First everyday lens suggestions for SL typ 601

[nico4444]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

I am looking to get my first lens for my recently acquired second-hand SL. I’ve been content with my Leica Q as my main camera, but there had been some instances where I’m photographing portraits and my subjects complain about the images looking too sharp, especially women, so I wanted to try something different should those occasions arise again and to expand what my Leica Q is lacking. 

Since the Leica Q is my daily carry and my preferred camera, I do not mind having a larger lens when using the SL, so while the Sigma 45mm f2.8 is an excellent lens for its size, I’ve already crossed it out from my mind.

Some fun lenses I’ve been eyeing for the SL are the Leica Summilux-R 80, Leica Summicron-R 90, Leica Summicron-R 50, Voigtlander VM 75 f1.5, and Lumix S Pro 50. They are all very different lenses with their own characters that I really like in images and I am not one who cares about all the technicalities.

From what I’ve seen, the Leica R 80 and Voigtlander 75 f1.5 are both soft with superb micro-contrast and I don’t know if getting a lens coincidentally ideal for female portraiture (I’m not talking about models, just ordinary people) is a good enough reason alone. These focal lengths are really interesting and fun to work with, so if I didn’t need soft looking images, I would rather look at the Leica Summicron-R 90 or the new Sigma Art 85 or even the Sigma Art 105, although that one is a beast of a lens. 

The 50mm focal length is a classic and it is easier to use with my experience, so I was eyeing the Lumix S Pro 50 as my all-rounder lens. Given its spectacular bokeh and the fact that it would make the setup completely weather resistant is very compelling. The Leica Summicron-R 50 and Summilux-R 50 can be found locally at a relatively low price, but I do not wish to fall into the trap of collecting lenses that I would not use just because I found a good deal on them. Other 50mm considerations are the new Meyer-Optik Trioplan/Primoplan II with L-mount, but I can’t really see them as daily lenses and I have not heard about anyone testing them out.

Honestly, if I had the means, I would get the Leica SL APO 50, so the natural choice should be the Lumix S Pro 50, which is actually the only lens I’ve tried among the ones I mentioned in this post, but I would still like some input from other users who might have experienced something similar when buying lenses. In terms of budget, I am capping myself at Lumix S Pro prices (~1500-1800 USD/Euro) and I intend to stick to one lens for the foreseeable future, with the Leica R APO Macro 100 f2.8 in my sights as my second lens, because it brings something very unique. Also, I should mention that my current cameras are the Q, SL, and my smartphone, with my previous setup of a Canon DSLR with 24-70 L and nifty-fifty, so tele lenses are kind of new to me, but welcomed.

[Marac]

Seems to me that the Pana 50 pro is your boy.

[BernardC]

If you want a great all-around lens to last you a lifetime, you can't go wrong with the 50 Summicron-R or Summilux-R. They have a classic look that is highly sought-after by cinematographers, and they are still relatively affordable. Sticking with R lenses will help you avoid the "adapter dance" down the road, when you get your R APO Macro 100 f2.8.

The Pana 50 is a good lens, but it will have the over-optimized look that you are trying to avoid. That's great for ultimate sharpness, but portraits rarely benefit from extra sharpness.

One other lens that you should consider is the 60/2.8 Macro-Elmarit-R. It's also sharp-but-smooth.

[nico4444]

3 hours ago, Marac said:

Seems to me that the Pana 50 pro is your boy.

I certainly can't go wrong with that lens. My plan is to upgrade to the SL APOs in the future eventually, so I was just considering other all-round lenses that I could use in the meantime.

[nico4444]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

If you want a great all-around lens to last you a lifetime, you can't go wrong with the 50 Summicron-R or Summilux-R. They have a classic look that is highly sought-after by cinematographers, and they are still relatively affordable. Sticking with R lenses will help you avoid the "adapter dance" down the road, when you get your R APO Macro 100 f2.8.

The Pana 50 is a good lens, but it will have the over-optimized look that you are trying to avoid. That's great for ultimate sharpness, but portraits rarely benefit from extra sharpness.

One other lens that you should consider is the 60/2.8 Macro-Elmarit-R. It's also sharp-but-smooth.

The 50 Summicron-R would be more than enough for my needs: resolution and micro-contrast. I don't really need large apertures for the shallow depth of field look, but I feel I would struggle with the R 60 2.8 as my primary lens given it is manual focus on top of the SL's low light struggles. The Pana 50 is a modern lens with every feature I could possibly need, but I agree that I might be fighting its sharpness more often than not. I may look into latest version R glass in good condition and maybe the Summilux-R 80, but I feel that lens would be a hit and a miss kind of lens when manual focusing, similar to the complaints for the Trioplan.

