Wide angle on the SL2

[Gavin Cato]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys,

I just bought a SL2 + 50/1.4 lux and am loving it to put it mildly.

I'm a very experienced photographer but new to Leica so I don't know the lenses that well.

I'm getting the 90/2 SL very soon, but need something on the wide side, around 21-28mm. 

I realise the 24-90 zoom is supposed to be quite good, but i'm more attracted to the idea of a smaller lens physically on the wider side. Can anyone recommend some M lenses in this range that perform really well on the SL2? The aim is landscapes. 

I don't need fast a f1.4 lens this wide (though it would be nice). 2.8 & up would be fine - as long as it is very nice optically for printing.

cheers

Gav

[jaapv]

Very wide there are the  Voigtländer 10 or 12 mm on the Leica L-M adapter. Not fast - who needs speed for such a lens?- but very fine quality, small and light. You might see some vignetting and colour shift towards the extreme corners.
For 18 and 21 mm the Super-Elmar lenses are superb. Highly recpommended. There are a number of 28 mm M lenses -both new and used. You cannot go wrong with any of them.

[Advertisement]

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

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Personally I see no need to adapt wide M lenses. The older ones don't always play nice and the newer ones aren't that small.

Try the Sigma L mount 14-24 f2.8. Not much bigger or heavier than the SL Summicrons (but wider at the front) and very very impressive performance wide open.

Gordon

[trickness]

I used the 21 SEM on my SL and absolutely loved it. Albeit I am a photographer who doesn’t pixel peep for perfect sharpness in the corners, I think stuff like that is the least important part of what makes a photograph good. The 21 SEM inspired me every single time I shot with it; I stupidly sold it after getting a 28 2.8 Elmar which is a lot of fun on the SL. 
 

If you’re the kind of person who obsesses over MTF charts, then get one of the native SL Summicron wides as they start to hit the market over the next year. If that kind of thing isn’t something you think about, by all means put an M prime on your SL and enjoy.

[darylgo]

The 21 and recently discontinued 24 super Elmars are superb, as well as the second generation 28 Asph, either the elmarit or summicron. The above is an evaluation based on the M, not the SL.  Leica says the SL is made to accept M lenses but it is not as optimized as the M.  With the SL2 and the greater pixel count I would want to shoot these lenses before purchase, look at your corners and edges to see if they play well together on landscapes. From past testing of the 24-90 zoom vs the 24 on the SL the zoom outperformed the single focal length, an absurd test with all other zooms, and it shows how good the zoom is as the 24 is what I regarded the best wide  for landscapes edge to edge.  

[chris_tribble]

I’d recommend checking the Sigma offering, especially if you are interested in value / performance. Jono Slack rates the 14-24. And remember, by working with native L mount lenses you get a massive range of functionalities that are lost if you use M lenses.

[HeinzX]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use for these purposes the Leica 24/90 and if I want more wide angle the Panasonic 16-35 which is light and has excellent image quality and a modest price. I am very satisfied with both lenses.

[Joakim]

There are some claims here that the 21 SEM and also the 24 Elmar are superb but you should know not everyone shares that opinion when it comes to using them on the SL2 and specially if you are shooting landscapes and expect the corners to be very good. 

The advantage of those 2 lenses are the small size and apart from corner performance the deliver an excellent image quality so they are still 2 attractive options.

Here is a recent discussion about 21mm lenses on this forum.

[anickpick]

The most versatile ultra wide angle lens in m mount is the WATE 16-18-21 imo. Stopped down to f 5.6, it is sharp across the whole frame. Beautiful colors.

The ultra wide Voigtländer lenses suffer toward the edges and also exhibit some aberrations.

The Sigma 14-24 in L mount bests them all, but it is much bigger and heavier.

[Gavin Cato]

Thanks so much everyone. I have a lot to think about.

If there was a native SL 21 (i.e. like the 35/50/75/90) the choice would be easy.

 

[IkarusJohn]

I use the 21 Summilux-M on my SL - compact by SL standards, balances nicely, and I like the results.  I also use the 28 Summilux-M on my SL.  In his review of the SL(?), or maybe it was his review of the 28 Summilux-M, Jono Slack was very complimentary of the 28 Summilux on the SL.  I don't do lens comparisons or pixel peak, but I have found both lenses on the SL to be very good - I'm not looking for alternatives.

Of the L mount lenses, the 16-35mm zoom is very good.  I will often take that zoom, the 50 Summilux-SL and/or the more compact 75 Summicron-SL with me - a very versatile combination.

Edited July 29, 2020 by IkarusJohn

[John Z. Goriup]

My very strong & earnest suggestion would be the Leica 16-35 SL 3.5-4.5 Super-Vario Elmar. Its performance across the range is at least as good as any of Leica's prime lenses of equivalent focal length, in several instances demonstarbly better, and you have it all from the eminently usable wide end of 16mm to 35mm.......and as jaapv sagely observed -"who needs speed in such a lens". Sharp, smooth, minimum distortion, superb color rendition, and the prints are stunning. For what it's worth, I traded up from my one previous favored ultra-wide lens, the wonderful 21mm f3.4 Super Elmarit about a year after I got my first SL and only after taking the 16-35 for a lengthy test-drive. Nota bene, it was a very convincing & conclusive test of the Vario lens. 

As you alude to, the only downside for you may be its size & weight, although it's smaller and slightly lighter than the 24-90, BUT, and this is a big but, with the 16-35 you will have a the effective equivalent of a whole bag full of superb Leica wide-angle primes at your disposdal with the twist of the zoom ring.

