Small survey - To SL and SL2 owners

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

SL2-S mainly for M lenses, particularly for access to a macro adapter to overcome the M's typical 0.7m or longer minimum focusing distance. This is why I hope any EVF-M camera is L-mount instead of native M-mount.

M:

• 28 Lux (performs much better on the SL2-S at sub-0.7m distances versus other adapted platforms)
• 28 Summaron (looking forward to trying with the macro adapter)
• CV 50 APO (incredible color & IQ but unfortunately shows some edge color shift on BSI sensors)
• CV 75 1.5 (favorite all-around rendering)

AF:

• Sigma 70 Macro Art (glorious color and bokeh reminiscent of the original Q in macro mode)
• Soon to order Sigma Sports 150-600 (to replace my sold RF 100-500)

Non-M Adapted:

• Contax Zeiss (C/Y): 35 f/1.4 / 45 f/2.8 / 50 f/1.4 / 100 f/2 (All except the 100 had a CLA and perform at the level of the Zeiss Classic and Milvus lenses now / 100 didn't need CLA)
• Minolta (MC/MD): 50 f/1.2 / 50 Macro / 58 f/1.2 (wow) / 85 f/2.8 Varisoft (all are very close to Leica color with a rendering somewhere between Leica M and R lenses)

I'm not really interested in the SL lenses due to cost+value+resale. I've had SL-APO-level lenses before for both GFX 100S and Canon R5, and the lure of chasing ultimate IQ has significantly faded for me. I have owned the SL 24-90 in the past on the original SL, and while the color/rendering was superior, the IQ at infinity and MFD was no better than the Canon 24-105.

Edited March 23, 2022 by hdmesa

[OR120]

9 hours ago, Alan Friedman said:

To date I have used the SL series cameras with manual focus lenses exclusively... M and R mostly with occasional experiments with Noct-Nikkor and Zeiss Contarex. In between the upgrade from the original SL to SL2-S I bought Sigma fp and fp-L for versatility and compact carry ability but I am finding the combination of Q2M and SL2-S suits me very well and the consistency of buttons and menus helps my aging brain remember the camera settings. Trading the SL and original Fp (with Leica trade-in program) brought the price of the SL2-S down considerably.

The range of lenses I've accumulated over the years more than meets my creative needs and it is a pleasure to use them anew with SL2-S evf. The Voigtlander apo-lanthar series delivers much of the correction and modern character I would expect from the SL primes. Still, I am curious to try an SL prime at a Leica dealer at some point, but I am hesitant to purchase without testing as I think the weight would likely influence how much I would carry and use it. The SL cameras become "smallish" with many of my manual focus lenses and I do value that.

Exactly how I feel. Thank you.

[Advertisement]

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

[jrp]

I bought into Leica when it (and Sony) were the only manufacturers to offer full frame mirrorless.  It was an M9 (sensor now corroded).  I got a range of M lenses and enjoyed them for their lightness and compactness.  Unfortunately, once I'd sipped the 24-90 and Summicrons, I found myself willing to accept the extra weight for the step up in performance (and the fact that I find myself hesitating before taking out some of the M lenses as they have so appreciated in value that it's scary taking them out.

[Jk1002]

I have the Sl with 24-90 in addition to my M when I need zoom and autofocus and weather sealing. 

That it works nicely with M lenses is just a bonus to me

 

JK

[masjah]

I have a substantial investment in R lenses. Originally an M240 served me as an adequate digital solution (didn't need autofocus or a rapidly responding EVF for my style of photography, and focus confirmation works well). However, a worsening benign essential tremor meant that I now need image stabilisation for non-tripod work, and an SL2 + Leica R-L adapter was the ideal solution. I now use my M240 as a rangefinder M-camera with the nice little Summarit 35/2.4. Of course, I could still use it as a back-up with my R-M adapter + EVF2 should the need arise.

