SL compact autofocus primes

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, SlowDriver said:

This is the 2020 roadmap:

https://www.panasonicff.com/updated-sigma-l-mount-lens-roadmap-through-2020-july-2019/

Nothing lightweight as far as I can see.

Bummer. Maybe next year?

https://www.diyphotography.net/sigma-ceo-we-will-make-smaller-lenses-but-bigger-cameras/

Edited February 14, 2020 by Simone_DF

[The206]

For sure the 23 f2 is exactly what I am looking for but not at the cost of 20 megapixels. It just seems absurd to me how leica has completely missed the point of a mirror less camera, I want the weight savings, other wise I would use the S series. The price of an SL prime is more expensive then buying the LEICA Q2 with its 28 1.7????? I would much sooner buy the Q2 to get the 28mm focal length and it would still come in around the same weight as the SL lens. It just seems like the spirit of why we use leicas is to be light, nimble, fast. The SL2 with the 35mm is a wrist breaker. Hopefully Sigma will see the opportunity here, I have the FP as well and its an amazing little camera. A 28mm on the sigma FP would sell like hotcakes. So Again LEICA come on, its been 5 years can we please like literally every other camera on the planet get a 50 1.8 and a 35 1.8 pleassssse

[Einst_Stein]

I once wanted that too. But then a camera store person commented, asked, “what do you want from a reduced （Downgraded!)  SL lens that the TL cannot do significantly?”.

[LocalHero1953]

6 hours ago, The206 said:

For sure the 23 f2 is exactly what I am looking for but not at the cost of 20 megapixels. It just seems absurd to me how leica has completely missed the point of a mirror less camera, I want the weight savings, other wise I would use the S series. The price of an SL prime is more expensive then buying the LEICA Q2 with its 28 1.7????? I would much sooner buy the Q2 to get the 28mm focal length and it would still come in around the same weight as the SL lens. It just seems like the spirit of why we use leicas is to be light, nimble, fast. The SL2 with the 35mm is a wrist breaker. Hopefully Sigma will see the opportunity here, I have the FP as well and its an amazing little camera. A 28mm on the sigma FP would sell like hotcakes. So Again LEICA come on, its been 5 years can we please like literally every other camera on the planet get a 50 1.8 and a 35 1.8 pleassssse

What's wrong with APS-C other than the psychological barrier of not being full frame? The CL is light, nimble, fast, has small lenses, and can take photos that are just as good (as interesting images, rather than technical deliverables) as those from a SL. And you omit the main failing of the fp and why it is light and fast: it is not nimble because it has no EVF (and the only add-on EVF is a monster).
I have all three, and I know which of the CL, SL and fp I would choose for 'light, nimble, fast' photography.

[jaapv]

On 2/12/2020 at 5:02 AM, CharlesL said:

The TL 23/2 mounted on the SL (warning: camera porn).

 

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!

How can you have porn with the essential parts covered??

[Guest]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

What's wrong with APS-C other than the psychological barrier of not being full frame? The CL is light, nimble, fast, has small lenses, and can take photos that are just as good (as interesting images, rather than technical deliverables) as those from a SL. And you omit the main failing of the fp and why it is light and fast: it is not nimble because it has no EVF (and the only add-on EVF is a monster).
I have all three, and I know which of the CL, SL and fp I would choose for 'light, nimble, fast' photography.

I bought into the Canon mirrorless system last year.  One of the main reasons was the availability of the good lightweight 300g 35mm f1.8 lens.  It allows me to travel with one system (as opposed to schlepping both the SL and CL around each time) using the 35mm when I want to go light and the heavier lenses when I want the best image quality.  In my opinion Leica should provide this option as well.  There should be at least one lightweight lens that allows you to make the SL slightly smaller.  All ranting obviously because it ain't happening, certainly not in the next 2 years but probably also not afterwards, but I do understand the frustration of the OP because I.have exactly the same...

