LEICA VARIO-ELMARIT-SL 24–70mm f/2.8 ASPH

[SJH]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, MediaFotografie said:

the Europe prices are nearly as expected:

• lens 2.550
• KIT SL-2S 6.490
• KIT SL2 7.990

which means Leica gives a discount of EUR 650 wit both Kits

I think this element is a good strategy for Leica as effectively a kit lens that's not priced too far above the Sigma when purchased this way. Standalone though you might as well buy the Sigma

[Advertisement]

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

[beewee]

I just noticed there’s a striking similarity between the 24-90 and 24-70 in the front group of elements. I wonder if the 24-90 was co-developed or even originally designed by Sigma.

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 May 6, 2021 by beewee

[setuporg]

2 hours ago, AZach said:

Totally off topic, but having lived in Japan over 4 years think that above statement is false..😉

Can you please recommend some dry ones?

[LocalHero1953]

Like (I guess) many (most?) 24-90 owners I will not be getting this lens*. I am very happy with the longer range and have no need to double up. The SL + 24-70 is still a heavy bundle so the gain in handling (especially with the reverse zoom rotation) would not be attractive. If I want to travel light, I have the CL (+ 18-56).

 

*Unless there is shown to be a firmware-interface-performance difference, I would have got the Sigma version. I can see no other reason to buy Leica in this case, at this price. I have no problem with them rebadging a Sigma. It's a cheap way for them to fill in their range and make more money.....to make other products I want to buy.......like the CL2........

[Jeff S]

11 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Like (I guess) many (most?) 24-90 owners I will not be getting this lens*. I am very happy with the longer range and have no need to double up. The SL + 24-70 is still a heavy bundle so the gain in handling (especially with the reverse zoom rotation) would not be attractive. If I want to travel light, I have the CL (+ 18-56).

 

*Unless there is shown to be a firmware-interface-performance difference, I would have got the Sigma version. I can see no other reason to buy Leica in this case, at this price. I have no problem with them rebadging a Sigma. It's a cheap way for them to fill in their range and make more money.....to make other products I want to buy.......like the CL2........

Also not for me.  I would have been enticed if more compact (with internal zoom) and lighter, even if 28-70, variable aperture, no OIS and higher price.

Jeff

[aksclix]

I cannot understand the strategy behind having 2 lenses in similar ranges.. they could have thought of an all purpose range like the popular 18-200 or 28-300 in DSLRs.. 

I too like my 24-90 enough to not look at this alternative.. and I don’t like the 70-90 gap it leaves if I do get it 😌

anyway, just my opinion 

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm curious why people feel strongly about internal focusing. I don't doubt that the concerns are genuine, but it is only a minor matter to me (though I would choose internal focus, other things being equal), so I don't understand the issues. Is it breathing and dust? Balance change in the hand or on a tripod?

[Jeff S]

30 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I'm curious why people feel strongly about internal focusing. I don't doubt that the concerns are genuine, but it is only a minor matter to me (though I would choose internal focus, other things being equal), so I don't understand the issues. Is it breathing and dust? Balance change in the hand or on a tripod?

My issue is internal zooming, not focusing.  The telescoping 24-90 adds greatly to length, changes balance and probably diminishes weather sealing.  The 16-35 and 90-280 are much more elegant designs IMO. 
 

Jeff

 

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, aksclix said:

I cannot understand the strategy behind having 2 lenses in similar ranges.. they could have thought of an all purpose range like the popular 18-200 or 28-300 in DSLRs.. 

I too like my 24-90 enough to not look at this alternative.. and I don’t like the 70-90 gap it leaves if I do get it 😌

anyway, just my opinion 

I never expected it to happen, but I would have liked a compact and lighter trio for travel in addition to the original 3 zooms.... something like 21-28, 28-70 and 70-150.  But the new 24-70 is not much more compact (especially with telescoping zoom) or lighter than the 24-90. Variable aperture and no OIS would have been fine.

I think the new lens gives Leica a lower cost entry point for new customers, especially paired with the SL2-S.  Probably smarter business-wise, building on the existing Sigma design.

Jeff

[LocalHero1953]

9 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

My issue is internal zooming, not focusing.  The telescoping 24-90 adds greatly to length, changes balance and probably diminishes weather sealing.  The 16-35 and 90-280 are much more elegant designs IMO. 
 

Jeff

 

My apologies - I meant to ask about internal zooming (non-extending zooming). You answered my question anyway! 

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

My apologies - I meant to ask about internal zooming (non-extending zooming). You answered my question anyway! 

I would have paid more for a non-telescoping 24-90 or new 24-70.  But I’m clearly not the target customer.  
 