 

[topoxforddoc]

I have finally succumbed and bought a SL2, which arrives on tuesday. The main reason is to use my much loved 180/2 APO Summicron R. This lens has been wonderful for over a decade on my two DMRs and I want to keep talking pictures with this marvellous beast. I can't really use it on my S(006), as it will only focus to about 10 m. Using it on a M10 with a Visoflex is pretty laughable. I did toy with buying a 180S APO Elmar too use on my S(006). But the would just mean my beloved 180/2 sitting forlorn.

Sure, I will use my other R and M lenses, but it's the 180/2, which I long to pick up again.

[matted]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/22/2022 at 4:17 AM, hansvons said:

I use the 24-90 for commercial, journalistic jobs exclusively. The quality is outstanding, so much actually that I consider it to be more of a variable prime (Zeiss built those for cine cameras back in the day) than a makeshift zoom. Exposure and face detection AF is absolutely to the task, delivering 95% keepers from a technical point of view. That combo is absolutely recommendable for any demanding job in inclement weather or even strong rain. Because my line of work doesn’t require the very best image quality in terms of corner sharpness, micro contrast, etc. I refrained from getting SL primes.
 

I plan to use the SL2-S also for smaller film projects that need moodier images than the 24-90 can deliver. For that, I acquired a set of Leica R primes. For the time being, I only used them on personal shots but they truly bring back the 70ies and 80ies look, very different from modern Leica glass, flatness, flares … They are profoundly kind to skin, render a tad cooler than SL lenses, which I find helpful for skin tones, and create that organic depth of field transition most modern super sharp glass misses (don’t cut the foreground sharply from the background). But the 24-90 behaves in that regard nicely too. 
 

I might get an PL adapter at some point and an M because the Summicron 35mm M as THE Leica lens intrigues me very much. 
 

In the end, I guess, the SL series takes almost any lens you throw at it, which makes it so versatile. 

Thanks for your thoughts, here and elsewhere. Very interesting hearing about your experience with the SL system given your trajectory and experience with cine glass and cine cameras. Which R primes did you acquire for your set? I will mainly be using M lenses for video but if the price is right adding R lenses to the stable might make sense since I can easily fit gears to them.

Myself, I just bought an SL2-s, and plan to use it with a combination of M and SL glass. For M, I feel like it will complement my M9 very well for low light situations, as well as for video/AF/inclement weather situations as required. Right now I am using a Fuji XT3 for these tasks, which leaves a lot to be desired when using M lenses, namely crop factor and EVF not being up to the task.

For SL glass, I'm absolutely torn on which lens to make my first... the 24-90 likely makes the most sense as it is by far the most versatile, and I already have a decent set of M primes for prime lens situations. That being said, the siren call of the 35 APO is very hard to resist. I generally lean on primes more than zooms (actually I do not currently own any zooms!). If you all could only own 1 SL lens, which would it be?

[LBJ2]

On 3/29/2022 at 2:28 PM, matted said:

Thanks for your thoughts, here and elsewhere. Very interesting hearing about your experience with the SL system given your trajectory and experience with cine glass and cine cameras. Which R primes did you acquire for your set? I will mainly be using M lenses for video but if the price is right adding R lenses to the stable might make sense since I can easily fit gears to them.

Myself, I just bought an SL2-s, and plan to use it with a combination of M and SL glass. For M, I feel like it will complement my M9 very well for low light situations, as well as for video/AF/inclement weather situations as required. Right now I am using a Fuji XT3 for these tasks, which leaves a lot to be desired when using M lenses, namely crop factor and EVF not being up to the task.

For SL glass, I'm absolutely torn on which lens to make my first... the 24-90 likely makes the most sense as it is by far the most versatile, and I already have a decent set of M primes for prime lens situations. That being said, the siren call of the 35 APO is very hard to resist. I generally lean on primes more than zooms (actually I do not currently own any zooms!). If you all could only own 1 SL lens, which would it be?

Go with the siren call 😉. The 35 APO is truly a very special lens. F2 on this lens will make you "almost" forget 1.4 at 35mm. 

[matted]

1 hour ago, LBJ2 said:

Go with the siren call 😉. The 35 APO is truly a very special lens. F2 on this lens will make you "almost" forget 1.4 at 35mm. 

