Budget Lens Option for SL2 - Advise Please

[Flyer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just had my SL2 for  a couple of weeks and have been using the Sigma 45mm as a walkabout.

I can't justify the Leica 24-90 at the moment so my option is the Panasonic 24-105 F4 or Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ART.

I mainly shoot travel and landscape so the f2.8 isn't essential.

Because the Panasonic has Image Stabiliser built in does this work in harmony with the SL2 or will there be no benefit over the non IS Sigma?

Main priority is corner sharpness when stopped down to say f8/f11

Many Thanks

Flyer

[Advertisement]

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

[chris_tribble]

I had the Sigma 24-70 for a couple of days and wasn’t excited by it. It’s sharp, responsive, but the lens didn’t draw in a way that felt special (unlike the Sigma 45 which I think is exceptional) - and it weighs nearly as much as the 24-90 Vario-Elmar. I’ve tried a friend’s 24-105 and was impressed (as was Jono Slack). If budget is tight and you want a zoom, it’s you only serious option. Oh, and the lens IS seems fine alongside the SL2 IBIS (though I’d ask a regular user if they can confirm this.

[Boojay]

5 minutes ago, chris_tribble said:

I had the Sigma 24-70 for a couple of days and wasn’t excited by it. It’s sharp, responsive, but the lens didn’t draw in a way that felt special (unlike the Sigma 45 which I think is exceptional) - and it weighs nearly as much as the 24-90 Vario-Elmar. I’ve tried a friend’s 24-105 and was impressed (as was Jono Slack). If budget is tight and you want a zoom, it’s you only serious option. Oh, and the lens IS seems fine alongside the SL2 IBIS (though I’d ask a regular user if they can confirm this.

I suppose this is the perfect example of why it's usually better to try a lens yourself if possible.

Not to be contrary at all, I have the Panasonic 24-105 and the Sigma 24-70, and out of the two prefer the results from the Sigma, but like the convenience and extra range of the Panasonic.   As far as weight goes, Panasonic 680g, Sigma 835g, Leica 24-90 1140g.

There may be some advantage having lens and body stabilisation when using the Lumix lens on the SL2 but I really haven't noticed in real time use compared to the Sigma, but I also use the 24-105 on the CL where it's a big help.   

Like the OP I have never quite justified to myself buying the Leica 24-90 but there seems to be strong evidence that's where you find the best IQ.

[biswasg]

On 8/26/2020 at 10:31 PM, Flyer said:

Just had my SL2 for  a couple of weeks and have been using the Sigma 45mm as a walkabout.

I can't justify the Leica 24-90 at the moment so my option is the Panasonic 24-105 F4 or Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ART.

I mainly shoot travel and landscape so the f2.8 isn't essential.

Because the Panasonic has Image Stabiliser built in does this work in harmony with the SL2 or will there be no benefit over the non IS Sigma?

Main priority is corner sharpness when stopped down to say f8/f11

Many Thanks

Flyer

With due respect to individual's purchase justifications, I believe the large investment in a Leica is for its lenses and not so much for the body (M aside). I too debated on the lens, eventually, bought the SL Vario-elmart 24-90 to go wiht my SL2. Though heavy, I have managed to lug it for full day trips with a lot of walking, I do not need to change lenses, and the quality of images are ideal. A very personal decision of mine.

[MarkP]

On 8/27/2020 at 7:55 AM, chris_tribble said:

...but the lens didn’t draw in a way that felt special (unlike the Sigma 45 which I think is exceptional)

Can you please expand on your thoughts regarding the 45?

Edited August 28, 2020 by MarkP

[chris_tribble]

1. An idiosyncratic rendering fully open, with, I find, a very attractive bokeh.
2. Very sharp stopped down to f5.6 or f8
3. Light and compact
4. Aperture ring and responsive manual focusing
5. beautifully engineered
6. under £500 if you shop around.

Enough already?

🙂

 

[AphotoBerlin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The new Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN should work pretty well in combination with the Sigma 45mm. A very compact&light solution with brilliant optical quality bought together for 1/3 of the price of a SL-Lens . I think Sigma is doing a great job at the moment, and the whole company itself is very likable. 

 

[chris_tribble]

Maybe you still need to consider looking for a used SL 24-90. I've just found one for £2900 and am SO much happier with it than I was with the Sigma 24-70.  I traded in a very little used WATE so the acquisition didn't hurt too much (😉) .  I still won't be using it every day as a walk around camera/lens combination (that's why I have the M10!) but it's going to be very very useful - and it's good to be able to get images like the two here with the one  body / lens...

