Classic zooms on SL2

[ajitmenon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apologies if this has been brought up before in this forum or even the M-forum.

What kind of recommendations do you have for a classic manual focus zoom on the SL2? And preferably a reasonably priced one...
I was looking at the R zooms like the vario 3.5/4.5 28-70mm zoom but I have read that it's soft and actually made by Sigma. The f/2.8 version is a ridiculously price...
The f/4 35-70 seems decent but I would love to start at 24mm or 28mm if possible.
Contax and other brand zooms are welcome too as long as adaptors are available.

FYI - I just traded in my Tri Elmar 28-35-50 for the SL2. Though I used it a ton and appreciated it's vintage look, I never loved it at 50mm so am looking for a cheaper alternative for moments when a zoom is the more flexible option!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[peterm1_Leica]

One thought that occurs is to track down the Minolta zooms that were used by Leica as a basis for their zooms (an area they had little experience in back in the 1970s/80s). I believe Leica and Minolta ones on which they were based are optically identical though the build quality / look and feel differs.

The Minolta 35-70mm f3.5 constant aperture  (which was put into Leica livery and rebadged as the Vario Elmar 35-70mm f3.5) is a good example but I think there were a few variants so check which is best. The 70-200mm f4 by Minolta is another.

A little info on the collaboration here: http://forum.mflenses.com/the-leica-minolta-collaboration-t77452.html

Another lens that is reasonably priced and excellent is the first version (62mm filter) of the Nikkor 35-70mm f3.5 (constant aperture). If you want a slightly faster (but not wider) lens the Nikkor AF 35-70mm f2.8 is also excellent and being an older AF lens works perfectly in MF mode. 

Another lens with which I am familiar and enjoy is the Konica Hexanon 28-135mm f4 - 4.6 lens which is very good but suffers from being slow, having a variable aperture and being a beast to carry around. Though it looks cool too and would mount nicely on an SL2.

One issue that others might wish to comment is how well these (and other) classic zooms might perform on a 47 megapixel sensor (I suspect the Nikkor 35-70mm f2.8 AF would be best as it performs within a hair's breadth of the later 24-70mm f2.8 by Nikkor which is no slouch. 

[Jeff S]

Yes, the ‘MATE’ is prone to flare at 50mm. Dr Kaufmann did say he’d like to see a new Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 that would work on the SL.   That wouldn’t be inexpensive, though.

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2019/07/breakfast-with-dr-andreas-kaufmann/

While not ‘classic’, you might consider a Panasonic LUMIX S lens (in L mount) like the 24-70 Pro (certified by Leica), which is reasonably priced and has a clutch mechanism for manual mode. 

Jeff

 

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, ajitmenon said:

Apologies if this has been brought up before in this forum or even the M-forum.

What kind of recommendations do you have for a classic manual focus zoom on the SL2? And preferably a reasonably priced one...
I was looking at the R zooms like the vario 3.5/4.5 28-70mm zoom but I have read that it's soft and actually made by Sigma. The f/2.8 version is a ridiculously price...
The f/4 35-70 seems decent but I would love to start at 24mm or 28mm if possible.
Contax and other brand zooms are welcome too as long as adaptors are available.

FYI - I just traded in my Tri Elmar 28-35-50 for the SL2. Though I used it a ton and appreciated it's vintage look, I never loved it at 50mm so am looking for a cheaper alternative for moments when a zoom is the more flexible option!

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1103368-REG/novoflex_let_cont_lens_mount_adapter.html

https://www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/lens-adapters//adapterfinder-products/camera/leica-sl-t-tl-tl2-cl-mirrorless.html

 

[ajitmenon]

Thanks! These are great suggestions! The 1972 photo article in particular was definitely a great throwback.

I did use the Tri Elmar a LOT but can't say I entirely loved it- I guess it was efficient in that it allowed me to switch from 28mm (shooting from the hip) to 35mm or 50mm when I needed a more normal perspective or when the subject was not very close. 
Some of the old Leica R lenses like the 21-35 and 28-90 are pretty steeply priced - at which point, I would probably go for a modern AF zoom anyway.

