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

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The SL 24-90, according to Red Dot Forum/Leica Miami tests, outperforms the SL 24-70 to the edge, if that’s a critical concern. For me, any of these lenses can probably produce sufficient IQ for my print needs and sizes, so choices typically come down to other factors, including shooting style, ergonomics and handling, focal length/aperture range, etc. I wish my SL 24-90 (or the SL 24-70) had internal zooming....can’t have it all.

Jeff

[tom0511]

deleted

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by tom0511

[tennessee jones]

17 hours ago, Torpille said:

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. 

 

 

Thank you so much, that's incredibly kind!

Truth is an enormous amount of stuff was with the 35 FLE. It largely lives (and still does) on the M.  Had it since 2013, and although he aperture ring is loose and it's lost some paint it's an absolute belter that I can't face parting with for service! Before that I used the 35mm Summaron 2.8, which in a quite different way is completely superb. Wish I could have afforded to keep both..... 

Drop me a DM (do they do those here?) and I can happily send examples etc. 

[tennessee jones]

Thank you so much everyone for such detailed and brilliant replies: so useful and welcome. 

Edited May 27, 2021 by tennessee jones

[tennessee jones]

3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

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.

 

This is really interesting, thank you so much.

That's the other real possibility: the sigma 24 and I was thinking perhaps an M 75 (rather than the 90, which is an interesting choice and I'll read up on it now!) for the SL.... 

[Stuart Richardson]

5 hours ago, tennessee jones said:

This is really interesting, thank you so much.

That's the other real possibility: the sigma 24 and I was thinking perhaps an M 75 (rather than the 90, which is an interesting choice and I'll read up on it now!) for the SL.... 

The 75mm APO Summicron and 90mm APO Summicron are both great, so I would choose by focal length. Most modern lenses in this range are very good, so I would decide more on what your priorities are. The 90mm APO is very good on the M and SL, so that is a plus, the Sigma 65mm or a 75mm from Leica or Voigtlander could be a good choice depending on how often you use this focal length and what kind of photos you want to make. The 90mm is definitely slower to operate than any of the AF lenses, but I still find it quite manageable for my work.

The pictures below probably won't tell you very much, as they are web jpegs, but they are with the 90mm. The B&W on the M10, the color on the SL2.

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!

[Torpille]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 16 Stunden schrieb tennessee jones:

Thank you so much, that's incredibly kind!

Truth is an enormous amount of stuff was with the 35 FLE. It largely lives (and still does) on the M.  Had it since 2013, and although he aperture ring is loose and it's lost some paint it's an absolute belter that I can't face parting with for service! Before that I used the 35mm Summaron 2.8, which in a quite different way is completely superb. Wish I could have afforded to keep both..... 

Drop me a DM (do they do those here?) and I can happily send examples etc. 

Thanks a lot, i have sent you me email

[chris_tribble]

I ran a two body M system with most focal lengths from 28 through to 135 alongside a Canon L series f2.8 zoom system.  Both worked impeccably and very differently - and served me well for many years.  When I got the SL2 I thought I'd be able to use my M lenses on it (especially the longer ones) and wouldn't need L mount glass.  However, after playing with a Sigma 45 I realised I was missing out and got a good used 24-90 - and have been totally seduced by the image quality and the ease of use.  It's become the workhorse for landscape work during the pandemic and will continue to be central to what I do if and when things open up.  Teamed with the 90-280 it's ideal for my needs (I don't feel a need for the 16-35, and have a VC 15mm mk III for moments when ultra-wide is needed. Allied with an APO 75 and APO 35 I can face whatever the weather throws at me with confidence and know that the IQ will be outstanding.

My problem now is what to do about the M system.  I've pared the lenses down to 28/35/50/135 but still have two M10 bodies.  I'm beginning to think that all I need / want is a single M10(R??) and the M lenses I have (the 135 A-T does work really well on the SL2) + a second SL2 body.  I don't do film and I'm very happy with the file size of the higher resolution sensor. When I do start doing assignments again I could imagine working with the two SL2's + zooms for documentary / events / concerts / theatre etc, with the M system reserved for more intimate events + street and travel.

I've not made up my mind as yet - but you can see the direction of travel.

So - back to the OP's question.  

1. I think you'll love the 24-90 (and you'll get used to the weight and size really quickly)
2. Be careful - the SL system is really seductive 😎 

[Slender]

6 hours ago, chris_tribble said:

 and have a VC 15mm mk III for moments when ultra-wide is needed.

Could you, please, post a couple of example of SL2+VC15III ? I had the vII and it was lovely on film Leica but severe fringe and vignette on my M9... Would be much appreciated.