JZG

[SrMi]

I do not recommend SEM 21 on SL2. In my tests (SL2 vs M10-R) the corners show considerable smearing on SL2, especially wide open, also still visible at f/8.

If you are fine with f/4 and are looking for a small and wide lens, I recommend WATE (16-18-21) as it performs very well on SL2 (no corner smearing).

[masjah]

What about the 21-35 R with Leica R-L adapter?

 

[Jared]

On 7/29/2020 at 1:35 AM, Joakim said:

There are some claims here that the 21 SEM and also the 24 Elmar are superb but you should know not everyone shares that opinion when it comes to using them on the SL2 and specially if you are shooting landscapes and expect the corners to be very good. 

The advantage of those 2 lenses are the small size and apart from corner performance the deliver an excellent image quality so they are still 2 attractive options.

Here is a recent discussion about 21mm lenses on this forum.

I was curious when I saw your comment that not everyone shooting an SL2 was happy with corner sharpness on the SEM just because that didn’t match my experience on the SL.  I went through the six page thread you linked to and couldn’t find a single complaint about SEM performance.  Plenty of people liked other lenses—Cosina Voigtlander, 7Artisans, etc.—but they all seemed to be value arguments, not image quality.

I never had any corner issues with my SEM on an M10 or an SL. Sounds like your experience with the SL2 is different.  Is that correct? Or were you referencing someone else’s experiences?  It looks like SrMi also does not recommend the 21SEM on the SL2.  I’m wondering whether the SL2 behaves differently with this lens than the SL and M10.

[Jared]

14 hours ago, John Z. Goriup said:

My very strong & earnest suggestion would be the Leica 16-35 SL 3.5-4.5 Super-Vario Elmar. Its performance across the range is at least as good as any of Leica's prime lenses of equivalent focal length, in several instances demonstarbly better, and you have it all from the eminently usable wide end of 16mm to 35mm.......and as jaapv sagely observed -"who needs speed in such a lens". Sharp, smooth, minimum distortion, superb color rendition, and the prints are stunning. For what it's worth, I traded up from my one previous favored ultra-wide lens, the wonderful 21mm f3.4 Super Elmarit about a year after I got my first SL and only after taking the 16-35 for a lengthy test-drive. Nota bene, it was a very convincing & conclusive test of the Vario lens. 

As you alude to, the only downside for you may be its size & weight, although it's smaller and slightly lighter than the 24-90, BUT, and this is a big but, with the 16-35 you will have a the effective equivalent of a whole bag full of superb Leica wide-angle primes at your disposdal with the twist of the zoom ring.

JZG

Yes, there is no question that the 16-35 is a superb lens on the SL2.  If the OP can manage the size and cost (weight isn’t too bad by SL2 standards), this is the best way to go by far.

[scott kirkpatrick]

47 minutes ago, Jared said:

I never had any corner issues with my SEM on an M10 or an SL. Sounds like your experience with the SL2 is different.  Is that correct? Or were you referencing someone else’s experiences?  It looks like SrMi also does not recommend the 21SEM on the SL2.  I’m wondering whether the SL2 behaves differently with this lens than the SL and M10.

Are you going to try this or shall I?   I have both SL and SL2 and the 21 SEM.  Don't have a 10-R at present to distract me.  I have concluded that full field sharpness with M28 Summilux and M24 elmarit-asph takes just a bit of stopping down on the SL2.  I prefer the 24 on an M frame, but would use the 28 on either.

Edited July 30, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[SrMi]

45 minutes ago, Jared said:

I was curious when I saw your comment that not everyone shooting an SL2 was happy with corner sharpness on the SEM just because that didn’t match my experience on the SL.  I went through the six page thread you linked to and couldn’t find a single complaint about SEM performance.  Plenty of people liked other lenses—Cosina Voigtlander, 7Artisans, etc.—but they all seemed to be value arguments, not image quality.

I never had any corner issues with my SEM on an M10 or an SL. Sounds like your experience with the SL2 is different.  Is that correct? Or were you referencing someone else’s experiences?  It looks like SrMi also does not recommend the 21SEM on the SL2.  I’m wondering whether the SL2 behaves differently with this lens than the SL and M10.

In my case, it may be because my impression is based on testing, not on practical use (close distance, the subject is a bookshelf, and criteria is the writing on the books).

If you shoot with f/8, the edges become much better on SL2 and one can complain about SEM 21 only after seeing how well it does on M10R.

[Joakim]

3 hours ago, Jared said:

I was curious when I saw your comment that not everyone shooting an SL2 was happy with corner sharpness on the SEM just because that didn’t match my experience on the SL.  I went through the six page thread you linked to and couldn’t find a single complaint about SEM performance.  Plenty of people liked other lenses—Cosina Voigtlander, 7Artisans, etc.—but they all seemed to be value arguments, not image quality.

I never had any corner issues with my SEM on an M10 or an SL. Sounds like your experience with the SL2 is different.  Is that correct? Or were you referencing someone else’s experiences?  It looks like SrMi also does not recommend the 21SEM on the SL2.  I’m wondering whether the SL2 behaves differently with this lens than the SL and M10.

My bad, I linked to the wrong discussion! This is the discussion I intended to link to.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jared]

4 hours ago, SrMi said:

In my case, it may be because my impression is based on testing, not on practical use (close distance, the subject is a bookshelf, and criteria is the writing on the books).

If you shoot with f/8, the edges become much better on SL2 and one can complain about SEM 21 only after seeing how well it does on M10R.

Thanks!