Is the 24-90 a companion an M shooter can fall in love with?

[tennessee jones]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Firstly, thank you so much for all the useful and interesting things on this forum, which I have been learning from.

I wondered whether members might offer some advice.

I've just dumped my Nikon DSLR gear and moved to the SL2s. 

I'm primarily an M shooter however, and I suspect 80% of my work is done with an M and 35mm lens.

I do documentary work primarily. You can see the sort of things here: www.jamesphillips.net

I used the Nikon for wider than 28 and longer than 50. 

So I now have a gap in my kit at the wide end and the long end, which was in my Nikon days filled by a 24mm 1.4 and an 85mm 1.4. 

My question is whether to get the 24-90 Asph, as it seems so exceptionally good.

Or to pick up some M primes (24/75 perhaps) and just use them across both my M and SL2. 

Or to slowly assemble SL Primes (they are fearsome expensive...)

I currently use, having got rid of the Nikon stuff:

28mm Leica 2.8 M (which isn't wildly special on the SL2s but does a job stopped down)

35mm 1.4 FLE (the prince of lenses)

50mm f2 (just works)

(I've also kept the Nikon AIS 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.2 and 105mm 2.5 that I used on Nikon digital/film, and which are good on the Novoflex adaptor)

So my question is: SL shooters who are also M users, would you advise getting the 24-90? Has it become a good and often used companion if you did get it? Do you love it?

Or perhaps just pick up 24mm and 75mm primes which can then switch back and forth onto my M bodies. Manual focus seems good on the SL2 (and a breeze after Nikon DSLR) the major downside of the M primes seems to be minimum focus on wides, which may well reduce their usefulness.

Many thanks for any thoughts, and apologies for a long ramble...

 

 

 

 

[Photoworks]

the 24-90 is a workhorse for me, it is very good lens

the SL lenses are extremely good. I have most of SL-summicron but 80% of the work is done with 24-90.  the SL 35 and 50, 75 gets used when I have to shoot wide open or when I have something special.

M lenses work well too. the 35 mm Lux. 21mm SEM, 50 Noctilux 0.95 for special character.

The Sigma 34 1.4 DG DN is excellent , a touch better then Summilux-M 35

The 85mm 1.4 DG DN is very good too.

But the 24-90 I think it a must, even if it is Vario aperture, it does have image stabilization that in combination with the sensor IS can give you 5-6 stops option

Edited May 23, 2021 by Photoworks

[Mick H]

3 hours ago, Photoworks said:

the 24-90 is a workhorse for me, it is very good lens

Agreed, my SL 24-90 is a workhorse lens for me too.  It is very versatile as it covers a wide range of focal lengths.  I use mine for documentary work as well.  You could opt for it now and then supplement it later.  

[Jeff S]

I keep my M lenses (28/35/50) on my M bodies, and SL lenses on my SL2. The latter include the 24-90 as primary, 90-280 and SL 75 (never bonded with 75 frame lines on an M).  Totally different, but complementary, tools for different needs and shooting experiences.  
 

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

I don't think it was an accident that the initial set of lenses Leica provided for the SL consisted of a single prime with a full set of zooms.  With M these days, I typically carry the WATE, 28mm and 50mm 'luxes. To approximate the same kit with the SL2 (16-35 zoom, 28 cron and 50mm lux) effectively triples the weight and volume. While the L-crons are undeniably delicious... I'll never part with my 75mm... after year and half with the SL2, I've concluded that its time to consolidate my L-glass, sell off most of my primes and move fully to zooms. In my experience, as tempting as the L primes might be, AFAIC, it's best to view the SL as a complimentary system offering alternate capabilities rather than approaching it as an AF, IBIS enabled M.  I'd suggest that for any M shooter who has no intention of ending their relationship with it, building an SL system around the 24-90 or one of the trio of 24-70s, is the most sensible approach.

[Slender]

Coming from exclusive M "only" background, yes, I can totally say I fell deeply in love with the 24-90 and how it renders. It's lovely all the time. Perhaps you can detect a hint of nervousness in some bokeh situations at 90mm when focussing at long distances (like birds high up in trees), but it is so occasional I wouldn't bother.

