SL lens wish list

[Pelu2010]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, simon_hsn said:

I would really fancy such a lens. I would like to see a 21-50 mm f2.8. It would be bigger, but this would be a great lens. Then, they could complement it with a 50-150 mm f2.8.

I also like my Leica 24-70 f2.8, I would like to see a Leica 70-200 f2.8 go complement it nicely. 

Good suggestion for workhorse lenses (or holy grail lenses) 

[BernardC]

The only lens on my wish list, that isn't on a roadmap, is a short macro in the 35 to 60mm range. Maybe they could add a built-in ring light, like Canon does.

[Advertisement]

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

[robb]

13 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

But the first two are already available thanks to Sigma (though it's a 85mm not 80)

Right.  If you like Sigma, more power to you.  I’m not a fan and will pay up for the minor or major differences to the Leica glass.

 

Robb

[sillbeers15]

3 hours ago, robb said:

Right.  If you like Sigma, more power to you.  I’m not a fan and will pay up for the minor or major differences to the Leica glass.

 

Robb

No doubt Leica makes good glass and I have been a happy user.

I do not mind searching for a jewel in the rough, but it takes one to do more homework.

The price point of non Leica lenses is one tenth to one fifth, so you can decide to keep it if it meets your requirements (with enough Leica glasses used, I'm certain you can compare and decide if non Leica glasses are inferior or Leica is way over price,....and that sounds fun!) or ditch it later as you do not loose much.

I'm venturing into Sigma 150-600mm as my first trial as Leica shows no intention to produce a SL glass beyond the 280mm range. Even if Leica decides to change decision later, it can easily be 5 years later or longer. I've decided not to wait, besides the Sigma glass I wanted has shown promising potential thus far. Until I use it extensively like my SL90-280mm, I will not comment. 

On the other hand, my SL90-280mm is worth every once I've paid for it on the amount of usage I've done and the satasification on the IQ and AF performance of the lens.

Edited September 2, 2021 by sillbeers15

[robb]

On 9/1/2021 at 3:34 PM, robb said:

Right.  If you like Sigma, more power to you.  I’m not a fan and will pay up for the minor or major differences to the Leica glass.

 

Robb

I guess I should take a step back and modify my position.  I do think in general, you get what you pay for with lenses.  My only experience with Sigma was 30 years ago when I was spending money on a 300 2.8 for the first time.  Back then, shooting with the first canon eos 1, if you didn’t have $3500 to pick up the canon AF version, that left Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma.  I wasn’t impressed with any of those long lenses back then and used them all with my pj buddies on assignments. I finally maxed out a credit card and picked up the canon 200 1.8 and the extenders to get what I wanted since ai was frustrated with the cheaper options.  Then eventually added a canon 400 2.8 because I was heavy into sports.

 

I also shot with a friends borrowed M6 and got the Leica bug and added glass and other Leica’s throughout the years.  So I noticed the quality of their  glass and I became very picky.  I relied on Leica’s Mtf’s to get a good first impression of which lenses could live up to my needs since I didn’t have a dealer nearby.  The mtf’s never seemed to let me down.

 

Fast forward to today and I am looking at all the options for the SL2.  Lot of nice options out there especially with adapters.

 

The mtf’s on several sigma lenses look great in particular for the 28, 40, and 105 1.4 lenses… and nothing really comparable from Leica at 1.4 with those mtf’s in those exact focal lengths.  so I will definitely get some copies to try and could go down a purchase route since they are supposedly so good and even give bang for the buck.  I am guessing they outperform comparable focal length in M lenses so I won’t slight Sigma’s capabilities today with my experiences 30 years ago.  I should have looked into them a bit more before the quick reply.  My apologies.

 

what does the group have to say about these three art lenses from Sigma on the SL (2j setup?

 

Robb

[sillbeers15]

1 hour ago, robb said:

 what does the group have to say about these three art lenses from Sigma on the SL (2j setup?

 

Coming from myself as a M10R & SL2 user with nothing but Leica glasses, I am very surprised that the IQ of Sigma 150-600mm coming very close to the sL90-280mm especially comparing 280mm vs 600mm performance. This gives me confidence to want to try out the Sigma ART 105mm F1.4 DG HSM. If it is good, it can compliant my M 0.95 Noctilux.

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, robb said:

what does the group have to say about these three art lenses from Sigma on the SL (2j setup?

These are all old DSLR designs with an adapter glued at the bottom. They are big and bulky, and AF performance won't be comparable to a "real" native lens since they were designed with other systems in mind.

You should really look at Sigma's DG DN line

[BernardC]

4 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

These are all old DSLR designs with an adapter glued at the bottom. They are big and bulky, and AF performance won't be comparable to a "real" native lens since they were designed with other systems in mind.

I understand the sentiment, but I doubt that they have glued-on adapters! Surely the rear mount is secured by screws, like it is for any other quality lens?

The f:1.4 "Art DG" (non-DN) lenses are the same as what you'll find in Sigma's Cinema lineup, and in various other mounts (Canon EF, Nikon F, Sony). They are known for their outstanding performance. They are bigger than the mirrorless-only DN lenses and, in theory, their autofocus performance should be worse. However, you don't usually get a choice between DG and DG DN lenses with the same focal length and speed, so you'll have to decide for yourself if the size/weight/AF of a particular lens suits your requirements.