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 hours ago, The206 said:

 So Again LEICA come on, its been 5 years can we please like literally every other camera on the planet get a 50 1.8 and a 35 1.8 pleassssse

While I get the desire for having exactly what you want, I find it absurd that anyone would buy into a Leica system expecting they had the slightest intention of doing what every other camera manufacturer on the planet does. It would literally kill the company. Leica occupies the high ground just below Mt. Phase One. We can debate whether or not the peak they reside on is high enough that they wont someday be washed away, but regardless that is the only strategy for survival they have. It is indeed rather frustrating the there are no wide primes available at any price today and those primes that are in circulation are backordered virtually everywhere, but you bought (I presume) into the system knowing all this right?  There was plenty of history to inform that decision given the SL, as you noted,  "was introduced in 2014 [yet] still lacks a series of compact autofocus primes".

What possible reason is there for Leica to introduce a 35 or 50mm 1.8 when utterly brilliant Summicrons 2.0s already exist? The point of the L-Alliance clearly was to expand the market by having Panasonic and Sigma fill in the low to mid range (every other camera maker stuff as you put it) while Leica soldiered on building uncompromised optics at uncompromised prices. The entire stated premise of the Summicron Ls was to increase size to maximize performance. If one were to anticipate a series of new optics to be announced by Leica in the next few years, they are far likelier to be high priced Noctis, not Elmarits or Elmars. Your best hope for what you desire lies with Sigma or a range of Pano S glass blessed by Leica. As someone who owns both the 35mm and 75mm Summicrons along side the Lumix 16-35m S and 135 ART, I can tell you that the 'lesser' glass is damn good. If the L-mount survives, and given the success of the 45 2.8, its hard to imagine that these partners wont eventually respond with similar offerings in other focal lengths. But outside of mounting M optics, I think any hope for compact, slower aperture lenses coming from Wetzlar is at best, decades in the future. But who knows, maybe they'll make a Summarit or two in the meantime. I just wouldn't count on it any more than I'd count on Ferrari building a 500 HP four cylinder minivan, as cool as that might be.

[Guest]

13 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

While I get the desire for having exactly what you want, I find it absurd that anyone would buy into a Leica system expecting they had the slightest intention of doing what every other camera manufacturer on the planet does. It would literally kill the company. Leica occupies the high ground just below Mt. Phase One. We can debate whether or not the peak they reside on is high enough that they wont someday be washed away, but regardless that is the only strategy for survival they have. It is indeed rather frustrating the there are no wide primes available at any price today and those primes that are in circulation are backordered virtually everywhere, but you bought (I presume) into the system knowing all this right?  There was plenty of history to inform that decision given the SL, as you noted,  "was introduced in 2014 [yet] still lacks a series of compact autofocus primes".

What possible reason is there for Leica to introduce a 35 or 50mm 1.8 when utterly brilliant Summicrons 2.0s already exist? The point of the L-Alliance clearly was to expand the market by having Panasonic and Sigma fill in the low to mid range (every other camera maker stuff as you put it) while Leica soldiered on building uncompromised optics at uncompromised prices. The entire stated premise of the Summicron Ls was to increase size to maximize performance. If one were to anticipate a series of new optics to be announced by Leica in the next few years, they are far likelier to be high priced Noctis, not Elmarits or Elmars. Your best hope for what you desire lies with Sigma or a range of Pano S glass blessed by Leica. As someone who owns both the 35mm and 75mm Summicrons along side the Lumix 16-35m S and 135 ART, I can tell you that the 'lesser' glass is damn good. If the L-mount survives, and given the success of the 45 2.8, its hard to imagine that these partners wont eventually respond with similar offerings in other focal lengths. But outside of mounting M optics, I think any hope for compact, slower aperture lenses coming from Wetzlar is at best, decades in the future. But who knows, maybe they'll make a Summarit or two in the meantime. I just wouldn't count on it any more than I'd count on Ferrari building a 500 HP four cylinder minivan, as cool as that might be.

Spot on I feel.  I personally don't believe we will ever see compact primes from Leica and I also don't believe there will be many lenses after the already announced ones.  In 2022 there will be 11 lenses and Leica considered the S lens lineup complete with 10 lenses (last lens 2013) and the T/CL lineup with 7 lenses (last lens 2017).  

Edited February 17, 2020 by Guest

[caissa]

Nobody thought that Leica would bring the SL. M was the holy grail. Certainly M is still the main source of income. But the strategy has shifted. So they would be really stupid to restrict themselves to a certain number of lenses. If users demand it, they will be glad to deliver.

