Jump to content

SL Apo-summicron or not ?!


Torpille

Recommended Posts

I use the 24-90 when I want to be pragmatic, just get the pictures, and when I'm unsure what focal length I need: events, drama, performance etc. Whenever I have a greater understanding of the type of shots I need or want, I much prefer to use the Summicrons because of the extra flexibility of the larger aperture and better image quality. The 24-90 is excellent, but the Summicrons are just superb!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the 24-90 for a week in Haiti and loved it.  I ended up selling it because most of my work is on the coast and I prefer the closed focus systems to keep sand and dust out.  That said, I took the 35 SL and 50 SL on a trip to Venice / Paris and got great shots.  Full transparency, I also took a Leica R 80-200mm f/4 zoom and it was stellar.  

I wouldn’t replace the 24-90 just to get a lens or two in the same range.  However, if you want a prime with slim DOF wide open, the SL primes do that well.  I am skipping the 28, but am interested in the 24mm SL for landscape work.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the three zooms, the 50 Summilux SL and the 75 Summicron SL.  Those two primes were superb, but I have M primes in those focal lengths and the zoom covers them as well.  Sold the wide and long zooms, and the two primes, and bought the APO Elmarit-R 180/2.8 ROM and the R-Adapter L (I also have the 2x converter, giving me 360mm field of view).

My reasoning was that the SL is really a travel, outdoor camera and the SL with the 24-90 zoom is a great single lens combination.  If I’m needing a tele, I have 180mm & 360mm covered, and I have my M primes if I need a faster lens.  Not anticipating buying more SL primes (that said, I highly recommend the 50 Summilux-SL and the 75 Summicron).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably very dependent on use-case. I have the three zooms, but ever since I got the 35 and 90 Summicron-SL, I find myself taking that combo out most of the time. The shooting experience with the Summicrons is just amazing, bigger aperture and superb image quality. With stitching (Capture One has that option now finally as well, yes!) and cropping, the range in focal length can be extended a bit should that be needed. The extra work needed to force myself using a fixed FL helps me to make better photographs. Rotating the zoom-ring to get an ok-ish composition makes me a bit lazy and gets me easily into a point-and-shoot mode.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, Torpille said:

Owners of the Vario 24-90mm, be honest: in what proportion do you use a SL Apo lens in addition to the Vario?

I've been asking myself the same question. Then I checked the 50mm SL compared to the 24-90. Indeed, it's one and a half stop faster than the zoom at 50mm, and the sharpness is even a tad better. That does make a difference (especially the faster f 2.0). 

Now the but. The SL lens line follows modern Leica's idea of plasticity. It is even its signature for plasticity. That makes the 50mm SL and the 24-90 at 50mm render similarly. With these lenses, faces are rendered comparable slim with a high dimensionality. 

For many faces, that isn't the most flattering approach. One could use a ninety or 75mm lens to alleviate that, basically compressing dimensionality. But losing the environment is inevitable. And even then, you are still stuck to that high dimensionality. 

M and R glass of some vintage render a face significantly flatter with the same field of view. I find the ability to be highly flexible with lenses regardless of their mount and construction the particular strength of the SL cameras. 

On a budget, the 60mm Elmarit R is an interesting contender. The classic 50mm Summicron R renders too cold for me (and perhaps even too flat) to be brilliant. The 50mm Summilux, M and R, rule the kingdom of the fifties for sure.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 12 Stunden schrieb Torpille:

Owners of the Vario 24-90mm, be honest: in what proportion do you use a SL Apo lens in addition to the Vario?

I did a simple analysis using the filter function from Lightroom to find out my usage pattern. These numbers support that I actually make a fair use of all of my lenses, with the no surprise result that the 24-90mm has the biggest share as a (very good) all-purpose zoom lens. But there are always instances when I prefer to shoot with primes so I am happy owning both...

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!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 24-90 as well as the 35 APO and a Q2. If I am not concerned about weight and general shooting the 24-90 is the go to lens. 

The hard truth for me is that I am so enamored with the 35 APO, actually totally blown away, that my Q2 has been replaced by the SL2/35 which has become my everyday, walk around combo. My Q2 is going up for sale shortly. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it’s about half.  I’ve done portrait sessions with the 24-90 and just set it to f/4 (using strobes so I can regulate exposure well) and that lens is lovely.  However, the APO 35 and 50 are something else with sharpness and color rendition.  Maybe a little too sharp though as I have to do a lot of skin retouching in post!  I’d love to add the 90 APO eventually but it’s not a high priority as I don’t need super thin DoF for portraits - I’m well past the only eyes in focus look. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

24-90 by day, APO summicron by night, for me it's almost that simple.

When shooting music I am generally working in pretty low light in small venues and appreciate a lighter less obtrusive kit. I also (generally) use my primes when shooting candid shots of my family/friends indoors.

Out for some landscape photography or just some sight seeing or city exploring I take the 24-90. In the right setting then also the 90-280mm.

I am curious to use my primes more for landscape and see how they compare to the 24-90, but am not willing to carry that much with me. If I was e.g. touring in a car or had a base like a country cabin, then I would.