Another potential problem with telescoping is lens creep with lens hanging downward, as some 24-90 buyers have already experienced. 

Jeff

Edited May 6, 2021 by Jeff S

[msh58]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Jeff S:

I would have paid more for a non-telescoping 24-90 or new 24-70.  But I’m clearly not the target customer.

Jeff

The telescoping zooming of the 24-90 is a bit annoying: the lens is quite a bit extended at 90 mm. Curiously, the last R-zoom (28-90 f/2.8-4.5 ASPH) is shortest at 50 mm and extends only relatively little when you go down to 28 mm or up to 90 mm. The quality of this lens is still quite respectable even though the 24-90 is in a different league. 

[Cobram]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I never expected it to happen, but I would have liked a compact and lighter trio for travel in addition to the original 3 zooms.... something like 21-28, 28-70 and 70-150.  But the new 24-70 is not much more compact (especially with telescoping zoom) or lighter than the 24-90. Variable aperture and no OIS would have been fine.

I think the new lens gives Leica a lower cost entry point for new customers, especially paired with the SL2-S.  Probably smarter business-wise, building on the existing Sigma design.

Jeff

Exactly. I was too expacting smaller all-around zoom lens. 28-70 Leica lens without telescoping zoom. 

@jonoslack Thank you for your beautiful review. I always check photos first and then start to read. Yo are such a great photographer.

I have few questions:

 - does 24-70 exhibit Leica "microcontrast"?

 - comparing to 24-90 which one is more suitable for family amateur photographer (kid portraits, indoor/outdoor events family events, small trips)?

 - 24-90 was associated with this statement: "like prime lens quality". Did Sigma... ups... Leica😉 achived "like prime lens quality" and "microcontrast" also with this new 24-70 zoom lens?

Edited May 7, 2021 by Cobram

[Simone_DF]

10 hours ago, aksclix said:

I cannot understand the strategy behind having 2 lenses in similar ranges.. they could have thought of an all purpose range like the popular 18-200 or 28-300 in DSLRs.. 

The SL2-S is the entry level model into the system, price wise.

Leica wants to offer a kit lens at a nice price to attract more customers into the system. The 24-90 is another 4k (on top of being big and heavy), it's a no no proposition.

 Now you can get a SL2-S + 24-70 for 6500€, I think it's a very attractive price, and you can start using your camera straight away.

All purpose zooms have too many quality compromises.

[aksclix]

1 minute ago, Simone_DF said:

The SL2-S is the entry level model into the system, price wise.

Leica wants to offer a kit lens at a nice price to attract more customers into the system. The 24-90 is another 4k (on top of being big and heavy), it's a no no proposition.

 Now you can get a SL2-S + 24-70 for 6500€, I think it's a very attractive price, and you can start using your camera straight away.

All purpose zooms have too many quality compromises.

yea you're right.. also after reading Jono's review I realized the constant aperture attraction for video shooters.. I think this is likely a very good option for SL2-S.. 

[aksclix]

6 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

All purpose zooms have too many quality compromises.

but it has not been done in mirrorless yet with newer tech.. when a 100-400 can be received reasonably well, I don't see why a 28-300 won't be.. time will tell I guess.. but I agree it won't fall into the elite category.. which is fine.. 

[Simone_DF]

8 minutes ago, aksclix said:

but it has not been done in mirrorless yet with newer tech.. when a 100-400 can be received reasonably well, I don't see why a 28-300 won't be.. time will tell I guess.. but I agree it won't fall into the elite category.. which is fine.. 

There's a Tamron 28-200 for Sony

https://www.dpreview.com/samples/9751432166/tamron-28-200mm-f2-8-5-6-di-iii-rxd-sample-gallery

[Ivar B]

We should nor be alarmed that Leica has decided to use the Sigma lens. Nobody has questioned the fact that it is a very good lens. I believe I have read that Sigma have difficulties keeping up with demand for this lens, but by far the largest demand comes from Sony users. I don`t know Sony well, but apparently the Sigma costs less than half of Sonys own 24-70 and performance is at least equal. There is no reason not to assume that Sigmas designers are as talented as designers in other companies, and they no doubt have the same tools behind them as in other companies. Maybe Sigma cannot afford to use the most expensive glass types - I don`t know. I don`t know the cost structure in lens design and manufacture, but Sigmas substantial volumes at least enable development cost and tooling to be allocated to a high number of units.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[beewee]

If I had to guess, I’d say Sigma is probably a bigger company in terms of revenue than Leica. They may well have more development resources than Leica as far as optics go.

[AZach]

15 hours ago, setuporg said:

Can you please recommend some dry ones?

Sorry, it is 35 years ago and was always treated as guest by the locals....