Yes, its big, but it is lighter and infinitely more practical (and faster than changing lenses) than carrying in your bag a 24-28-35-50-75-90 at once. For reportage I would say it's really great. I think Steve McCurry said it better himself: that lens is the main reason he switched to SL system.

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!

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You swapped the lightest FF mirrorless body (except for the brilliant, if quirky, Sigma fp, fp L) for the heaviest. So you know what you're capable of carrying comfortably. I don't have an opinion here, since I wouldn't want to walk around all day with an SL2 and a big zoom.

I'm just here to say that I admire your extraordinarily creative and diversely so career. Whatever you decide to buy, I do hope you post some of your photos with us.

Edited May 24, 2021 by bags27

[hansvons]

Yesterday I‘ve been on a 5h hike with the SL2-s and the 24-90. With the biggest Peak Design strap absolutely doable. Besides an extra battery in the trousers pocket, nothing extra necessary because the camera and lens are extraordinarily sturdy and weatherproof. Pictures leave no questions. 

[tennessee jones]

4 hours ago, bags27 said:

I'm just here to say that I admire your extraordinarily creative and diversely so career. Whatever you decide to buy, I do hope you post some of your photos with us.

Was this for me? If so immensely kind and thank you! 

[Einst_Stein]

 Probably not. I see SL+24-90 as the replacement of M, not the companion.

[SonomaBear]

The 24-70 f2.8 (Sigma) delivers 85%+ of my images.  They are literally all sale-able images. My bag carries three M lenses (all Summicrons: 28, 50, & 90 — all Mandler magic) 

The Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN is portrait magic, far better than the little 90 ‘Cron - but too big for casual carry

It seems that the majority of the Amazing/Sensational/Artsy images start with my love of slow hands, caution, joy of M glass!

[Slender]

1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said:

 Probably not. I see SL+24-90 as the replacement of M, not the companion.

As much as I just praised and drooled on the 24-90... nothing quite replaces the M's quirks, intimacy and (wide angle) focussing pleasure... If you have good eyes and a steady hand+intimate knowledge of your sensor(and framing lines) and are willing to restrain on lenses (grab one... two is already and open door for hesitation... three primes is trouble) the M is a mighty effective thing in its own right.

But for client/time sensitive things and shear ease of use + Leica look, the SL2 +24/90 took the spot for me. On top of that video is really impressive... but whenever possible I will get another M again (and 28f2+35f1.4+50f1.4).... ideally when they put the SL2-S sensor in it. 🙏.

My next purchase however surely could be the "next" SL launch flagship (prime) lens, the polarizing 50 1.4 SL, however.

[bags27]

2 hours ago, tennessee jones said:

Was this for me? If so immensely kind and thank you! 

Indeed! and you're very welcome.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Did you have a zoom as part of your Nikon kit? If not why would you think that you'll want to have one now?

The 24-90 is mostly excellent but if you don't like shooting zooms I'm not sure this will convince you otherwise. If you do then you'll be extremely pleased with the 24-90 as it has a lovely balance of sharpness and rendering.

For primes there's the excellent Sigma options. The 24 and 85 options could be exactly what you need. At least as good as you Nikons. If you get one Leica prime though, you will have a problem shooting with anything else. You have been warned....

The Sigma 14-24 could do all your wide needs and expand your range without doubling up. Fabulous lens even wide open.

M lenses will work well but if the rumoured new M10 visoflex is true then that may be a better way to go.

Gordon

[Einst_Stein]

3 hours ago, Slender said:

As much as I just praised and drooled on the 24-90... nothing quite replaces the M's quirks, intimacy and (wide angle) focussing pleasure... If you have good eyes and a steady hand+intimate knowledge of your sensor(and framing lines) and are willing to restrain on lenses (grab one... two is already and open door for hesitation... three primes is trouble) the M is a mighty effective thing in its own right.

But for client/time sensitive things and shear ease of use + Leica look, the SL2 +24/90 took the spot for me. On top of that video is really impressive... but whenever possible I will get another M again (and 28f2+35f1.4+50f1.4).... ideally when they put the SL2-S sensor in it. 🙏.

My next purchase however surely could be the "next" SL launch flagship (prime) lens, the polarizing 50 1.4 SL, however.

SL+24-90 as the M replacement is in the sense that you will not carry M if you are carrying SL+24-90mm. 

