tom0511 Posted January 5, 2020 Share #1 Posted January 5, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anybody compared them? What do you think? I much prefer the weight and size of the Pana and have not seen big weaknesses in any area (except slightl nervous bokeh in few images). DO you agree/disagree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Hi tom0511, Take a look here 24-105 Pana vs 24-90 Leica. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NRKstudio Posted January 5, 2020 Share #2 Posted January 5, 2020 I would think the red badge Pana 24-70/2.8 is more comparable (in terms of IQ and resolution) to the Leica 24-90. The Leica zoom is right in between the size of both the Panasonic zooms. here’s a camera size.com comparison of the Leica/Pana zooms and the 50mm L mount players. http://j.mp/2rSir1w Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 5, 2020 Share #3 Posted January 5, 2020 3 hours ago, NRKstudio said: I would think the red badge Pana 24-70/2.8 is more comparable (in terms of IQ and resolution) to the Leica 24-90. The Leica zoom is right in between the size of both the Panasonic zooms. here’s a camera size.com comparison of the Leica/Pana zooms and the 50mm L mount players. http://j.mp/2rSir1w Since 24-105 is very attractive from size/weight/range perspective, I wonder how much I will loose in term of image quality if I use Lumix 24-105 instead of 24-90. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luca Posted January 5, 2020 Share #4 Posted January 5, 2020 13 minutes ago, Artin said: The 24-90 is an excellent lens super sharp very contrasty it is pretty much the best in IQ in any zoom lens ever made by any manufacturer. It holds its own with the best primes from the SL. Lineup. But it is 5000.00 dollars more then the 24-105. (In Canada) At this point what value do you see in the difference? I had the 24-105 pan. I returned it and picked up the SL because I do not plan on purchasing any other Autofocus primes therefore it was worth it for me to have the 3 great autofocus lenses and then work with R and M primes. I will eventually pick up some SL primes on the resale market but for now I am set up . Base it on your needs and on your budget and go from there .. the SL zooms are the best in IQ so far from the L mount alliance I fully agree and share your comments. 24-90 has a stellar quality same as its price 🙂 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 5, 2020 Share #5 Posted January 5, 2020 41 minutes ago, Artin said: The 24-90 is an excellent lens super sharp very contrasty it is pretty much the best in IQ in any zoom lens ever made by any manufacturer. It holds its own with the best primes from the SL. Lineup. But it is 5000.00 dollars more then the 24-105. (In Canada) At this point what value do you see in the difference? I had the 24-105 pan. I returned it and picked up the SL because I do not plan on purchasing any other Autofocus primes therefore it was worth it for me to have the 3 great autofocus lenses and then work with R and M primes. I will eventually pick up some SL primes on the resale market but for now I am set up . Base it on your needs and on your budget and go from there .. the SL zooms are the best in IQ so far from the L mount alliance I have owned and used 24-90 since I got the SL two years ago. I am pleased with it. I do not see Lumix 24-105 as a complete replacement for my 24-90, except when I want to travel lighter. I would like to hear from those who own both lenses (no ownership bias) how they compare the two. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted January 6, 2020 Share #6 Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) Tested by Le Monde de la Photo on S1R and SL2, then printed in A1 format. f/2.8-4.0 24-90 suffers from moderate CA at 24mm. f/4.0 24-105 suffers from high CA below 50mm f/2.8 24-70 suffers from high CA at 24 & 70mm. All three do not have any issue with vignetting and distortion. 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! Edited January 6, 2020 by nicci78 2 Quote 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/305063-24-105-pana-vs-24-90-leica/?do=findComment&comment=3885921'>More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted January 6, 2020 Share #7 Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) There are other tests of L-mount lens on the magazine. But I will not published everything. Just grab it in paper or online. What you need to know. Is that Leica SL lenses are always better than Panasonic one. Actually Sigma are also better than Panasonic. Sigma DG DN 35 f/1.2 is a gem. A heavy one, but almost perfect optically. Wide angle : Leica SL 16-35 f/3.5-4.5 > Sigma DG DN 14-24 f/2.8 > Lumix S Pro 16-35 f/4 50mm prime : Leica SL 50 f/1.4 > Sigma DG HSM 50 f/1.4 > Lumix S Pro 50 f/1.4 Trans standard zoom : Leica SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 > Sigma DG DN 24-70 f/2.8 > Lumix S 24-105 f/4 > Lumix S Pro 24-70 f/2.8 Telephoto zoom : APO-SL 90-280 f/2.8-4 > Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/2.8 > Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/4 Portrait lenses. It is a draw : APO-SL 90 f/2 = APO-SL 75 f/2 = Sigma DG HSM 85 f/1.4 Sigma Art lenses are really really good. Leica's are slightly better at 4 times the cost. Just take in mind that newer Sigma DG DN made for mirrorless will focus way faster than older DG HSM made of DSLR. It is a question of motors. One is made for on sensor contrast detect. The other for phase detect modules. Among Sigma's older DG HSM, avoid 20 f/1.4 & 24 f/1.4. However DG HSM 40 f/1.4 & 105 f/1.4 are excellent. Edited January 6, 2020 by nicci78 2 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rim_light Posted January 6, 2020 Share #8 Posted January 6, 2020 55 minutes ago, nicci78 said: 50mm prime : Leica SL 50 f/1.4 > Sigma DG HSM 50 f/1.4 > Lumix S Pro 50 f/1.4 I didn't had the lenses in my own hand, but from trustful sources who had I don't think this is correct. The Lumix should be No 1. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted January 6, 2020 Share #9 Posted January 6, 2020 I only report the reviews results. The tester JMS is totally reliable. They are all 3 quite similar, but Leica got a slight edge over Sigma which has a slight edge over the Panasonic. However Sigma is way cheaper than the other two. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 6, 2020 Share #10 Posted January 6, 2020 1 hour ago, nicci78 said: There are other tests of L-mount lens on the magazine. But I will not published everything. Just grab it in paper or online. What you need to know. Is that Leica SL lenses are always better than Panasonic one. Actually Sigma are also better than Panasonic. Sigma DG DN 35 f/1.2 is a gem. A heavy one, but almost perfect optically. Wide angle : Leica SL 16-35 f/3.5-4.5 > Sigma DG DN 14-24 f/2.8 > Lumix S Pro 16-35 f/4 50mm prime : Leica SL 50 f/1.4 > Sigma DG HSM 50 f/1.4 > Lumix S Pro 50 f/1.4 Trans standard zoom : Leica SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 > Sigma DG DN 24-70 f/2.8 > Lumix S 24-105 f/4 > Lumix S Pro 24-70 f/2.8 Telephoto zoom : APO-SL 90-280 f/2.8-4 > Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/2.8 > Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/4 Portrait lenses. It is a draw : APO-SL 90 f/2 = APO-SL 75 f/2 = Sigma DG HSM 85 f/1.4 Sigma Art lenses are really really good. Leica's are slightly better at 4 times the cost. Just take in mind that newer Sigma DG DN made for mirrorless will focus way faster than older DG HSM made of DSLR. It is a question of motors. One is made for on sensor contrast detect. The other for phase detect modules. Among Sigma's older DG HSM, avoid 20 f/1.4 & 24 f/1.4. However DG HSM 40 f/1.4 & 105 f/1.4 are excellent. Thank you for the summary. Which number of "Le Monde de la Photo" contains the tests? Merci beaucoup. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted January 6, 2020 Share #11 Posted January 6, 2020 4 hours ago, rim_light said: I didn't had the lenses in my own hand, but from trustful sources who had I don't think this is correct. The Lumix should be No 1. I own the Leica and the Sigma in EF mount. I have tested the Panasonic. Optically the differences are almost insignificant. Choose from the three without issue. There's no bad lens here. I slightly prefer the way the Leica draws over the other two. But if I didn't already own it I might go for the Sigma because of the size. Gordon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted January 6, 2020 Author Share #12 Posted January 6, 2020 Am 5.1.2020 um 21:59 schrieb SrMi: I have owned and used 24-90 since I got the SL two years ago. I am pleased with it. I do not see Lumix 24-105 as a complete replacement for my 24-90, except when I want to travel lighter. I would like to hear from those who own both lenses (no ownership bias) how they compare the two. I own both lenses and for last 2 vacations grabbed the 24-105 for its much lower weight and size + longer reach and did not detect anything wrong. SO I wondered if I missed something? I did not run direct comparisons though. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 6, 2020 Share #13 Posted January 6, 2020 36 minutes ago, tom0511 said: I own both lenses and for last 2 vacations grabbed the 24-105 for its much lower weight and size + longer reach and did not detect anything wrong. SO I wondered if I missed something? I did not run direct comparisons though The sort of testing done in mags etc. is done in ways specifically to exhibit weaknesses that rarely feature in the vast majority of 'normal' photos. I'm always rather amused by the obsession with extreme periphery performance ...... which except for photos of vertical brick walls is lost in OOF areas that no-one bothers to look at. It is a weird photographer indeed that positions his focal point at the edge of the frame ..... 1 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyboy Posted January 7, 2020 Share #14 Posted January 7, 2020 I hate the bokeh of the Pana lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 7, 2020 Share #15 Posted January 7, 2020 9 hours ago, Artin said: however what I saw from my brief ownership of the Panasonic 24-105 was just the lack of Micro contrast that gives the SL vario the 3D pop that I personally find very important for me, and I chose to pay for the difference ah ...... Leica micro contrast and 3d-pop ...... I'd very much like to see some examples of this. A bit like the Loch Ness monster ..... lots of people say they have seen it but the scant photographic evidence never appears very convincing to me .... 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 7, 2020 Share #16 Posted January 7, 2020 Microcontrast can be measured. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted January 8, 2020 Share #17 Posted January 8, 2020 On 1/6/2020 at 5:54 PM, SrMi said: Thank you for the summary. Which number of "Le Monde de la Photo" contains the tests? Merci beaucoup. The latest hors série : les objectifs Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 8, 2020 Share #18 Posted January 8, 2020 43 minutes ago, nicci78 said: The latest hors série : les objectifs Thanks, got it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted January 9, 2020 Share #19 Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) On 1/6/2020 at 11:12 PM, thighslapper said: The sort of testing done in mags etc. is done in ways specifically to exhibit weaknesses that rarely feature in the vast majority of 'normal' photos. I'm always rather amused by the obsession with extreme periphery performance ...... which except for photos of vertical brick walls is lost in OOF areas that no-one bothers to look at. It is a weird photographer indeed that positions his focal point at the edge of the frame ..... That’s why JMS from le monde de la photo, tested 40+ MP with A1 size print and 20/24MP with A2 size print. By the way, in the magazine, we can notice how excellent are Olympus lenses. Making m4/3 at the level of best APS-C. By the way, all modern optics are so good, that one of the key difference is in corner performance. They have to higher their expectations. Otherwise they will be too similar. Another real difference stated by JMS is how Leica manage to make lenses with lowest CA possible. Best in industry. So to sum up Leica SL are best into excellent sharpness until the corner, high micro contrast and CA reduced to minimum Edited January 9, 2020 by nicci78 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.