Need some help deciding to Buy SL and Leica or Sigma lenses

[rollsman4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am speculating getting a SL but I need to know if the Leica glass is worth spending all that Extra money. I need AF and I dont need to shoot F3.5-F5.6  NOT open I dont need the Bokeh

 I will be using it as my wald around camera and shoot some Portraits and Family shots. I am NOW retired and this is for Me as my gift to myself. Thank you

[Speeding]

When you say shoot portraits and family, are you in SAF or CAF?  In CAF, Sigma lenses tend to pulse and hunt more on the SL and SL2 than Leica or Panasonic lenses do.  If shooting SAF then you probably won't notice much of a difference but CAF can be disappointing.  For photojournalism work I leave my Sigma's home for this reason.  Too unpredictable.  For walkaround lens or non-critical work Sigma should be fine.  

Rendering is of course subjective but most of the faster Sigma primes render nicely.  I've heard good things about the new Sigma 65mm f2.  Also check out the Panasonic 35/50/85mm f1.8 primes.  I have not used them but people who do seem to really like them.  Might be the best compromise between Sigma pricing and Leica pricing.  

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

Offering advice on whether Leica lenses are worth the extra money over other brands with similar aperture and FL is how wars start in this forum!
There is no objective measure of $/Image Quality. The only possible way of judging is to borrow/rent/buy a lens and try it for yourself. 
FWIW I lived for years taking portraits, group shots and events with nothing but the Leica 24-90 zoom, and was very happy with it. Eventually I succumbed to the lure of the Summicron primes (35-75-90), and they amaze me every time I lift the camera to the eye.

However.............!

I'm a fit, reasonably strong retiree, and I could never use it as a walk-around camera for family, social & travel: too large, too heavy, too indiscreet. That's what I have the CL for (others have a M or a Q for the same reason).

[Speeding]

29 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Offering advice on whether Leica lenses are worth the extra money over other brands with similar aperture and FL is how wars start in this forum!
There is no objective measure of $/Image Quality. The only possible way of judging is to borrow/rent/buy a lens and try it for yourself. 
FWIW I lived for years taking portraits, group shots and events with nothing but the Leica 24-90 zoom, and was very happy with it. Eventually I succumbed to the lure of the Summicron primes (35-75-90), and they amaze me every time I lift the camera to the eye.

However.............!

I'm a fit, reasonably strong retiree, and I could never use it as a walk-around camera for family, social & travel: too large, too heavy, too indiscreet. That's what I have the CL for (others have a M or a Q for the same reason).

Agree with this ^ advice on all counts.  Jump on Lensrentals.com and rent the SL and lenses you are interested in or borrow if you have friends that shoot with Leica.  There are better walk-around/casual cameras than the SL and they provide very Leica-like experience if that's what you are after.

Please don't use the SL APO primes unless you are prepared to purchase one (or several) of them - they are HIGHLY addictive 😂

[rollsman4]

I did NOT mean to dis credit the Leica Glass. I was hoping for someone on the forum that has used the Sigma L mount lenses on their SL body. Including the Sigma zooms  Thank you for all the comments

[Gavin Cato]

27 minutes ago, rollsman4 said:

I did NOT mean to dis credit the Leica Glass. I was hoping for someone on the forum that has used the Sigma L mount lenses on their SL body. Including the Sigma zooms  Thank you for all the comments

Well, I have the Sigma 14-24 L mount on my SL2. I can't do a fair comparison as my widest Leica lens is the 35/2.

The Sigma is a very good lens. But the 35 knocks my socks off. It's pretty much perfect. I wish it was f/1.4 but that aside - I can't see any fault with it whatsoever.

Likewise with my 50 & 90.

I feel your pain $$ wise, they are staggeringly expensive. I'm eyeing the 90-280 at the moment and it's an awful lot of change.

 

 

 

[Shawn30]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a mix of Leica lens's and Sigma Len's. I have a "thing" for Leica so I have more of those, but I have huge respect for what Sigma's doing.

The Sigma 24-70 Art lens on the SL2 is really good. I Can't say if the Leica 24-70 is better.

The Sigma 105mm Macro is an amazingly useful lens and I get stunning photos with it and the SL2.

Not that it's a walk around lens but for the price point the Sigma 150-600 is fantastic.

I also have the CL and TL lens's and it's nice travel/walk around camera. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Shawn30

[rollsman4]

Thank you all for your info you shared.  I was going to Bite the Bullet and just get the Leica 24-70.  I am still looking to buy a SL body as well.  TY

[caissa]

I spent the money. That means I think Leica lenses are worth the money.

If it is the same for you ? I have no idea - I know nothing about you. Technically I am sure that the cameras are good enough for you (for anybody). The lenses ? They are usually the highlight and the reason to buy a Leica camera. Do I use Sigma lenses ? Yes, but mainly if there is no equivalent from Leica.

