SL vs M (if you could only keep one)

[Chris Nebard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, beewee said:

Unless you need large apertures, the Sigma 24/3.5 DG DN is excellent when stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8. I’ve tested it with 100MP multi-shot mode and it resolves well out to the corners. See posts #16-19 here:

I don’t have the Sigma 35/1.4 or 35/2 DG DN but reviews are generally good and the 35/1.4 is outstanding.

Unless you really dig the APO SL prime look and/or need to shoot wide open, the Sigma DG DN L-mount lenses are well worth it and quite a bargain. Their ergonomics and haptics are excellent and the i-series primes are much lighter than any Leica SL lenses. That said, I do very much like the APO SL prime look and you can get nice bokeh even at 28mm when shot wide open. Enough so that I’ll probably end up getting the 21mm and 24mm APO SL when they eventually get released.

Here’s an example of the 28 APO SL shot wide open.

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!

And one more shot at f/2 with zero coma.

Stunning. Also fully agree regarding the Sigma DG DN i lenses; I have the 24 f3.5 and the 45 f2.8. Used on the SL2-S, I like the results I’m getting from both. 

[michali]

9 hours ago, kriskunisch said:

For those who use(d)/own(ed) both the M10 and SL2-S, any difference in color between the two cameras? My partner has the M10, I shoot with an M240, and the closest SL2-S is 4 hour drive away. I love the output of the Ms, but am tempted to add the SL2-S to my bag.

 

8 hours ago, beewee said:

I don’t shoot them side-by-side so I haven’t done any direct comparison but I find I process the photos the same way in Lightroom using Adobe Color profile and the look is similar. You’re likely to see a bigger colour difference coming from the lenses (especially older or third-party glass) than the cameras themselves. In general, I use only native L-mount glass on the SL2-S and Leica M lenses on the M10. Even though I have the M to L adapter and tested the M mount lenses on the SL2-S, I haven’t been happy with the performance with the lenses that I have. It’s also a very different shooting style, so I think M-lenses make more sense used on an M-body and L-mount lenses makes more sense on an L-mount body. Since I’m fortunate to have both the M10 and SL2-S, I don’t see a point in shooting my M-lenses with the SL2-S and I definitely wouldn’t buy M-lenses to shoot on the SL2-S if I didn’t already own an M body.

On a recent trip to Mozambique I shot my M10 & SL-2S side by side. No major differences in colour, see the images below. As beewee says, it's a function of processing. I also use each camera with its native lenses and each camera to suit the subject I'm shooting. I normally revert to my M cameras when I want to slow things down a bit.

(please click on images for better res.)

M10 & WATE @ 50mm

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!

SL2-S & Leica VE 90-280mm @ 150mm

[Advertisement]

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

[FrozenInTime]

18 hours ago, threeseed said:

RedDotForum when they did the review of the 24-70 talked about comparisons with the M lenses on an SL.

They said that the 24-70 in particular was much closer in rendering to an M than an SL prime.

That's marketing speak for lower contrast and softer in the corners 😉

[beewee]

1 hour ago, FrozenInTime said:

That's marketing speak for lower contrast and softer in the corners 😉

Yup. The RDF folks use to sing praises about 24-90 being “as good as a top performing Leica prime” but since the 35 and 50 APO M and APO SL primes came out, they’ve had to dial that back to “as good as many current generation Leica M primes”.

[threeseed]

2 hours ago, beewee said:

Yup. The RDF folks use to sing praises about 24-90 being “as good as a top performing Leica prime” but since the 35 and 50 APO M and APO SL primes came out, they’ve had to dial that back to “as good as many current generation Leica M primes”.

35/50 APO SL are a little bit better than the 24-90 based on the comparison here. But those are standouts in the lineup.

By all accounts it seems to be as good as the rest of the SL primes (except 90). So I wouldn't say it's an entirely inaccurate statement.

Edited January 18, 2022 by threeseed

[beewee]

1 hour ago, threeseed said:

35/50 APO SL are a little bit better than the 24-90 based on the comparison here. But those are standouts in the lineup.

By all accounts it seems to be as good as the rest of the SL primes (except 90). So I wouldn't say it's an entirely inaccurate statement.

By no means do I think the 24-90 is bad but the APO SL primes (all of the ones released so far) are head and shoulders above the 24-90 in their respective focal length as far as overall image quality. The SL2 is not really even approaching the limits of the APO SL primes. Peter Karbe did a talk a while back where he mentions the APO SL primes will still be strong performers with a 200 MP full frame sensor and that’s not something that can be said about any of the Leica SL zooms.

[SonomaBear]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We all sing the praises of handling the M -- for me, PERFECT!

But now I carry a Q and a SL2-s set up to feel like a M...

Upper Dial = Shutter; Aperture almost always on the lens barrel; ISO on easiest Fn button; Exposure Compensation on real Dial.
 No -review  used (Hell, it was perfect win the viewfinder, don't need no stinking' review to chimp!)