Thanks! I will be eventually for sure, but decided to start with the 24-90. As discussed in a thread I started on the matter, the 35 was very, very tempting, but I have an embarrassment of riches in M 35s and a Q2 already so it didn't make sense for me to start there. Once I have some SL primes I may sell the zoom but it gets me the most bang for my buck for the time being.

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, matted said:

I may sell the zoom

Doubt it.

[matted]

2 hours ago, hansvons said:

Doubt it.

I have eventually sold every zoom I have ever purchased, but mostly due to the fact that the quality tradeoff was not worth the size, and I would usually prefer to carry 1 or 2 primes vs 1 zoom. However, since the 24-90 is truly like carrying a bag of 24,28,35,50,75,90 Elmarit/Elmar primes then it will surely be a different calculation. I think you may be right!

[hansvons]

Let me know what you think of it. That's what I find:

The 24-90 belongs to Leica’s modern breed of lenses. It fits well into Leica’s today’s interpretation of a good lens: outstanding corner-to-corner sharpness, warm to neutral colour rendition, round bokeh orbs, harmonic focus fall-off, straight focal plane from open rose all the way up to f 16, hardly any flaring, delicate contrast, you name it. 

So far, so boring - if there wasn’t the 24-90’s plasticity, very pronounced even up to 90mm despite the focal length's compression. It renders faces on the slimmer side, amplifies face characteristics due to its plasticity (3d-pop, hate that term) and is gentle to the skin in terms of sharpness. But there is no mushiness or cheap looking glare at all, even with strong backlight.

I wouldn’t use it for beauty shots. I find older Leica glass better suited, such as the 50ies from the 60ies to the 80ies, the fabulous 60mm Elmarit R, the famous 80mm Summilux or the 35mm Summicron R and Elmarit R weirdos with their heavily bent focal plane when shot open. They render cooler, the 50mm Summicron particular cooler (the more you stop down, the cooler the lens renders), than modern Leica lenses. That helps skin tones, I find. But foremost, they all render much flatter images than modern Leica lenses, are geometrical more forgiving to faces (if that makes sense).

But the 24-90 has equally soul. And that’s why it’s a keeper for me, adding up to all the other virtues such as AF, weather sealing etc. - and being a versatile zoom on top.
 

Edited March 31, 2022 by hansvons

[Sailronin]

I bought it to use with S lenses (really the 120mm T-S Apo-Elmar) as well as M lenses.  Now I have a couple of L mount lenses but non by Leica yet.

[glenerrolrd]

I have more lenses than I can ever use ...most all the M,R,Sl and S lenses .  Right now I enjoy using my R lenses with the adapter most ...they don t produce the same flawless image quality of the SL primes but they have character .  My favorite set of lenses for the R on Sl2 kit :  19/2.8,28/2.8;35/1.4;50/1.4,80/1.4,100/2.8, APO 180/2.8 APO . I typically pick 4 out of that group for a trip with two SL2 bodies .  Carry those in an F Stop back pack  and determine the carry kit when I get there .  

Three other uses : 

              90-280 on an Sl2_S for sports (baseball and lacrosse) .  Not a Nikon Z9 or Canon R3 AF capability but what an incredible 90-280 zoom . 

             S-SL2 adapter to allow the Sl2 to function as backup to my S3 .  This is a big advantage to an S owner because you can get almost S3 quality with multishot and not have $15K invested in your back up body .  

               M Notiluxes with the M to L adapter .  Just a terrific solution but now with the new M11 VISO not as important . 

I do not use my M lenses on the Sl2 now with the M11/Viso ..why would I ? 

I know the SL primes are the answer and I should be using them .  If I was starting from scratch I would aim for the SL Prime lens set .  The zooms are terrific as well but just unpleasant to use due to size and weight .  

Just getting back to shooting every week after hiding from CV19 for two years .  The more I use the SL bodies ..the more I like them ..takes a while to get a rhythm .  

 

[matted]

On 3/31/2022 at 6:55 PM, hansvons said:

Let me know what you think of it. That's what I find:

The 24-90 belongs to Leica’s modern breed of lenses. It fits well into Leica’s today’s interpretation of a good lens: outstanding corner-to-corner sharpness, warm to neutral colour rendition, round bokeh orbs, harmonic focus fall-off, straight focal plane from open rose all the way up to f 16, hardly any flaring, delicate contrast, you name it. 

