Jump to content
MarkinVan

New APO-SUMMICRON-SL 35 f/2 ASPH vs Leica Q2

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

So I've been planning to get and now I'm ready to place a deposit on the new APO-SUMMICRON-SL 35 f/2 ASPH for my Leica SL.

I have the 3 Leica SL Zooms and they are beautiful lens, so my thinking with the ordering  of the SL 35mm lens was to have a smaller, lighter, less intimidating lens to make my SL my always on lens to carry around more as in the "alway wear your camera" idea.  

There has been a bit of confusion at my local dealer about ordering and they now have things figured out and I am still first in line for the SL 35mm and tomorrow I'm to pay a deposit and then once the lens shipping is confirmed I am to go pay the full balance.

On the way home after he told me about all the Leica Q2 orders they have it got me thinking.

Will it be better to order the Q2?

Roughly 10% more in cost, weather proof, more compact, 47.3 megapixels, lighter and less intimidating for portraits and a second body and something my wife would probably use more?

Would it be better value for me and get more use.

I have an M240, with a 35 & 50 mm and the 35 almost only on,  which my wife doesn't use as she leans towards family pictures but can't focus well and I do ok with but much prefer my SL in most ways and don't use that much unless I want to be very discrete.

I'm rocking back and forth between the two tonight wondering which one to order.

 

 

Edited by MarkinVan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha ha, I placed a deposit for the 35SL which I have been waiting on forever! anyway while in the store I played around with the Q2 and its quite nice and I was thinking exactly the same way as you lol. 

but after a lot of thought I am now firmly committed to the 35SL as its APO and will be awesome for a long time, way longer then when even the Q3 comes out. The 35SL can be used on Leica, Lumix and eventually the Sigma Foveon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The choice as written in the title is a bit weird. (Camera vs lens).  In reality it is Q2 vs SL2. For the next few months, as long as there is no SL2, the Q2 is very charming. As soon as the new SL2 is here the Q2 will not be so appealing anymore.

Regarding the choice in the title, it is twice nay for me. I do not need a 1.4 or 1.7 28mm lens. So I definitely will prefer the flexibility of a camera with exchangeable lenses. But I do also prefer the flexibility of the SL16-35 vs the APO 35mm Summicron. (For the worst case I still have the 2.0/24-35 which is also not bad.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Q2 has IBIS, (or is this a misunderstanding ?) so at a later stage the firmware could also support some sort of sensor shift or high res mode. This would make the Q2 extremely attractive. But then probably usage from tripod would be necessary. As this is a contradiction to the philosophy (small and handheld) Leica will probably not implement that. Too bad ...   😪

This is probably no useful answer for the thread owner. But in your very personal situation only a close partner can give useful advice. So best talk with your wife about it. 😉

Edited by caissa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, caissa said:

The Q2 has IBIS, (or is this a misunderstanding ?)

Optical stabilization in the lens, not the body.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mark,

just my experience if useful.

I had been on the list for the 35APO for quite some time with similar thinking to yours. When decision time came (and also the Q2 surfaced)I had to be honest with myself and admit that I use the SL mostly for landscapes, zoom use and portraits not for walk around

The Q2 having the same batteries as the SL was the dealbreaker for me - although that may change with the SL2 of course - so I did not put the deposit down for the 35APO and jumped on the one for the Q2 (which I still have not received).

Once I do, the Q2 plus SL with the 75mm will be a great combo, IMHO; not any lighter than SL plus 35 and 75 but at least with no lens change to be done. I will also use the Q2 as a second body for the M10 when needed or stand alone for walks, baby pictures (we have a toddler) etc

Much as the 35APO is spectacular, I do not see the SL as a walk around camera and when I want something wide, the 16-35 is a great lens (and not that much heavier than the 35).

That was my thinking anyways ..

Fedro

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, caissa said:

The choice as written in the title is a bit weird. (Camera vs lens).  In reality it is Q2 vs SL2.......

It depends how you look at it.

Do you carry the the Summicron-SL 35 as an alternative lens for the SL in your bag, or do you carry the Q2 and avoid changing lenses, while adding another part of another stop, IS, extra pixels etc?

The Summicron-SL 35 weighs 720g; the Q2 weighs 734g, and is shorter than the Summicron-SL 35 without the SL body (obviously the Q2 height and width are greater than the SL lens on its own). The Q2 will be about £750 more expensive.

I think it's a valid comparison.

Edit: FWIW I don't own, nor intend to get either!

Edited by LocalHero1953

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MarkinVan said:

So I've been planning to get and now I'm ready to place a deposit on the new APO-SUMMICRON-SL 35 f/2 ASPH for my Leica SL.

I have the 3 Leica SL Zooms and they are beautiful lens, so my thinking with the ordering  of the SL 35mm lens was to have a smaller, lighter, less intimidating lens to make my SL my always on lens to carry around more as in the "alway wear your camera" idea.  

There has been a bit of confusion at my local dealer about ordering and they now have things figured out and I am still first in line for the SL 35mm and tomorrow I'm to pay a deposit and then once the lens shipping is confirmed I am to go pay the full balance.

On the way home after he told me about all the Leica Q2 orders they have it got me thinking.

Will it be better to order the Q2?

Roughly 10% more in cost, weather proof, more compact, 47.3 megapixels, lighter and less intimidating for portraits and a second body and something my wife would probably use more?

Would it be better value for me and get more use.

I have an M240, with a 35 & 50 mm and the 35 almost only on,  which my wife doesn't use as she leans towards family pictures but can't focus well and I do ok with but much prefer my SL in most ways and don't use that much unless I want to be very discrete.

I'm rocking back and forth between the two tonight wondering which one to order.

To use a hunting analogy, the prey isn't going to disappear so there's no need to press the trigger now unless the need is urgent.