 

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 August 30, 2020 by chris_tribble

[Jk1002]

To me one should strive for the 24-90, better to invest in lenses than in body.

As a smaller option which might be a good idea for a start I think looking at the 20-60 Lumix or preowned Leica TL18-56 especially with the Sl2 where the drop in megapixel is not as bad seems to be the way to go.

I settled on 20-60 but am still on edge about 18-56, problem is I started with the Sl initially and want to invest in the lens system first.

Coming from M and primes 8 am not even sure zoom will stick with me. 

JK

 

[chris_tribble]

It’s down to the dilemma we have when choosing systems, and allocating finite resources. If push came to shove, and I had to chose one system only, I think I’d stay with the M. What I’d lose in terms of flexibility, I’d gain in portability, IQ, and shooting experience. For my purposes the SL2 will not be the daily, take it with me everywhere camera. That will continue to be an M and a 35. Do I like the bulk and weight of any fast standard zoom (on any system)? No. Do I like the results I get from the 24-90 — my word I do!

[tom0511]

I own both Zooms and frequently use the 24-105 instead of the 24-90 on vacation trips. I have very good experience with it, like the lighter weight, and the reach makes it a very flexible lens.

From my side highly recommended.

[Ivar B]

22 hours ago, chris_tribble said:

Maybe you still need to consider looking for a used SL 24-90. I've just found one for £2900 and am SO much happier with it than I was with the Sigma 24-70.  I traded in a very little used WATE so the acquisition didn't hurt too much (😉) .  I still won't be using it every day as a walk around camera/lens combination (that's why I have the M10!) but it's going to be very very useful - and it's good to be able to get images like the two here with the one  body / lens...

 

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!

 

Just out of interest, could you enlarge upon what made you strongly prefer the Leica 24-90 over the Sigma lens?

 

[chris_tribble]

1 hour ago, Ivar B said:

Just out of interest, could you enlarge upon what made you strongly prefer the Leica 24-90 over the Sigma lens?

 

1. Image quality (rendering, bokeh, edge to edge sharpness, colour)
2. the extra 20mm focal length - it makes a surprising difference).

I’d prefer it to be lighter and smaller - but it is what it is.

the Sigma was good, but not as good...

 

[RustyBug]

On 8/26/2020 at 5:32 PM, Boojay said:

I also use the 24-105 on the CL where it's a big help.   

 

New to Leica ownership and the forum. 
Just got my first Leica, the CL (less than a week).  I've paired it with the 55-135 to start, but of course, no IS ... so it's 1/250 and Auto ISO for the moment.

Wondering how effective the Panny 24-105 OIS is on the CL (single IS).  Also wondering how much "Leica" drawing style did they get put in it ... kinda close to Leica-ish, or really far from it.  Kinda wondering about the 70-200/4 Panny a bit, too.

Thanks.

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by RustyBug
Added info

[Slender]

To add my grain of salt, the 24-90 is really out of this world. True it's heavy coming from M9, but geez, it has to be one of the finest lens I ever used... Elmarit-M 90 sharpness mixed with 50 summilux asph. bokeh, 3D pop, colors... Surely a sigma 45 is an attractive option for a lighter walk-around lens... I was thinking of a voigtlander-M 35 f1.2 III with M adaptater instead for a more conventional focal length and fully embrace the "not perfect but so caracterful", wide aperture all manual experience with the SL2 on days off.

[bherman01545]

48 minutes ago, Slender said:

To add my grain of salt, the 24-90 is really out of this world. True it's heavy coming from M9, but geez, it has to be one of the finest lens I ever used... Elmarit-M 90 sharpness mixed with 50 summilux asph. bokeh, 3D pop, colors... Surely a sigma 45 is an attractive option for a lighter walk-around lens... I was thinking of a voigtlander-M 35 f1.2 III with M adaptater instead for a more conventional focal length and fully embrace the "not perfect but so caracterful", wide aperture all manual experience with the SL2 on days off.

+1, the 24-90 amazes me every time that I use it. Yes, it is heavy, but it really replaces a bag full of primes. I also picked up an  SL 35 Summicron, which is reported to be even better yet. I can't imaging what 'better' looks like, because the Leica 24-90 is the best 24-90 that I've every used, and I've used he best from Nikon, Canon and Sony.

