to go . “  (Roger Dunham)

Still no clarification from Leica. 

Jeff

[tom0511]

I might add the 35 at some point, but having the zooms I am not in a hurry, and eventualy would prefer and wait for a 28mm prime.

I have the 50/1.4SL and love the way it renders. I might replace it with the Summicron for size reasons, but it renders so beautiful that I also may just keep the 50/1.4SL and live with the weight. 

[jplomley]

My fear is that these new generation of Summicrons are going to be so good, it will be difficult not to end up with them all, especially as there are no f/2 options in the M lens line-up for the 21 and 24 mm.

[helged]

1 minute ago, jplomley said:

My fear is that these new generation of Summicrons are going to be so good, it will be difficult not to end up with them all, especially as there are no f/2 options in the M lens line-up for the 21 and 24 mm.

😉 The L-primes opens a territory for consumer optics only/mostly seen in industry and/or military applications so far. Ok, you have to pay a stiff price compared to comparable counterparts from the usual suspects, but you get resolution, micro-contrast, sharpness, colour rendering etc. that will survive generations of firthcoming sensors. Just imagine what the L-primes can/will deliver on a 50-ish mp sensor, the first to be officially released on Friday, Feb 1st (Panasonic), with Leica's SL2 following in the not-to-distant future (my guestimate). 

[futura]

I've been giving this a lot of thought. At the moment, I use the 35lux and 75SL 99 precent of the time on the camera. I have a reasonably good hit ratio with the 35lux probably due to the awesome EVF, but at times esp when my subject is moving through plane of focus, my adjustments aren't quite fast enough. So I'll definitely consider adding the 35SL when its released.

One side thought, I recently picked up my canon 1dx and 300mm to shoot deer, and it reminded me of why I switched over to Leica, so having an overall heavier SL kit might result in some of my weight concerns coming back

[jonoslack]

8 hours ago, helged said:

😉 The L-primes opens a territory for consumer optics only/mostly seen in industry and/or military applications so far. Ok, you have to pay a stiff price compared to comparable counterparts from the usual suspects, but you get resolution, micro-contrast, sharpness, colour rendering etc. that will survive generations of firthcoming sensors. Just imagine what the L-primes can/will deliver on a 50-ish mp sensor, the first to be officially released on Friday, Feb 1st (Panasonic), with Leica's SL2 following in the not-to-distant future (my guestimate). 

Absolutely agree - I think the SL summicrons will be benchmarks of quality for a long long time to come. . . and matched with the SL2 they will be a real winning combination.

[SiggiGun]

No replacement of any M-Lenses and the VARIO-ELMARIT-SL f. 2.8-4.0/24-90mm ASPH. 

But APO-SUMMICRON-SL f2. 0/50mm ASPH. pre-ordered (on top on the waiting list). I think shipping will start in May

[jplomley]

Well, I'm heading to Romania for 3 weeks in May, so chances are the 35 APO will not be available by then :-(  Plan was to take the SL with 35 and 75 and the M10 with 28 Cron Asph and 21 SEM. Looks like it will be the SL with 75 APO and M10 with 35 Lux and 21 SEM.