Are you are planning to buy a high MP count L-mount body sometime in the future? If not then the Q2 seems quite attractive.

But, setting aside the "camera as a tool" arguments, in terms of shear long term joy of ownership which purchase is going to give you the most pleasure? Once you know that the decision might be easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had a Q1 running concurrently with an SL and TL (now CL). 

It was .... and I am sure the Q2 is, an excellent camera ....... but you are firmly stuck with one focal length (all the cropped additional advertised options are marketing hype) and eventually I sold it as it was getting little use. 

Wouldn't it be more sensible to carry about an extra lens rather than an extra camera ? If you want it as a standalone substitute for taking an SL with you, fair enough, but it doesn't make much economic sense otherwise .... particularly as lenses have a much longer life span than bodies, and tend to hold their value. The 35/2 SL also looks like being optically streets ahead of anything else at that focal length.

Having at one stage had multiple Leica's, I am now firmly in the diversification minimisation, maximum compatibility camp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the CL and SL combination make more sense than the SL, Q2 combination with the SL Summicron lenses. I have the 90mm and have ordered the 35mm. This way I have 4 focal lengths. The 35 becomes a 24mp 50mm on the CL and the 90 becomes a 135mm on the CL. Certainly can’t get that with the Q2. Only advantage of Q2 is if you really want a 47mp 28mm camera. As was said above the crop is just advertising fluff as you can crop any shot. 

I know you can get a wider focal range with SL zooms but I much prefer the weight of the summicron lenses to the zooms. I have owned and sold all 3 SL zooms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the CL and SL combination make more sense than the SL, Q2 combination with the SL Summicron lenses. I have the 90mm and have ordered the 35mm. This way I have 4 focal lengths. The 35 becomes a 24mp 50mm on the CL and the 90 becomes a 135mm on the CL. Certainly can’t get that with the Q2. Only advantage of Q2 is if you really want a 47mp 28mm camera. As was said above the crop is just advertising fluff as you can crop any shot. 

I know you can get a wider focal range with SL zooms but I much prefer the weight of the summicron lenses to the zooms. I have owned and sold all 3 SL zooms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To me the CL and SL combination make more sense than the SL, Q2 combination with the SL Summicron lenses. I have the 90mm and have ordered the 35mm. This way I have 4 focal lengths. The 35 becomes a 24mp 50mm on the CL and the 90 becomes a 135mm on the CL. Certainly can’t get that with the Q2. Only advantage of Q2 is if you really want a 47mp 28mm camera. As was said above the crop is just advertising fluff as you can crop any shot. 

I know you can get a wider focal range with SL zooms but I much prefer the weight of the summicron lenses to the zooms. I have owned and sold all 3 SL zooms. 

Edited by grahamhoey
Delete as accidentally posted twice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it comes down to this 

17 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

The Summicron-SL 35 weighs 720g; the Q2 weighs 734g

The SL + 35SL weighs over 1.5 kg. That does not qualify as an "always wear your camera" set up. The Q2 will add much more versatility to your excellent SL zooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my thinking exactly, and I don't see it as a camera for street either, be that with the 16-35 or with the 35 Cron

Like you, I think that the Q2 opens more possibilities, but that is of course for me and for what I do, I am sure others will have a different view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Q2 has convenient marks for zone focus. It  much better suits for street shooting.

Edited by Smogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Smogg said:

Q2 has convenient marks for zone focus. It  much better suits for street shooting.

street shooting for me = 50 mm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would use the 35 Summicron mainly for lower light images, otherwise I would rather carry one of the zooms.

These low light moments are often situations where a smaller camera (and even f1.7) has its advantages. So I see the Q2 as a 28mm and 35mm low light camera, but also as a stand alone small package camera for hikes, party, vacation. I think a very good companion to a Leica SL.

Does one  need/want a 35 Summcrion if one has a Q2 anyways? I am sure the Summicron is optically even better than the Q2 lens, but how much?

 

Do you want max. IQ and are you fine to allways carry a SL sized camera system -> 35 SL

Do you sometimes want to just bring a smaller camera and can sacrifice a little IQ (compared to SL with primes) -> Q2

For me the Q2 feels a little like a Leica M with AF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi There

I think it's a rather interesting conundrum, and certainly reflects my indecision.

Only difference for me is that I've spent a lot of time with both the Q2 and the SL35 APO, so I can be indecisive with real information. 

The problem for me is increased by the fact that having just bought the 90-280 and a CL with two of the zooms . . . .  I'm entirely skint, so I can't afford either the 35 APO or the Q2. I tried to sell a kidney, but it's too pickled, and my granny died 35 years ago, so I'm a bit stuck!

What I can say is that although the lens on the Q2 is wonderful . . . . . it isn't as wonderful as the 35 APO, truth to tell, if I had the money to buy just one of them it would be the 35 APO, and if I had the money to buy both of them . . it would be the 35 APO and wait for the 50 APO. 

All the best

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There

I think it's a rather interesting conundrum, and certainly reflects my indecision.

Only difference for me is that I've spent a lot of time with both the Q2 and the SL35 APO, so I can be indecisive with real information. 

The problem for me is increased by the fact that having just bought the 90-280 and a CL with two of the zooms . . . .  I'm entirely skint, so I can't afford either the 35 APO or the Q2. I tried to sell a kidney, but it's too pickled, and my granny died 35 years ago, so I'm a bit stuck!

What I can say is that although the lens on the Q2 is wonderful . . . . . it isn't as wonderful as the 35 APO, truth to tell, if I had the money to buy just one of them it would be the 35 APO, and if I had the money to buy both of them . . it would be the 35 APO and wait for the 50 APO. 

All the best

 

 

This saved me lots of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...