[Einst_Stein]

7 hours ago, chris_tribble said:

I ran a two body M system with most focal lengths from 28 through to 135 alongside a Canon L series f2.8 zoom system.  Both worked impeccably and very differently - and served me well for many years.  When I got the SL2 I thought I'd be able to use my M lenses on it (especially the longer ones) and wouldn't need L mount glass.  However, after playing with a Sigma 45 I realised I was missing out and got a good used 24-90 - and have been totally seduced by the image quality and the ease of use.  It's become the workhorse for landscape work during the pandemic and will continue to be central to what I do if and when things open up.  Teamed with the 90-280 it's ideal for my needs (I don't feel a need for the 16-35, and have a VC 15mm mk III for moments when ultra-wide is needed. Allied with an APO 75 and APO 35 I can face whatever the weather throws at me with confidence and know that the IQ will be outstanding.

My problem now is what to do about the M system.  I've pared the lenses down to 28/35/50/135 but still have two M10 bodies.  I'm beginning to think that all I need / want is a single M10(R??) and the M lenses I have (the 135 A-T does work really well on the SL2) + a second SL2 body.  I don't do film and I'm very happy with the file size of the higher resolution sensor. When I do start doing assignments again I could imagine working with the two SL2's + zooms for documentary / events / concerts / theatre etc, with the M system reserved for more intimate events + street and travel.

I've not made up my mind as yet - but you can see the direction of travel.

So - back to the OP's question.  

1. I think you'll love the 24-90 (and you'll get used to the weight and size really quickly)
2. Be careful - the SL system is really seductive 😎 

You made an unrecoverable mistake! I know, once hooked by SL, it's hard to return to M. 

Try to wait for enough years, till the weight of M vs. SL becomes an issue. 

[panoreserve]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb chris_tribble:

I ran a two body M system with most focal lengths from 28 through to 135 alongside a Canon L series f2.8 zoom system.  Both worked impeccably and very differently - and served me well for many years.  When I got the SL2 I thought I'd be able to use my M lenses on it (especially the longer ones) and wouldn't need L mount glass.  However, after playing with a Sigma 45 I realised I was missing out and got a good used 24-90 - and have been totally seduced by the image quality and the ease of use.  It's become the workhorse for landscape work during the pandemic and will continue to be central to what I do if and when things open up.  Teamed with the 90-280 it's ideal for my needs (I don't feel a need for the 16-35, and have a VC 15mm mk III for moments when ultra-wide is needed. Allied with an APO 75 and APO 35 I can face whatever the weather throws at me with confidence and know that the IQ will be outstanding.

My problem now is what to do about the M system.  I've pared the lenses down to 28/35/50/135 but still have two M10 bodies.  I'm beginning to think that all I need / want is a single M10(R??) and the M lenses I have (the 135 A-T does work really well on the SL2) + a second SL2 body.  I don't do film and I'm very happy with the file size of the higher resolution sensor. When I do start doing assignments again I could imagine working with the two SL2's + zooms for documentary / events / concerts / theatre etc, with the M system reserved for more intimate events + street and travel.

I've not made up my mind as yet - but you can see the direction of travel.

So - back to the OP's question.  

1. I think you'll love the 24-90 (and you'll get used to the weight and size really quickly)
2. Be careful - the SL system is really seductive 😎 

Interesting thoughts! 

As an M-shooter since 1990 (always 2 M bodies with 21-28-35-75-90) I switched to the SL system in 2016 (mainly due to M's permanent and bothersome calibration issues) - the SL's sensor(!)-based focussing is a "blessing". - By now I'm using two SL2 bodies and (exclusively) "a few" SL Apo primes (28-35-50-90)...and couldn't be happier (never looked back).😇

Edited May 30, 2021 by panoreserve

[Simone_DF]

14 hours ago, Slender said:

Could you, please, post a couple of example of SL2+VC15III ? I had the vII and it was lovely on film Leica but severe fringe and vignette on my M9... Would be much appreciated.

The VC15III has been specifically optimized for digital sensors, in fact it's also available in Sony FE mount. There's a big thread over on Fred Miranda's with examples shot with a Sony with both M and FE mount.

Since the M version works well on a Sony, I'd expect it to work even better on a SL

Edited May 30, 2021 by Simone_DF

[jrp]

The trouble with the 24-90mm SL is that it is too boring.  It just works.  No quirks.  It produces magnificent pictures without any fuss.  It may not be a Leica lens (was it designed by Tamron, cannot remember), but it sure delivers the goods.  there's nowhere to hide.  Your creativity (or lack thereof is fully, err ..., exposed).

[ing_rippi]

There is a very interesting review by Vieri Bottazzini under

https://www.vieribottazzini.com/2018/05/leica-super-vario-elmar-sl-16-35mm-f-3-5-4-5-asph-in-depth-review.html

The Vario Elmar 24-90, the Super Vario Elmar 16-35 is compared to the Voigtlaender Super Wide Heliar 15mm III

Edited June 1, 2021 by ing_rippi

[Slender]

12 hours ago, jrp said:

The trouble with the 24-90mm SL is that it is too boring.  It just works.  No quirks.  It produces magnificent pictures without any fuss.  It may not be a Leica lens (was it designed by Tamron, cannot remember), but it sure delivers the goods.  there's nowhere to hide.  Your creativity (or lack thereof is fully, err ..., exposed).