Edited by hoolyproductions
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the SL originally because of a planned trip to Chile and originally planned on using it with M lenses. Once I calculated the weight of my bag with 4 M lenses, I realized the single 24-90 was just lighter. It certainly was the right decision. Most days I just carried the SL and zoom leaving my camera bag in the hotel. It has been a superb lens, and the built in image stabilization generally meant I did not need the faster lenses. The SL APO lenses came later and were certainly superb across the frame when shot wide open. I now have the 35 and 75 APO that makes up a good kit all by themselves, but in the bag they will weigh as much as the 24-90. We all rave about the Summicrons, and they are great, but my 35 APO does flare badly with the sun. while my 24-90  zoom does not. My SL 75 often makes nasty sounds when I try and focus it manually. These are not things I expect from such high priced lenses. On the whole I would hope that I never have to sell the three zooms I have, nor the SL 35, 75, and the SL 50 Summilux. They all have a place in my collection if I can afford them. However for my day to day walk arounds these days, I have a light kit of old adapted Zeiss Contax lenses. A 28/ 2.8 Distagon. a 50 1,7 Planar, and an 85 Sonnar 2.8. All three weigh about the same as one SL Summicron. I tend to shoot them between F4 - 11 and the quality is really excellent. I actually prefer shooting with them this way to their M equivalents.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I currently have the 16-35 SVE, 35 APO and 75 APO. Once the wide angle L Summicron's become available, I will get rid of the 16-35. Once the results of the Summicron's have been seen, they cannot be unseen and then one becomes painfully aware of the sub-par performance of the 16-35 mm, especially corner performance. I use the SL/SL2 with 75 APO L for street because I cannot accurately focus anything longer then 50 mm with my M10M or M10-R, nor as quickly. The SL with 75 APO L is simply an awesome street tool.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been growing my L-mount lens lineup over the past year since getting the SL2-S and so far have the following:

  • Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN
  • Leica 16-35 SL
  • Sigma 24/3.5 DG DN
  • Leica 24-90 SL
  • Leica 28 APO SL

I mostly shoot wide and my preferred focal length is 24mm for the primary type of shooting that I do, which I would characterize as environmental/documentary style mountain photography. As far as APO Summicron vs Leica zoom lenses go, I base the choice on the following:

Go with an APO Summicron if most of following applies to you:

  • You are happy with a single focal length and don’t feel the need to change often, at least not in bad weather (dust, rain, snow, etc…)
  • You prefer to shoot at wide apertures
  • You need absolute sharpness out to the very corners
  • There exist an APO Summicron lens in your preferred focal length
  • You’re shooting with the SL2 or Sigma fp L and you want pixel level sharpness out to the corners

Go with a the Vario otherwise. At least to start with, if you’re not sure what focal length you prefer most.

The 24-90 is big. In fact, if you compare it against M-lenses, it’s massive. But it’s not THAT much heavier than the APO Summicron SL and the flexibility of additional focal lengths is nice. When stopped down, I’m able to get good sharpness out to the corners for landscapes.

Here’s a photo taken with the 24-90 @ 90:

 

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!

Edited by beewee
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, beewee said:

The 24-90 is big. In fact, if you compare it against M-lenses, it’s massive. But it’s not THAT much heavier than the APO Summicron SL and the flexibility of additional focal lengths is nice. When stopped down, I’m able to get good sharpness out to the corners for landscapes.

Here’s a photo taken with the 24-90 @ 90:

 

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!

The SL 90-280 is even better at the 90mm setting, and outperforms the 24-90 generally. I own both, and appreciate that the longer FLs provide the opportunity for creating minimalist and potentially more impactful landscape compositions. Part personal style, part stellar performance, which is why I won't sell the 90-280 despite its size/weight and infrequent use. It also doesn't telescope out when zooming like the other SL zooms...very well balanced...and likely better sealed. Different strokes, as always.

Jeff

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

24-90 is fantastic lens.  I would only reach for the 35 / 75 summicrons instead if I plan to shoot a lot at f2 in darker places, or want to have less weight in my hand.  I would not carry the zoom and primes at the same time.  I’d pick either the zoom or the two primes based on the subject that day.
But if I am shooting video also, then I think the 24-90 flexibility is better in that area than the primes.  
24-90 also looks great for portraits and I like the smooth background also.  

Robb

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I now use the 2470 instead of the 2490 because I prefer the smaller size und f2.8 constant.

Own also 35/50/70 Summicrons and 50 /1.4 SL.( which I wanted to replace with the 50 Summicron but cant let go.

the 50/1.4 renders great and I would say sharp but more smooth bokeh and transition. Really like it for environmental portraits of the kids etc.

around the house or when Inshoot inside I really like the primes. Faster, nicer handling, beautiful rendering.

I use the zooms for family events when I want flexibility, and for travel and vacation.

overall I prefer shooting the primes. 50 followed by 35 followed by 75.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The SL35 APO is the best lens I've ever shot, I know that now, because I sold it and I miss it and know it was a mistake to sell. 

(and I own 3 other 35mm Leica m lenses and the 24-90 in that range, not to mention a CV APO)

I love shooting with primes. So for me, the zoom is really only for events and party's.  Where I need versatility. Otherwise, the size, handling, character and stunning clarity of the SL primes are what I am addicted to when shooting AF. Especially the 35 ....Holy Cow it's good.

Edited by thatkatmat
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Only have the 24/90 in L mount for now on my SL2...Coming from R7/8+28/60/80/100/180 and M4/7/9+15/21/28/35/50/90.

I don't think you can really justify extra stuff if cost/performances are the main deciding factor. Beyond pixel peeping, for 95% of work that doesnt get printed huge, most people would be hard pressed to fault the zoom agaisnt the APOs. I would switch for a prime for other reasons: Combo size and need for self-limitations.

On some jobs, that's out of the question: you just fly from shot to shot with the 24/90 flexibility and AF performance: carrying 2 or 3 primes in APO in your bag instead would be heavier, more expensive, and slower. M lenses are a different affair, but you loose sealing and AF.

For passion stuff, such as street photography, intimate reportage, carry all day flaneur camera+lens, then yes a smaller prime (or two) then takes precedence.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...