[BernardC]

3 hours ago, nico4444 said:

I may look into latest version R glass in good condition and maybe the Summilux-R 80, but I feel that lens would be a hit and a miss kind of lens when manual focusing, similar to the complaints for the Trioplan.

The 80 shouldn't be too difficult to focus. I use a Zeiss-Contax 85/1.4 that I've owned forever, and it snaps in and out of focus in the SL's EVF. There are also several generations of R 90mm lenses that you can try.

[iiiNelson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What about the Lumix S Pro 24-70 or the Sigma variant? You may be able to find these lense in the same vicinity (price wise) as the S Pro 50/1.4. I would guess the biggest concern is duplicate focal lengths if you plan on getting the APO-Cron’s eventually... which is why a zoom may make sense for now to be able to do most things really well.

[nico4444]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

The 80 shouldn't be too difficult to focus. I use a Zeiss-Contax 85/1.4 that I've owned forever, and it snaps in and out of focus in the SL's EVF. There are also several generations of R 90mm lenses that you can try.

Yes, the R 80 has excellent rendering, which is the main reason I consider it at all, because I can always raise the sharpness in post, but cannot add micro-contrast to the images. Actually, I already own a Novoflex R to L adapter, so I can just go to my local store and try the Summicron-R 90 before judging the manual focus of tele lenses too harshly.

30 minutes ago, iiiNelson said:

What about the Lumix S Pro 24-70 or the Sigma variant? You may be able to find these lense in the same vicinity (price wise) as the S Pro 50/1.4. I would guess the biggest concern is duplicate focal lengths if you plan on getting the APO-Cron’s eventually... which is why a zoom may make sense for now to be able to do most things really well.

I have used the Canon 24-70 L for years, so I know the convenience of zoom lenses. Now, the SL 24-90 is also something I would love to own, but I just prefer the feel of fixed lenses when composing, so if I were to look into zoom lenses again, I would rather wait for the Pana (or Sigma) 16-35 f2.8 since it gives a different feel compared to the 24-70 that I do not miss at all.

I am hesitant in buying an expensive lens as I am already planning on replacing it for the SL APOs, but if I find a lens I would stick to permanently, that would be terrific. 

[_Michael]

6 hours ago, nico4444 said:

The 50 Summicron-R would be more than enough for my needs: resolution and micro-contrast. I don't really need large apertures for the shallow depth of field look, but I feel I would struggle with the R 60 2.8 as my primary lens given it is manual focus on top of the SL's low light struggles. The Pana 50 is a modern lens with every feature I could possibly need, but I agree that I might be fighting its sharpness more often than not. I may look into latest version R glass in good condition and maybe the Summilux-R 80, but I feel that lens would be a hit and a miss kind of lens when manual focusing, similar to the complaints for the Trioplan.

I'm sorry, but how does "SL's low light struggles" (which, I would disagree with to a point) impact the ability to manually focus a manually focused lens? It's quite easy to push a button for focus peaking, turn focus indicators on/off, the EVF is more than usable in all but the darkest situation and this is arguably much better than focusing a M especially in low light.  I have both bodies.  Longer glass will be notably easier with the SL. 

 

[_Michael]

54 minutes ago, nico4444 said:

Yes, the R 80 has excellent rendering, which is the main reason I consider it at all, because I can always raise the sharpness in post, but cannot add micro-contrast to the images. Actually, I already own a Novoflex R to L adapter, so I can just go to my local store and try the Summicron-R 90 before judging the manual focus of tele lenses too harshly.

I have used the Canon 24-70 L for years, so I know the convenience of zoom lenses. Now, the SL 24-90 is also something I would love to own, but I just prefer the feel of fixed lenses when composing, so if I were to look into zoom lenses again, I would rather wait for the Pana (or Sigma) 16-35 f2.8 since it gives a different feel compared to the 24-70 that I do not miss at all.

I am hesitant in buying an expensive lens as I am already planning on replacing it for the SL APOs, but if I find a lens I would stick to permanently, that would be terrific. 

 

If you wants something quick and easy as an all-around lightweight and cheap solution to use temporarily, look at the Panasonic 24-105. It's light, sharp and accurate. Close focus ability too. I have this and while I do like the convenience, I find the images quite "clinical"...technically quite good, but little character to speak of. I have it as a temporary solution, with an eye towards the SL lux or summicron 50. 

[Tailwagger]

3 minutes ago, _Michael said:

... I find the images quite "clinical"...technically quite good, but little character to speak of... 

I find one could say the same of the Lumix 16-35mm. It's a very, very good lens which, in the right circumstances, can produce admirable images. But it seems a trademark of Lumix optics to favor acuity to the point of harshness. Can't speak to the 24-105, but CA is not all the well controlled, though perhaps I'm spoiled by the 'crons. In bright light that combination can generate quite an ugly muddle at least prior to any back end work to tame it all. I personally find the pair of Sigma optics I own to render in a far more pleasant (and easier) to work with way.