[Manicouagan1]

I got an SL2 in December 2019.  Since then my M cameras and lenses have been used only sparingly.    When I compare image quality of my M vs SL2 images at similar focal lengths the biggest differences are in the extreme corners (more than 18mm from center of the 24x36mm frame).  The images with the 24-90mm SL zoom are noticeably sharper in the corners.  This factor only is an issue with the the modest fraction of images that the corners are important.   The SL2 has become my preferred choice because 1) more and more of my images have been taken outside the 24-90 mm range of my Leica M primes, and 2) frequently changing lenses became annoying as I got older.   When I went through a sort in my Lightroom files I realized how little I had used my trusty M's since I bought my SL2 and a set of zoom lenses covering  the range from 14mm to 600mm.  

[beewee]

3 hours ago, Manicouagan1 said:

I got an SL2 in December 2019.  Since then my M cameras and lenses have been used only sparingly.

This has been the same for me since I picked up the SL2-S in spring 2021. My default camera is the SL2-S as compared to the M10. The M is more compact and lighter but the SL2-S has such a wonderful viewfinder for ultra-wide angle lenses that far surpass the Visoflex on the M10 and the 16-35 SL has meant that I almost never change lenses when I’m shooting landscapes.

Between the generally more superior optical performance of the SL lenses (especially the APO primes), having AF at least as an option, much lower pricing for similar optical performance (i.e. 35 APO SL vs 35 APO M or 50 APO SL vs 50 APO M), the SL as a system is much better value and provides better overall image quality than the M system with only very limited exceptions with specific M setups like the 35 APO M + M11 which is almost twice the price of an SL2 + 35 APO SL.

Ever since the the 35 APO M came out and seeing the price difference, along with the year over year price increases of the M lenses that, for the most part, trail behind SL lenses in optical performance, for me the SL is the system of the future that I’m building on. I’m fortunate in that I have a fairly complete set of M glass to cover a wide focal range and my lenses were purchased at decent prices many years ago but I feel the current pricing of the M lenses have made the value proposition of the M system rather poor. If I didn’t already have an M kit, I can’t imagine myself getting into the M system today.

[John Smith]

On 1/20/2022 at 2:31 PM, beewee said:

This has been the same for me since I picked up the SL2-S in spring 2021. My default camera is the SL2-S as compared to the M10. The M is more compact and lighter but the SL2-S has such a wonderful viewfinder for ultra-wide angle lenses that far surpass the Visoflex on the M10 and the 16-35 SL has meant that I almost never change lenses when I’m shooting landscapes.

Between the generally more superior optical performance of the SL lenses (especially the APO primes), having AF at least as an option, much lower pricing for similar optical performance (i.e. 35 APO SL vs 35 APO M or 50 APO SL vs 50 APO M), the SL as a system is much better value and provides better overall image quality than the M system with only very limited exceptions with specific M setups like the 35 APO M + M11 which is almost twice the price of an SL2 + 35 APO SL.

Ever since the the 35 APO M came out and seeing the price difference, along with the year over year price increases of the M lenses that, for the most part, trail behind SL lenses in optical performance, for me the SL is the system of the future that I’m building on. I’m fortunate in that I have a fairly complete set of M glass to cover a wide focal range and my lenses were purchased at decent prices many years ago but I feel the current pricing of the M lenses have made the value proposition of the M system rather poor. If I didn’t already have an M kit, I can’t imagine myself getting into the M system today.

This is exactly right. I've tried to justify in my mind keeping my M10R and M10M, along with the 50APO, because they are so iconic. But the SL2 and its lenses are so zen. I decided to let the whole of my M kit go with the exception of a 50mm Summilux-M (silver). I plan to use it for travel and as a knock-about lens for a different look. While the M10 is a little more compact (not so much if you use the grip), I find the SL2 easier to handle.  

Regarding the 35APO + M11, I'm not sure it that combination provides better image quality than the SL2 + 35SL. One, the 35SL is technically the better lens. Two, read the M11 thread where users are complaining about blur. Some are saying they need to use speeds of at least 1/125 for sharp images. Thankfully, the SL2 (-S) has IBIS which allows a much lower ISO. Something to think about.

Edited February 19, 2022 by John Smith

[Reddy]

On 12/19/2021 at 3:49 AM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

It is a rebadged Sigma lens. Sigma designed. Sigma built. Leica badges. There is no real world difference to the Sigma version, apart from possibly different lens coatings (unconfirmed) and quality control (also unconfirmed). The SL24-90 is a modified Panasonic design but made exclusively for/by Leica.

Being a Sigma designed and manufactured lens doesn't matter. Many many lenses from mainstream brands are made by some one else (Tamron for Pentax and Nittoh/Fujifilm for Hasselblad for example). All that matters is if the lens is good.