I came to the SL because I still had R and M lenses that I wanted to use again (in a decent way). No idea how it is with you ....

[Photoworks]

If you are considering buying the SL camera and just do family and travel I would suggest an affordable and super light Panasonic 20-60mm. and then get some fast 50mm.

the newer sigma lenses are all better than most Leica M glass. Sharp but some are not so exiting in rendering. I have the sigma 45mm (it's ok) and the 35mm 1.4 is really good (AF slower in low light.

[Anakronox]

I bought the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.2 for its wide open rendering, but mostly as a stop-gap as no shop could stock a 35mm APO Summicron SL for more than 3 minutes.  Eventually I found the 35 Cron and couldn’t be happier with it, though I confess I rarely use it for most of my photography.  Would I sell it?  Absolutely not unless an emergency sprang up.  If a SL2 Monochrom we’re to be released, then I wouldn’t be able to put the 35 Summicron down!

[beewee]

The Sigma 14-24 DG DN is great, as are many of the i-series primes. I don’t have experience with other Sigma zooms though.

People have different ideas of what focal length would make an ideal portrait lens so it would be helpful if you can elaborate on what focal lengths you’re interested in.

The Sigma 90/2.8 DG DN looks pretty good as is the 65/2 DG DN but I don’t have experience with either since I’m more of a wide angle shooter. 35mm is the longest focal length I have in native L-mount, although I do have other M lenses in the standard and telephoto range for when I do want to shoot tighter, along with an old Canon DSLR setup with super-tele range for wildlife.

[Cowz]

I primarily use M Cameras (M10P and M9M) and have a lot of M glass, German and Chinese.  I recently bought a SL and I mated it with a Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG HSN.

Now in no way is the 35 a perfect portrait lens.  In my SL kit, I also have a TTArtisan 50mm f0.95, 7Artisans 75mm f1.25 and TTArtisan 90mm f1.25.  between the auto 35 (which I prefer to shoot in manual mode with back button focus and joystick to pinpoint focus area) and manual 50/75/90, I am very happy.

My M cameras use a 35mm f2, 50mm f2, 75mm f2.5 and 90mm f2 and on occasion an old 135mm f2.8.

Coming from M to SL, I don't utilise all the AF modalities, but I don't need to.

 

 

[jaapv]

11 hours ago, Gavin Cato said:

I'm eyeing the 90-280 at the moment and it's an awful lot of change.

Eye the Sigma 150-600 instead - you'll be pleasantly surprised - even in comparison to the 90-280.

[Eclectic Man]

I suggest that you hire some and try them out before purchase.  You will get used to the rendering and the weight, and whether you can use the SL as a 'walk around' camera or not.

Happy hunting!

[bpLeica]

On 10/13/2021 at 2:30 PM, rollsman4 said:

I am speculating getting a SL but I need to know if the Leica glass is worth spending all that Extra money. I need AF and I dont need to shoot F3.5-F5.6  NOT open I dont need the Bokeh

 I will be using it as my wald around camera and shoot some Portraits and Family shots. I am NOW retired and this is for Me as my gift to myself. Thank you

I think your best bet would be the Leica 24-70/2.8... 

[rollsman4]

I was thinking the same.  TY 

[Driften]

Leica makes excellent lens, but for the my SL2-S all I have are Sigma lens for it (24,35,45,90mm). At least right now. It's partly the ones I have are lighter. Some of the lens I had bought to use with my CL and weight mattered to me. I just don't expect a Sigma 35mm to be an equal to a Leica 35mm TL or SL lens.

[hillavoider]

Don’t get a SL2 or SL or SL2s get a LUMIX and spend the money on Leica glass, always the glass with Leica, the AF bodies will be obsolete… well already 

 

ps. A SL35 lens on a lumix would be hard to beat for the money, the lens is insane 

Edited October 16, 2021 by hillavoider

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Torpille]

Am 13.10.2021 um 20:30 schrieb rollsman4:

I am speculating getting a SL but I need to know if the Leica glass is worth spending all that Extra money. I need AF and I dont need to shoot F3.5-F5.6  NOT open I dont need the Bokeh

 I will be using it as my wald around camera and shoot some Portraits and Family shots. I am NOW retired and this is for Me as my gift to myself. Thank you

I don't think you need the Leica SL Lenses for what you plan to do.

Leica SL lenses are overpriced but yes they are great, but heavy with Leica SL.

I will go for : 

- SL with Sigma 35 and 65mm two very good lenses or 24-70 (still heavy)
- CL + 18-56mm : very good size
- Lumix S5 with Panasonic 20-60mm or 24-105mm

if you plan to use M-Lenses then SL

Edited October 16, 2021 by Torpille