Maybe you have still not learned that predicting the future by referring to the past is silly. (Look at the current big ten stock companies, who would have predicted that a few years back ? Or Tesla, many times “bankrupt” according to specialist predictions, now the second most valuable car maker in the world).  Who would have predicted the details of the SL2, only 6 months back ?   Don’t mix what you expect or wish for with real predictions (like the weather forecast).

Some old M fans are even leaving the boat in protest, now that the strategy has been changed (see the strange reaction of Erwin Puts).

Edited February 17, 2020 by caissa

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, caissa said:

If users demand it, they will be glad to deliver.

Sure but given that Leica has not updated its lens roadmap (as they said they would) and given that they have delayed their production schedule by pushing the 21mm and the 24mm into 2021 I am thinking that user demand and the user base might not be as large as Leica wants it to be.  If the SL-lenses were selling like cheesesteaks in Philly they would be flooding the market with them IMHO. 

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, caissa said:

 ...Look at the current big ten stock companies, who would have predicted that a few years back ? 

Back in 1999 when I was at Sun Microsystems developing one of the earliest forms of cloud computing, the company started to implode and I left. On the way out the door I bought quite a reasonable bit of stock in the only other cloud competitor that existed at the time. That was over twenty years back. When I purchase those shares said company was trading at $55.  It closed last week at $2134.  Was there luck involved?  Without a doubt.  Any number of things could have happened to derail their rise.  Did I anticipate this much profit? Nope. But it was 100% certain for a whole host of reasons that someone was going to win in this space and win big. And in the software industry, when we're talking about platforms that force lock in, first to market has historically won.  

I'd concur that one might not get the particulars right and I'd also agree that predicting the future solely based on history isn't sufficient, but if one is paying close attention it isn't necessary all that difficult to suss out the problems that need solving and figure out whose best positioned to make a dent in them a few year on. And that isn't the only time an idiot like me has had such a win. Investing in CDMA back in the early 90's yielded a similar result. And of course, in the 80s there was... 

[digitalfx]

On 2/15/2020 at 8:25 PM, The206 said:

For sure the 23 f2 is exactly what I am looking for but not at the cost of 20 megapixels. It just seems absurd to me how leica has completely missed the point of a mirror less camera, I want the weight savings, other wise I would use the S series. The price of an SL prime is more expensive then buying the LEICA Q2 with its 28 1.7????? I would much sooner buy the Q2 to get the 28mm focal length and it would still come in around the same weight as the SL lens. It just seems like the spirit of why we use leicas is to be light, nimble, fast. The SL2 with the 35mm is a wrist breaker. Hopefully Sigma will see the opportunity here, I have the FP as well and its an amazing little camera. A 28mm on the sigma FP would sell like hotcakes. So Again LEICA come on, its been 5 years can we please like literally every other camera on the planet get a 50 1.8 and a 35 1.8 pleassssse

Leica hasn't missed any point...this is their market. 

and why would Leica divert resources to make a 50 1.8 and 35 1.8 when they already have both in the 50mm Summicron and 35mm Summicron

[CharlesL]

On 2/16/2020 at 2:27 AM, jaapv said:

How can you have porn with the essential parts covered??

You are correct. It is only camera eroticism. Please forgive me; I was raised in a strict household.

[Daniel81]

This thread pertains to my dilemma.  Purchased an SL 6 months ago with one 'native' lens - the 75 SL.  I have enough money for one more lens and I'd like an autofocus option.  I have been thinking of getting the 35 or maybe the 50 SL.  Then someone recently suggested why not get the Q2 - size and weight are comparable to the 35 or 50 SL (wouldn't be all that different having the SL and two SL lenses in my bag versus the SL, one SL lens and the Q2), with 40 MP, I can certainly crop from 28 to 35 - and its got manual and AF and on its own, its a great travel option.  Its a compelling thought.  I just feel kind of odd having the SL with just the one lens and not two.  I'm just sitting with this choice for a while.