The 24-70 is a very good lens, optically. It's also smaller, lighter and cheaper than the 24-90. The 24-90 is the better lens. It has slightly less aberations, is corrected for fringing and LoCa a bit better and has improved transitions from in to out of focus. Sharpness is similar with the 24-90 holding up in the corners better, especially wide open. If the 24-90 is a 9/10 then the 24-70 is an 8-8.5. You're looking a two excellent lenses. Whether the improved corners and CA is worth a couple of grand is up to you.

Sigma make a few gems for the L mount. The 14-24 is outstanding. The 150-600 is a fine super tele-zoom and the longest L mount option.

If it were me, I would choose the 24-90 if I were shooting primarily zooms and the 24-70 if I shot a mix of primes with zooms there when I wanted convenience.

Gordon

I doubt the SL 24-90mm f2.8-4 ASPH is a modified design from Panasonic,  as Leica has it legendary R 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 ASPH. Panasonic L mount focus on more in video and the lenses trends to have constant aperture throughout the zoom ranges. Panasonic 24-70mm f2.8, 24-105mm f4 or 70-200mm f2.8 and f4, all with constant aperture. 

I'm just wondering if Leica shares the SL lens designs for new M lenses. M/R APO 90mm f2 asph both share the same design but SL APO 90mm f2 asph have totally different design. If SL lenses are better in digital, then it make senses to put SL lenses without motor into M11 for max. image quality ?

Edited March 3, 2022 by Reddy

[BernardC]

53 minutes ago, Reddy said:

I doubt the SL 24-90mm f2.8-4 ASPH is a modified design from Panasonic,  as Leica has it legendary R 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 ASPH. Panasonic L mount focus on more in video and the lenses trends to have constant aperture throughout the zoom ranges. Panasonic 24-70mm f2.8, 24-105mm f4 or 70-200mm f2.8 and f4, all with constant aperture. 

I'm just wondering if Leica shares the SL lens designs for new M lenses. M/R APO 90mm f2 asph both share the same design but SL APO 90mm f2 asph have totally different design. If SL lenses are better in digital, then it make senses to put SL lenses without motor into M11 for max. image quality ?

The rumour about the 24-90 is based on a patent for a mechanical design belonging to Panasonic. Mechanical design and optical design are not the same thing, but rumours rarely make such distinctions! It's likely that Panasonic supplies some of the mechanical components used in the lens, such as the inner lens barrel covered by the patent. It's also likely that Panasonic has the production tools (and capacity) to manufacture such mechanical components, and that Leica does not. Final assembly is in Germany, so presumably those inner components are shipped by the sub-contractor (Panasonic) to Wetzlar, where they are mated with glass elements and assembled.

The 24-70 is a different matter. The consensus is that it's manufactured by Sigma, and also designed by them. However, it is not the same lens as Sigma's own 24-70, either optically or mechanically. My theory is that it's a design proposal that was rejected by Sigma because it was too expensive (it uses more low-dispersion elements). They then pitched it to Leica, who needed a "kit zoom". Everyone benefits from such a collaboration: Sigma gets to produce a lens that they couldn't sell at their $1,000 price point, Leica gets a zoom that they can package with the SL2-S, and we as photographers have more choice.

[Reddy]

9 hours ago, BernardC said:

The rumour about the 24-90 is based on a patent for a mechanical design belonging to Panasonic. Mechanical design and optical design are not the same thing, but rumours rarely make such distinctions! It's likely that Panasonic supplies some of the mechanical components used in the lens, such as the inner lens barrel covered by the patent. It's also likely that Panasonic has the production tools (and capacity) to manufacture such mechanical components, and that Leica does not. Final assembly is in Germany, so presumably those inner components are shipped by the sub-contractor (Panasonic) to Wetzlar, where they are mated with glass elements and assembled.

The 24-70 is a different matter. The consensus is that it's manufactured by Sigma, and also designed by them. However, it is not the same lens as Sigma's own 24-70, either optically or mechanically. My theory is that it's a design proposal that was rejected by Sigma because it was too expensive (it uses more low-dispersion elements). They then pitched it to Leica, who needed a "kit zoom". Everyone benefits from such a collaboration: Sigma gets to produce a lens that they couldn't sell at their $1,000 price point, Leica gets a zoom that they can package with the SL2-S, and we as photographers have more choice.

Well then it make sense as Leica and Panasonic AF is very similar and the focus speeds are pretty much the same, unlike any early Sigma L lenses which are a step slower.

Edited March 3, 2022 by Reddy

[David Gao]

What a tough choice! I've been using M system for 15 years, bought the each generation of bodies until M10P then met the SL2. I never thought I would buy a SL system body as my lenses collection are all for M system, but actually I found the SL system is so friendly with the manual focus lenses. So I sold all of my Canon, Sony system and only keep the Leica M and SL. Currently, If I have to choose one, I would say SL2 is the favourite. But seems my wife prefer the M system, because the weight of SL2 is not good for her. 

Edited March 5, 2022 by David Gao