The main exceptions to the "no equivalent lens" rule are the 35 and 85, which had DG versions at one time and have since been replaced by DG DN versions. You may be able to find the older version in-stock somewhere, new or used. If that's the case, you should expect a significant discount.

[Simone_DF]

2 hours ago, BernardC said:

I understand the sentiment, but I doubt that they have glued-on adapters! Surely the rear mount is secured by screws, like it is for any other quality lens?

The f:1.4 "Art DG" (non-DN) lenses are the same as what you'll find in Sigma's Cinema lineup, and in various other mounts (Canon EF, Nikon F, Sony). They are known for their outstanding performance. They are bigger than the mirrorless-only DN lenses and, in theory, their autofocus performance should be worse. However, you don't usually get a choice between DG and DG DN lenses with the same focal length and speed, so you'll have to decide for yourself if the size/weight/AF of a particular lens suits your requirements.

The main exceptions to the "no equivalent lens" rule are the 35 and 85, which had DG versions at one time and have since been replaced by DG DN versions. You may be able to find the older version in-stock somewhere, new or used. If that's the case, you should expect a significant discount.

Yes, of course, "glued" was a figure of speech! What I meant is that Sigma just added an adapter to a lens designed for DSLR that was not meant to be used on a mirrorless system.

Sure, you're right, at the moment the choice for the DG DN is limited in comparison, but I think it's just a matter of time until all the old designs are superseded by new mirrorless designs, just like the 85 and 35, and given the amount of releases Sigma is pushing out, I suspect we'll see them sooner rather than later.

My point was to inform the OP that not all Sigma lenses in L mount are born equal

[sarav]

180 2.8 or 4.0

280 4.0 or 5.6

400 5.6

 

Aperture are not large because to me size and weight matter. SL lenses size is ridicolous, too big, too fat, too long. With small aperture maybe size could be restricted to R-lens size but with AF, IF and APO.

[IkarusJohn]

I don’t mind the size so much, as it removes the compromise on image quality.  That said, the 90-280 was just too big for me.  If I was doing a lot of birding, I might have kept it.  A 180/2.8 would be a nice balance between size and quality, with more usable reach.  I regret selling the APO R180/2.8 I had, but it seemed pointless when I had the 90-280 … now, not such a great idea.

[sillbeers15]

4 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I don’t mind the size so much, as it removes the compromise on image quality.  That said, the 90-280 was just too big for me.  If I was doing a lot of birding, I might have kept it.  A 180/2.8 would be a nice balance between size and quality, with more usable reach.  I regret selling the APO R180/2.8 I had, but it seemed pointless when I had the 90-280 … now, not such a great idea.

I kept both of them.

[sillbeers15]

On 10/8/2021 at 4:48 PM, Simone_DF said:

These are all old DSLR designs with an adapter glued at the bottom. They are big and bulky, and AF performance won't be comparable to a "real" native lens since they were designed with other systems in mind.

You should really look at Sigma's DG DN line

I'm impressed with the IQ performance & compact design of the DG DN 85mm F1.4. However what really got my attention is the 105mm F1.4.

[Andrew Gough]

28-75mm F2.0 please

[goldenbear]

On 8/30/2021 at 5:54 AM, trickness said:

I’m desperately waiting for the 21 SL Summicron, that should be an incredible lens

I’m sure it will be great. However, given that auto focus is, arguably, less necessary at that FL, why not the 21 SEM-M? No matter the size/weight difference. 

[trickness]

49 minutes ago, goldenbear said:

I’m sure it will be great. However, given that auto focus is, arguably, less necessary at that FL, why not the 21 SEM-M? No matter the size/weight difference. 

I’ve got one of those too! 🤣

[aksclix]

I have waited for the 21mm f2 ever since I got my SL2 a year and a half ago.. it's ridiculous to take this long after announcing it.. 

the Leica native SL line-up is also missing a macro.. the SL is not built for fast action anyway.. so I guess they are not bothered about super telephoto lenses.. I would love a lighter 400 f4 prime.. if the Canon DO IS could be handheld, a mirrorless equivalent has to be lighter.. (or I hope.. ) 

anyway, I can wish for quite a lot but realistically, a top class macro needs to have been in the line up already.. even panasonic is taking forever to make those.. I have the sigma 105 macro and it is awesome but I would like a native Leica glass too.. didn't buy the SL2 to shoot with 3rd party lenses (although I do have some of them..) 

I have the 24-90, 90-280 and the 75.. I would probably keep those as long as I stay with the SL system.. if the S goes the mirrorless way, I might sell my S007 and the SL2 to get that right away  

[Steven Lane]

135mm f2 or f2.8 please. Loved this focal length back in my film days and miss having a modern dedicated prime.

[wceide]

Please Leica, if your read me, make a set  of shift lenses 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Pelu2010]

19 hours ago, wceide said:

Please Leica, if your read me, make a set  of shift lenses 

 

Yes, that would be nice.