As to the new primes, while I applaud Pano for recognizing the world needs a few lenses we can actually carry around, I am forced to keep my enthusiasm in check until I get a peek at just how they draw.  

[rpittal]

I am using a L mount Sigma 40mm f/1.4  (about 1200g but good price) as my main lens and am very happy with it, IQ wise, but may be too sharp for portraits. Your goal of the L50APO would be very sharp for portraits and may not meet your stated needs. The SL50Lux that I had is a great portrait lens though. They are easily available on the used lens market.

[Jeff S]

Besides contemplating a new lens, there are certainly a variety of ways to mitigate ‘too sharp’ portraits with your Q, both through lighting/capture as well as post processing.  
 

Jeff

[nico4444]

1 hour ago, _Michael said:

I'm sorry, but how does "SL's low light struggles" (which, I would disagree with to a point) impact the ability to manually focus a manually focused lens? It's quite easy to push a button for focus peaking, turn focus indicators on/off, the EVF is more than usable in all but the darkest situation and this is arguably much better than focusing a M especially in low light.  I have both bodies.  Longer glass will be notably easier with the SL. 

 

The SL’s sensor performs almost identically to the Q’s, so I know a fair bit from experience that high ISO performance is not ideal for low light. You can argue that 6400 is enough for most situations, but I disagree and that’s a subjective topic that we don’t need to get into. My case against the R 60 f2.8 was that on top of having to manual focus, I would be also restricted with smaller aperture making it hard to use in low light (might have worded it wrongly again, English is hard). 

As for the Pana 24-105, it is a great suggestions, but if I were to carry around such a large lens, I would want it to be a little bit more special.

[nico4444]

47 minutes ago, rpittal said:

I am using a L mount Sigma 40mm f/1.4  (about 1200g but good price) as my main lens and am very happy with it, IQ wise, but may be too sharp for portraits. Your goal of the L50APO would be very sharp for portraits and may not meet your stated needs. The SL50Lux that I had is a great portrait lens though. They are easily available on the used lens market.

For the 40mm focal length, I was considering the Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 as I’ve heard great things about it, but I realized that 40mm is a bit too close to the 28mm. I saw raw images taken with the SL APOs and I was stunned. My subjects can live with their imperfections when they see the images that lens can produce.

[nico4444]

12 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Besides contemplating a new lens, there are certainly a variety of ways to mitigate ‘too sharp’ portraits with your Q, both through lighting/capture as well as post processing.  
 

Jeff

I sometimes use “soft” light from my SF40 to produce softer looking images, but it is pretty impractical in most scenarios for portraits. The Q is very sharp and smothering textures in the images in post feels too naughty.

[nico4444]

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

I find one could say the same of the Lumix 16-35mm. It's a very, very good lens which, in the right circumstances, can produce admirable images. But it seems a trademark of Lumix optics to favor acuity to the point of harshness. Can't speak to the 24-105, but CA is not all the well controlled, though perhaps I'm spoiled by the 'crons. In bright light that combination can generate quite an ugly muddle at least prior to any back end work to tame it all. I personally find the pair of Sigma optics I own to render in a far more pleasant (and easier) to work with way.

As to the new primes, while I applaud Pano for recognizing the world needs a few lenses we can actually carry around, I am forced to keep my enthusiasm in check until I get a peek at just how they draw.  

What Sigma lenses would you be referring to? 

[Jeff S]

6 minutes ago, nico4444 said:

I sometimes use “soft” light from my SF40 to produce softer looking images, but it is pretty impractical in most scenarios for portraits. The Q is very sharp and smothering textures in the images in post feels too naughty.

Flash is hardly what I meant by Portrait lighting options. Nor did I mean ‘smothering textures’.  We have different notions regarding PP and rendering, especially for prints.

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

3 minutes ago, nico4444 said:

What Sigma lenses would you be referring to? 

Neither fit your brief... the ubiquitous 45mm and the rather extraordinary 135mm ART.  The 'crons I referred to are the 35 and 75mms, the latter being one of my all time favorites. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[nico4444]

17 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Flash is hardly what I meant by Portrait lighting options. Nor did I mean ‘smothering textures’.  We have different notions regarding PP and rendering, especially for prints.

Jeff

I see. I am ignorant about the use of lighting equipment outside flash, so I never considered researching them. 
 

18 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Neither fit your brief... the ubiquitous 45mm and the rather extraordinary 135mm ART.  The 'crons I referred to are the 35 and 75mms, the latter being one of my all time favorites. 

I am assuming the Crons are SL APOs, which if it is the case, it would make your set of lenses incredibly enviable.