But I did come across a few interesting options I may research a bit more:

• Angenieux 28-70mm 
• Tokina 28-70 f/2.6-2.8
• Nikkor 28-50 f/3.5
• Contax 28-70 f/3.5

Obviously image quality is a huge factor too and partly why most of us gravitate toward Leica in spite of the steep price point but in street photography I find that a bit of "rawness" or lack of perfection gives photos a bit of that down-to-earth nature. Then again, maybe I should just learn to use my 28mm summicron better.

 

[SonomaBear]

Canon FD zooms were/are wonderful and reasonably priced.  Spend just a bit more for the "L" versions of the FD lenses!

Minimal passive adapters are on eBay.

[caissa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica And Zeiss were longtime rivals and produced similar zooms.  So I use some Contax zooms from time to time. New they were also expensive but now (used) they are ridiculously cheap.

The Contax 28-70 is a weak lens (it was the low end zoom). More famous is the 3.4/35-70. The 28-85 is also very good - interesting because built the inverse way (short at 85mm). I also like the 4/80-200 (for macro at 200, very nice colors!). And some LOVE the 100-300, but I never tried that. (The EF 100-400 IS v2 is much better for me).

The Contax 3.4/35-70 is small and offers very high IQ (for a zoom). So it is probably the best. Very similar to the Leica 4/35-70. (The Contax has macro at 35mm, the Leica at 70mm which is usually more convenient.) The Leica is the only aspherical lens from Leica, that hides this in the name. So it punches above its weight.

Edited April 24, 2020 by caissa

[Richardgb]

On 4/22/2020 at 4:24 AM, peterm1_Leica said:

One thought that occurs is to track down the Minolta zooms that were used by Leica as a basis for their zooms (an area they had little experience in back in the 1970s/80s). I believe Leica and Minolta ones on which they were based are optically identical though the build quality / look and feel differs.

The Minolta 35-70mm f3.5 constant aperture  (which was put into Leica livery and rebadged as the Vario Elmar 35-70mm f3.5) is a good example but I think there were a few variants so check which is best. The 70-200mm f4 by Minolta is another.

A little info on the collaboration here: http://forum.mflenses.com/the-leica-minolta-collaboration-t77452.html

Another lens that is reasonably priced and excellent is the first version (62mm filter) of the Nikkor 35-70mm f3.5 (constant aperture). If you want a slightly faster (but not wider) lens the Nikkor AF 35-70mm f2.8 is also excellent and being an older AF lens works perfectly in MF mode. 

Another lens with which I am familiar and enjoy is the Konica Hexanon 28-135mm f4 - 4.6 lens which is very good but suffers from being slow, having a variable aperture and being a beast to carry around. Though it looks cool too and would mount nicely on an SL2.

One issue that others might wish to comment is how well these (and other) classic zooms might perform on a 47 megapixel sensor (I suspect the Nikkor 35-70mm f2.8 AF would be best as it performs within a hair's breadth of the later 24-70mm f2.8 by Nikkor which is no slouch. 

Minolta vs Leica: Indeed, a close family friend back in the Leicaflex heyday wanted a zoom and was told by his friendly dealer to wait while QC in production of the 35-70mm Minolta zoom was upped in order to be acceptable to Leica, whence it would simply be re-badged.

[caissa]

This story is somehow flawed. The R 3.5/35-70 was designed by Minolta, but is one of the weakest Leica zooms. Even the Minolta coming later were better. The much later R 4/35-70 (produced by Kyocera) is much better, and still ok today. But if you compare it to the current SL24-90 it is no match. As usual not in the center, but in the field and at the edges, where the differences are obvious. 

Edited April 24, 2020 by caissa

[peterm1_Leica]

9 hours ago, caissa said:

This story is somehow flawed. The R 3.5/35-70 was designed by Minolta, but is one of the weakest Leica zooms. Even the Minolta coming later were better. The much later R 4/35-70 (produced by Kyocera) is much better, and still ok today. But if you compare it to the current SL24-90 it is no match. As usual not in the center, but in the field and at the edges, where the differences are obvious. 

I think you will find that  in my post I stated  that there are different variants of the Minolta 35-70 f3.5 and I was not sure which one is best so a buyer should check which one has the best reputation.