FWIW, at least for me, I bought into the SL2 for the lens system. I'm sure that most would get good results from either the Sigma or the Lumix. I prefer Leica lenses whenever possible and fill-in with lenses from other manufacturers when I need something which Leica doesn't offer. I just purchased the Sigma 105mm F/2.8 DG DN Macro, since it fills a gap in Leica's lineup.

Also, a completely different topic, once I configured the joystick to perform the equivalent of back-button AF, my hit-rate has gone up. The focus is tack sharp and I can move the focus point around with the same finger.

For me, back button AF was a game changer.

 

-Brad

[skimmel]

4 hours ago, RustyBug said:

New to Leica ownership and the forum. 
Just got my first Leica, the CL (less than a week).  I've paired it with the 55-135 to start, but of course, no IS ... so it's 1/250 and Auto ISO for the moment.

Wondering how effective the Panny 24-105 OIS is on the CL (single IS).  Also wondering how much "Leica" drawing style did they get put in it ... kinda close to Leica-ish, or really far from it.  Kinda wondering about the 70-200/4 Panny a bit, too.

Thanks.

 

I use the 24-105 on the CL. IS seems to work well. I haven't quantified "number of stops" gained but I have shot both with and without IS and there is a big difference. I can handhold at 105mm at 1/30 second easily (and I am not very steady!).  1/15 is not 100% sharp but pretty close.   Without IS I will not go below 1/125 sec at 105mm for regular shooting. (I can handhold at lower shutter speed with good technique but a lot of my style is more spontaneous images.)

Edited November 9, 2020 by skimmel

[Boojay]

3 hours ago, RustyBug said:

New to Leica ownership and the forum. 
Just got my first Leica, the CL (less than a week).  I've paired it with the 55-135 to start, but of course, no IS ... so it's 1/250 and Auto ISO for the moment.

Wondering how effective the Panny 24-105 OIS is on the CL (single IS).  Also wondering how much "Leica" drawing style did they get put in it ... kinda close to Leica-ish, or really far from it.  Kinda wondering about the 70-200/4 Panny a bit, too.

Thanks.

 

Not sure about "Leica" drawing style being evident in either of the Panasonic zooms, can't say I personally see that.  However, I find the lens OIS useful and effective certainly allowing shutter speeds down to around 1/20.  The focal range of the 24-105 a good travel/walkaround option for L mount bodies, crop (covering roughly 35-150mm ) or FF.   

As others have said, not up to IQ that the 24-90 SL is fabled for but we're in a completely different price range and much lower weight too.  

 

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[RustyBug]

18 minutes ago, skimmel said:

I use the 24-105 on the CL. IS seems to work well. I haven't quantified "number of stops" gained but I have shot both with and without IS and there is a big difference. I can handhold at 105mm at 1/30 second easily (and I am not very steady!).  1/15 is not 100% sharp but pretty close.   Without IS I will not go below 1/125 sec at 105mm for regular shooting. (I can handhold at lower shutter speed with good technique but a lot of my style is more spontaneous images.)

Thanks.  Gotcha at "number of stops".  Like you, when using great technique, I'm not too shabby ... umm, that's "when", and sometimes it just takes too much effort (time-wise, not effort wise) for spontaneity.  Just looking for a dependable helping hand, not necessarily a miracle for sloppy workmanship. 😉

[RustyBug]

8 minutes ago, Boojay said:

Not sure about "Leica" drawing style being evident in either of the Panasonic zooms, can't say I personally see that.  However, I find the lens OIS useful and effective certainly allowing shutter speeds down to around 1/20.  The focal range of the 24-105 a good travel/walkaround option for L mount bodies, crop (covering roughly 35-150mm ) or FF.   

As others have said, not up to IQ that the 24-90 SL is fabled for but we're in a completely different price range and much lower weight too.  

 

 

 

 

Thanks.  I didn't know if / how much "Leica" is showing up in the Alliance with Panny ... granted, to a price point, of course (which might mean, "not much").  

+1 not up to 24-90.  Unrealistic to think such a thing.  I'd be comparing to the Vario 55-135 for IQ diff's (focal length diff's so noted) as to better, worse, same ... or just "different".  I'm thinking the OIS and 35-150 range would be good, but I don't want to take a big step backwards on IQ from the Vario.  If it's much of a diff, then I'll probably just live with the ISO bump for the SS.  The CL ISO plays pretty nice, so it's not too bad.  Of course, I've only got a few frames under my belt so far.  I just know that my keeper rate at 1/160 sec was poor with the CL at 135mm (200mm equiv).

Thanks again.

Kent