Lens for SL2-S (for a specific need)

[paul.bridges.3388]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi All.

I’ll try to be as succinct as I can with this. 😬

Not looking to reopen a pixel peaking debate. Just folks’ impressions of lens choice for a specific scenario here.

I used to shoot a Summilux M 1.4/35 ASP on the SL. Adored the render & character, particularly with available-light portraits of my family. Until it was stolen...gah.

By this time, the SL was dated and so I waited on the SL2 to replace it. But, I got impatient and could not resist a Q2 when I fluked one on its first day of release. I’ve enjoyed the Q2 a lot....but I’ve not gotten a single portrait that stands up to my SL & 35mm combo. It does so much....but it’s no replacement for indoor portraits, IMO.

Fast forward to yesterday and my new SL2-S is shipped. This seems to be the camera for my specific needs.  Good low light sensor, IBIS, massive EVF, Leica render, etc. Now need to optimise the lens. Priority is still low light portraiture. Cost & weight are factors...but I’ll compromise to nail the shot.

What would folks choose here? I still have the Q2 which will serve me well for most other applications.  For this reason, and to get more flattering portraits, I’m minded to go a bit longer - probably 50mm. I loved the separation on my old Sony + Batis 85mm/F1.8....but found it just too long. So probably not the 90 & 75 SL.

Priorities are bokeh, pop and character. Photos that give the soft Leica micro-contrast are my most treasured. I’m not looking for super sharp portraits, preferring a softer look that flatters. BUT I do value available light gains with a faster lens....so recognise the value of the, say, 50mm 1.4 SL.

Manual focus is not a deal breaker, although I do recognise that I’m not using the SL2-S to its full potential without Auto focus. So auto is a bonus. Particularly if they can finally sort eye-AF out. My teen kids are getting less and less patient with Dad’s photo sessions 😔.

Ive pulled out the first shot that I could find that speaks to what I’m seeking. It’s not a good composition, well lit, or particularly in focus. SL & Summilux M 35/1.4 shot wide open, ISO 1250 and tweaked in LR. At least to my eyes, it speaks to what I’m chasing. This dark wood-panelled room at home is frequently the shooting location, as it gives lovely tones...but a difficult shooting environment to get right.

Perhaps all that I’m chasing can be achieved with better technique and more work in LR with the Q2??!! I realise the SL can do this too....but I can’t get past dropping cash on older tech (however suitable it is).

Grateful for all and any constructive opinions. 

Thanks for bearing with me!

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Tp2000]

Looking at the photo and reading what you say, I’d say environmental type portraits are what you’re after. So a wider lens makes most sense. 
 

The Leica 35mm apo is stupidly good. Tried one for a little while and between that and the 75, blew my mind with sharpness, pop etc. 
 

That said, with the SL2 some of the sharpest portraits I managed were with the 35mm FLE M and the Apo 50mm M. 

Alternatively, if the budget doesn’t stretch that far, I’ve seen some lovely results with the sigma lenses (28mm/35mm Art and the new 35f2).
 

There. I did it. I’ve committed heresy and recommended something other than Leica 

[Tp2000]

As an aside, on the q2, I found it took some considerable dedication to make it work for me properly. Still not there with it, but do get some results where I “get it”. But I’m more inclined a lot of the time to reach for a M with a 28mm lens on it. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

SL2S is a bargain and offers an extra stop (maybe more) of quality high ISO.  The Q2 is also very capable in the 35 to 50 range.  With the SL2 I normally use the SL Summicron 35, but your Q2 can do many of the same things.  So (don't tell anyone) the Sigma 24/3.5 strikes me as interesting and allowing a different view.  Leica won't have anything quite like it until late next year.  I currently use an M10-R and M 24/2.8 asph for family indoor low light stuff, but I expect the SL2S will have better high ISO quality. 

[Simone_DF]

The Sigma 45mm ticks all your boxes

[paul.bridges.3388]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

The Sigma 45mm ticks all your boxes

Including the micro-contrast Leica look that I so covet? Its F2.8 - I would assume a little too slow?

Edited December 12, 2020 by paul.bridges.3388

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Including the micro-contrast Leica look that I so covet?

From the samples I've seen around, the 45mm has a very nice bokeh rendering, it's relatively soft wide open at close distances, it has a more "classic" rendering compared to modern lenses, it's small, light, and has AF. I think there's a topic about it on this forum, you should have a look at the pictures and see if that's what you're looking for :-)  

[caissa]

A used Summicron R 50, I still like that old lens.

For modern AF.  Sigma 2.8/45 mm or Pana 1.8/50 mm (soon to be released)

For ever and almost too sharp, the Summicron SL 35mm Apo. By far the most expensive.

Or all 3 of them. 

Personally I use often the 75mm. But if you think it is too long ?!

Edited December 12, 2020 by caissa

[Stuart Richardson]

I don't know if you can find it, or how much it is going for these days, but you might like the 50mm 1.2 M Hexanon or the even harder to find 60mm version. Or maybe there are not sharp enough for you? But when I shot the 50mm along side the 35mm Summilux ASPH, I felt they balanced well, and the 50mm had a gorgeous look. I don't think the 45mm will do what you want...too slow and soft wide open (which for it is 2.8). But of course I could be wrong. It is certainly a well priced lens that feels nice and would be easy to try. Having a native lens is a big advantage as well. Another gorgeous lens would be the 50mm 1.4 Summilux R E60. That was one of the most beautifully rendering lenses I have used.