M needs a companion only for the sake of zoom and/or AF. For such, the AF/zoom would be CL + one of the trinity, or, simpler, the XV.

But, who the real M'ist would need AF or zoom anyway? 

[Slender]

6 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

But, who the real M'ist would need AF or zoom anyway? 

Yes... Indeed I haven't used anything with an AF (or sometimes even a P mode or even a lightmeter) from 2005-2020 (R7, R8, M4, M7, M9)... and I did fine for film sets and other clients

But yeah, at the moment the SL2+24/90 replaced all that at once. Very happy with it but I know I will come back to buy another M camera.

 

[SiggiGun]

Hi, concerning the initial question of this threat....

I was in the same situation. M photographer for over 40 years. I added a SL with the idea to use my M lenses, espacially all lenses where focusing is tricky: Noctilux, Apo75,...

After some weeks, I added the 24-90mm. Realy a impressif lens: image quality is outstanding! However, as a M guy..., I found the lens heavy and (too) big. I sold it,... Now, after a 2 years, I think it was the wrong decision! M is M and SL is SL!!! This means: M means Prime lenses and SL means also Zoom lenses. This means SL is a different "playground" for me. 

[Torpille]

I have  just took a look at your work. I love it 👏
I am very insterested to know wich are done with the 35 fle. 

I use the M with 35mm f/2 90% of the time. Sometimes i use the 50 f/2 (but i am not a fifty Guy) or 90 f/2,8 for portrait (great lens and easy to Focus).

I added the Sl for over a year now as the CL just didn’t fit my expectations in term of handling.  

I started with Tl lens of the CL, very good results but only 10 mp...
Tried the m lenses but did not convinced me that much. I prefer them using with the M10 in term of rendering. 

Found a good deal on the 24-90mm and ...
yes it’s big, yes it’s heavy... but what a lens, what a great combo the sl. 
I took it with me most of the time and sometimes just sl and tl23mm eq 35mm

i am not sure I will buy another Leica lense for the Sl system right now. This zoom does really a great job. 

M+35 and Sl+24-90 make me very happy

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Torpille

[tom0511]

it depends.

I own M and SL (with zoom and with primes).

The SL with 24-90 zooms offers you what you do not get with the M:

fast change of focal length without switching lenses (specially usefull in bad weather or dusty conditions), also for family events), IBIS/OIS, AF

The SL with 24-90 is a very flexible combo, you can shoot from landscape to portrait. 90mm is more usefull than 70mm long end.

It is ok to carry around and it also handles ok, but it is still a somewhat frontheavy and heavy combo.

In the end I use primes more often, because of size and because I can do a little more subject isolation. The 24-90 is mainly and only used when I need the flexibility.

If I use M lenses I prefer to use them on an M body.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Stuart Richardson]

I will go against the grain here and say that I was not all that taken with the 24-90mm. I did not really like the results in the landscape work I did. It is not that it is unsharp, just that you clearly see sharpness fall-off from center to edge and you cannot really get around it. For big prints, I find that distracting. I also felt it to be a very large, heavy and bulky lens. The way I like to work, I would rather have several smaller lenses in a bag and one manageable one on the camera, rather than a single unwieldy lens.

Personally, if you are primarily an M shooter, I would recommend the 90mm APO Summicron M, which is a superb lens that performs very well on both the M and SL, and I would recommend the 24mm Sigma prime for the SL which is AF and extremely well built, high performing and very fairly priced. I found that it outperformed the 21mm Super Elmar M that I compared it with on the SL. The 24mm will give you a quick working light and cheap wide angle that you can use for street work or landscapes, and the 90mm Summicron will be a better portrait lens in most cases than the 24-90, as you get the APO performance and 2.5 extra stops of light gathering/bokeh in a more compact and lighter lens.

If you are more interested in the SL as an autofocus companion to the M, then the Sigma lenses are worth looking at, at least if you do not want to buy everything at once. They really are excellent. I have a ton of Leica lenses and have been a loyal Leica shooter for twenty years, but it is very hard to argue with the results that Sigma is achieving in their newest lenses...if you don't believe me, believe Leica, who used them to manufacture their new 24-70...the Sigma 24mm and 65mm seem to be standouts, as well as their macro lenses.