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, Daniel81 said:

This thread pertains to my dilemma.  Purchased an SL 6 months ago with one 'native' lens - the 75 SL.  I have enough money for one more lens and I'd like an autofocus option.  I have been thinking of getting the 35 or maybe the 50 SL.  Then someone recently suggested why not get the Q2 - size and weight are comparable to the 35 or 50 SL (wouldn't be all that different having the SL and two SL lenses in my bag versus the SL, one SL lens and the Q2), with 40 MP, I can certainly crop from 28 to 35 - and its got manual and AF and on its own, its a great travel option.  Its a compelling thought.  I just feel kind of odd having the SL with just the one lens and not two.  I'm just sitting with this choice for a while.

Well, if this were a differently titled thread, I might suggest an SL 24-90.  Then you could gain 6+ lenses in one (with OIS), even when your SL 75 is left home.  

Jeff

[Boojay]

On 2/18/2020 at 2:37 AM, Daniel81 said:

This thread pertains to my dilemma.  Purchased an SL 6 months ago with one 'native' lens - the 75 SL.  I have enough money for one more lens and I'd like an autofocus option.  I have been thinking of getting the 35 or maybe the 50 SL.  Then someone recently suggested why not get the Q2 - size and weight are comparable to the 35 or 50 SL (wouldn't be all that different having the SL and two SL lenses in my bag versus the SL, one SL lens and the Q2), with 40 MP, I can certainly crop from 28 to 35 - and its got manual and AF and on its own, its a great travel option.  Its a compelling thought.  I just feel kind of odd having the SL with just the one lens and not two.  I'm just sitting with this choice for a while.

Daniel have you thought of maybe trying the very reasonably priced Lumix 24-105 to widen your options on the SL, I'm using it on SL2 and it's a nice walk around, I'm sure not up to the standard of the SL 24-90 but a lot lighter.  I have a similar dilemma to you.  Having promised myself only one of the SL Primes I'm really struggling to decide which one☺️!    

[Simone_DF]

FYI:

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/4997384936/panasonic-interview-if-we-stay-united-i-think-we-will-survive

What are the most important priorities for evolving the S1 lineup, in the future?

Overall, we’ve had a lot of appreciative comments from high-end users. What’s hindering us in the lower-end segment is size, weight and price. So we need to understand those obstacles, and we’re considering the development of new products in order to penetrate into a wider market.

 

Which means forget smaller lenses hitting the market before 2021/2022

[Alistairm]

If you want small AF (and to use the whole sensor), then the L Mount alliance has at least delivered the Sigma 45. Otherwise, sacrificing AF, M lenses remain small, fast and wonderful and play very nicely with the SL and SL2. 
 

If autofocus, full frame, compact and interchangeable lenses in one system are all important to you then Leica isn’t the right brand with its current offering. 

[Daniel81]

On 2/19/2020 at 7:55 AM, Boojay said:

Daniel have you thought of maybe trying the very reasonably priced Lumix 24-105 to widen your options on the SL, I'm using it on SL2 and it's a nice walk around, I'm sure not up to the standard of the SL 24-90 but a lot lighter.  I have a similar dilemma to you.  Having promised myself only one of the SL Primes I'm really struggling to decide which one☺️!    

i've been an exclusively prime lens guy for a very long time and i may be proving to be way too stubborn, but for now, i am keeping it that way.  And the 24-90 is just way too big for my liking.  i actually love the way the SL primes feel on the SL.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[GlennC63]

On 2/17/2020 at 9:37 PM, Daniel81 said:

This thread pertains to my dilemma.  Purchased an SL 6 months ago with one 'native' lens - the 75 SL.  I have enough money for one more lens and I'd like an autofocus option.  I have been thinking of getting the 35 or maybe the 50 SL.  Then someone recently suggested why not get the Q2 - size and weight are comparable to the 35 or 50 SL (wouldn't be all that different having the SL and two SL lenses in my bag versus the SL, one SL lens and the Q2), with 40 MP, I can certainly crop from 28 to 35 - and its got manual and AF and on its own, its a great travel option.  Its a compelling thought.  I just feel kind of odd having the SL with just the one lens and not two.  I'm just sitting with this choice for a while.

At this point in time, that is exactly what I do.  I carry my SL/75 and the Q.  It all fits in a small bag and gives me a tremendous amount of versatility because I don’t have to take time switching lenses.  With that said, I too would like some smaller lens options, but having rented the 35 this past summer, it is a stellar piece of glass and most likely what I add next.... That is, if I can ever get my SL2!!