Edited December 12, 2020 by Stuart Richardson

[FrozenInTime]

The Voigtlander 40/1.2 is a much overlooked lens in the Leica M world. I love it on my Ms, but think for many there is a hangup on the frame lines; not a problem on the SL.

Over on the FM forum there is a 200+ page thread on the lens; seems to work well on the Sony cover glass, so the SL2S stack should be fine.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/231?b=2

 

[paul.bridges.3388]

49 minutes ago, caissa said:

A used Summicron R 50, I still like that old lens.

For modern AF.  Sigma 2.8/45 mm or Pana 1.8/50 mm (soon to be released)

For ever and almost too sharp, the Summicron SL 35mm Apo. By far the most expensive.

Or all 3 of them. 

Personally I use often the 75mm. But if you think it is too long ?!

Someone else put me on to the R50 - as a lens full of character. Only F2...but that may be a good thing when it comes to a less “clinical” portrait. It might also help justify holding on to the Q2. One for character portraits, the other hi-res tack sharp. 🤔

(I do worry that I’m getting the SL2-S because of a lack of technique with the Q2 though...)

[paul.bridges.3388]

2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I don't know if you can find it, or how much it is going for these days, but you might like the 50mm 1.2 M Hexanon or the even harder to find 60mm version. Or maybe there are not sharp enough for you? But when I shot the 50mm along side the 35mm Summilux ASPH, I felt they balanced well, and the 50mm had a gorgeous look. I don't think the 45mm will do what you want...too slow and soft wide open (which for it is 2.8). But of course I could be wrong. It is certainly a well priced lens that feels nice and would be easy to try. Having a native lens is a big advantage as well. Another gorgeous lens would be the 50mm 1.4 Summilux R E60. That was one of the most beautifully rendering lenses I have used.

Looks like the 50mm 1.2 M Hexanon is €4K ish..

 

[Stuart Richardson]

That is probably more than I would pay for it. At that price, I would get the 50mm R Summilux E60 which seems to be 3 to 4000 dollars these days. I think it is a sharper lens with probably even better character.

[Jim B]

I would get the Leica SL  50 1.4, swirly bokeh,  And the cheaper sigma 35 1.2 

*warning*  The Leica m35 summilux  look has the X factor that is very hard to duplicate.  If that’s the look you love,  you may never be fully satisfied with anything else. 

[paul.bridges.3388]

14 minutes ago, Jim B said:

*warning*  The Leica m35 summilux  look has the X factor that is very hard to duplicate.  If that’s the look you love,  you may never be fully satisfied with anything else. 

Interesting: that would change matters, for sure. There’s a certain look to these available light portraits that my Q2 seems unable to replicate. It may specifically be the 35M Summilux that’s able to give this, you say?

Edited December 12, 2020 by paul.bridges.3388

[Jim B]

44 minutes ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Interesting: that would change matters, for sure. There’s a certain look to these available light portraits that my Q2 seems unable to replicate. It may specifically be the 35M Summilux that’s able to give this, you say?

Yes it’s the 35mm Summilux that gives you that heart warming  feeling, that “oh i love this picture look”   I’m sorry to hear it got stolen, but if that’s what you loved I would replace it. You will be constantly comparing to your old lens wondering if it would have had that certain quality.  Then wondering if the new lens is too sharp, too clinical, why doesn’t it give me that same feeling. .....  That’s my opinion.  It most certainly is the lens...

[padam]

My vote is for the Distagon 35/1.4 ZM which I am thinking of getting yet again, had it alongside the Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH pre-FLE yes the Leica is a little smoother but overall, I didn't see a great deal of difference between them, both are fantasic and you can step it down to f/2 and still have a smoother background than with an f/2 lens.
It looks a bit too bulky on an M camera, but on the SL2-S it will feel right at home (it even goes well with the design).

But I would decide about MF versus AF first and go on from there, they are just too different in every way.

[Tp2000]

The ZM and the Pre-FLE are quite different lenses - the ZM is a little more like the FLE. 

I'd have a serious look at the Nokton 1.2 iii - there's a thread on it in the M Lens forum.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jim B]

31 minutes ago, Steven said:

I have that lens. 35 Lux Pre fle. Most beautiful lens I’ve ever owned. Irreplaceable. 

Lucky You! Let me know of you want to sell it. 
 

Edited December 12, 2020 by Jim B
Spelling

[Anakronox]

It sounds as if you really enjoy shooting 35mm lenses based on your feelings towards the Summilux.   I can speak to three 35s that I’ve used on the SL and now SL-2:

• Summilux-M 35mm FLE - Hands down my favorite 35 ever.  Like you said, it has an almost indescribable quality to it.  I’ve taken portraits, landscapes, and it’s my go-to street lens. You can’t go wrong getting another. 
• Summicron-SL 35mm - A relatively new addition.  It’s excellent, sharp, and has decent subject separation.  I have taken a few indoor portraits with it using a single light and softbox.  Definitely a keeper.
• Sigma 35mm Art f/1.2 - Nice lens, but it’s MASSIVE and a bit heavy.  It’s as big as the Vario-Elmarit 24-90!  Has some CA wide open, but easily corrected.  Nice rendering though and has goood 3D pop when used properly.  Doesn’t match the look of my 50 APO-Summicron-SL, so I don’t shoot it as much.  But it helps out the SL2 in really low light and I don’t have to push the ISO above 3200 often at night. 

Obviously the latter two have autofocus, if that matters to you.  If you’d like some samples I’d be happy to upload a few to Dropbox for you.