So I heard some rumors about the 90-280 having some japanese ascent but surely the not for the 24-90. I would put my hand in fire it is purely Leica. It's not their first wonderful zoom and as the flagship, launch -and only- lens for what used to be "the most expensive" Leica body - the SL601 back in 2015 - they put all their very best at it and it shows.

[tennessee jones]

Thanks so much for these excellent replies! As people have said, guess it comes down to duplicating my usual kit (the M with 35 and an "SLR" with 24/85) or going for an M and then the SL with a zoom. 

So.... Having read all your brilliant notes I did a test run this weekend thanks to a Leica store.... 24-90 and 75 SL.

They are seriously good aren't they.... 

 

Edited June 1, 2021 by tennessee jones

[beewee]

14 hours ago, Slender said:

So I heard some rumors about the 90-280 having some japanese ascent but surely the not for the 24-90. I would put my hand in fire it is purely Leica. It's not their first wonderful zoom and as the flagship, launch -and only- lens for what used to be "the most expensive" Leica body - the SL601 back in 2015 - they put all their very best at it and it shows.

Depends on what you mean.

 The 90-280 design is patented by Panasonic and licensed by Leica.

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!

Similarly, the 16-35 design is patented by Konica-Minolta, and licensed by Leica.

See the trend?

The front optical group of the Leica 24-90 bears striking resemblance to the Sigma 24-70.

Lastly, Sigma has dozens of patents that uses the same design found in the front optical group on the 24-90 and 24-70 and these patents date back to 2011 and earlier. Meanwhile Leica has no patent for the 24-90.

If I were to make a wager, I would say Leica probably has influence on the design targets of the 24-90 but Sigma probably did the actual lens design and formulation.

[setuporg]

I just got Sigma 28-70, after using Leica 16-35, SL APO 35 and 50, and Sigma 24-70.  I must say the 28-70 fits the APO line perfectly with the same size barrel and 67mm filter size.  It's very light and easy to carry one-handed.  The extension is short and zooming swift.  It's really easy to carry.  I took the 16-35, 50 and 28-70 on a trip and it was great.  I'd rather have the option of a prime for portraits and just beautiful shots in hand.

[Slender]

@beeweeI can only imagine there is only so many results you can get from the automated computer design softwares and centuries of optical-handbooks, be it in Japan or Germany.... to get a "great-to-perfect" zoom lens design (and let's not forget France with Angenieux... USA with Panavision....etc)

According to Karbe and oher lens designers from Arri, nowadays the computer assisted design programs will give you "the perfect lens" but without size/weight/cost constraints. The human engineer's job is then to apply some of those constraints to skrink/compromise the desing/performances within what they deem acceptable for the intented use/product line/price point/size.... etc. That's where Leica is not afraid of high prices... and in the case of the 24-90 a larger than average size/weight... in the name of performance. And it shows. It is very expensive for a photo lens/zoom but it feels near-on-par as great cine-lenses from Arri or Angenieux. It's not parfocal but that is not important for still-shooters with AF. I know that if you turn-off inDNG corrections it will show a bit more distortion/CA but it is negligeable anyway.

Off course Sigma/Tamron can make glass as good as Leica/Zeiss and design "samey and perfect" lenses... but to make them happen in real-life it has to match your marketing aims. Panasonic could never sell a still-lens like the 90-280 at this price and clearly Sigma is not going the luxury road either... and since most people wrongly associate variable aperture design with nasty kit lenses.... so yeah... all the extra cash saved on plastic lenses sold to Sony/Canon shooters can help make "ultimate designs" happen on paper.... and then maybe those crazy germans will put their "savoir-faire" in action to make it real at the exacting level we expect with price tag. 😅

Edited June 3, 2021 by Slender

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[BernardC]

2 hours ago, Slender said:

Off course Sigma/Tamron can make glass as good as Leica/Zeiss and design "samey and perfect" lenses... but to make them happen in real-life it has to match your marketing aims.

Exactly. The problem isn't designing or building an outstanding lens, it's selling it. That last little bit of performance can easily double or triple the price (or more, if you build it to cinema-level mechanical standards).

Sigma has made a great effort to raise their market position in the past dozen years, and it has paid-off. They now sell many of their lenses at similar prices to the main Japanese OEMs. Their cinema lenses are very well regarded and are price-competitive with mid-market offerings from Zeiss (CP), Schneider (Xenon FF), and other traditional cine lens makers. There's nothing wrong with their design or manufacturing. The problem is that, unlike Leica, they would struggle to sell lenses at twice the price of Sony, Canon, or Nikon equivalents.