So far, so boring - if there wasn’t the 24-90’s plasticity, very pronounced even up to 90mm despite the focal length's compression. It renders faces on the slimmer side, amplifies face characteristics due to its plasticity (3d-pop, hate that term) and is gentle to the skin in terms of sharpness. But there is no mushiness or cheap looking glare at all, even with strong backlight.

I wouldn’t use it for beauty shots. I find older Leica glass better suited, such as the 50ies from the 60ies to the 80ies, the fabulous 60mm Elmarit R, the famous 80mm Summilux or the 35mm Summicron R and Elmarit R weirdos with their heavily bent focal plane when shot open. They render cooler, the 50mm Summicron particular cooler (the more you stop down, the cooler the lens renders), than modern Leica lenses. That helps skin tones, I find. But foremost, they all render much flatter images than modern Leica lenses, are geometrical more forgiving to faces (if that makes sense).

But the 24-90 has equally soul. And that’s why it’s a keeper for me, adding up to all the other virtues such as AF, weather sealing etc. - and being a versatile zoom on top.
 

Based in no small part on your writings here and elsewhere I’m probably going to add a few R lenses to my kit pretty soon. They seem to be a “cheap” (at least in Leica terms) way to flesh out my lens kit a little more, especially for video use. I was planning on using my M lenses for video, and I certainly will, but the R lenses will play better with a follow focus and have better minimum focus distances. I am eyeballing a 50 Summicron-R as they seem to be quite cheap, and also perhaps a 28 Elmarit and 90 Elmarit, in addition to the 80-200/4 zoom. The 35 Summicron and Elmarit seem to be quite a bit more expensive so I will add one of the two later. I just bought 2 35s for my M so I am banning myself from buying any more 35s for a while!

 

60mm Macro and 100mm macro are also on the table for me. 

[hansvons]

10 hours ago, matted said:

Based in no small part on your writings here and elsewhere I’m probably going to add a few R lenses to my kit pretty soon.

I thought along the same lines. I own this little set: 28mm Elmarit R, 35mm Elmarit R, 50mm Summicron R, 60mm Elmarit Macro, 90mm Elmarit R and soon the 180mm Elmarit s2. All lenses are early versions because with that set, I'm looking for character resembled through homogenous flares, bent focus planes, cooler rendering, tender glowing highlights,  etc... All virtues you want for moody filmmaking.

Contrary to the general belief that Elmarit series Leica lenses are inferior, they are not. They are just not as fast as their Summilux and Summicron siblings. That can be an issue in stills lands, but the f 2,8 as the fastest stop isn't much of a problem in video. The classic f-stop for interior shots is T 2,8 - on an S-35mm sensor in cinematography. Anything faster will cause a shallower depth of field and less sharp footage until unusability. Shooting f 1,4 in moving pictures only rewards good results when using ultra-fast wide-angle lenses such as the 15mm Masterprime.

Since the Sl2 (-S) is a FF camera, and above experiences in mind, moving pictures' f 2,8 is plenty fast (roughly resembling f 2,0 in S-35mm cinematography). The question is, how good are the Elmarit R lenses at open rose? The Elmarit 60mm Macro is as sharp as the Summicron 50mm at F 2,8. From that perspective, the Elmarit range is an excellent option for soulful and relatively cheap tiny makeshift cine primes.

As your first R lens, I like to entrust the 60mm Elmarit to you. It's a wonderful lens. A lifelong keeper.

[Archiver]

On 4/2/2022 at 9:34 PM, hansvons said:

I thought along the same lines. I own this little set: 28mm Elmarit R, 35mm Elmarit R, 50mm Summicron R, 60mm Elmarit Macro, 90mm Elmarit R and soon the 180mm Elmarit s2. All lenses are early versions because with that set, I'm looking for character resembled through homogenous flares, bent focus planes, cooler rendering, tender glowing highlights,  etc... All virtues you want for moody filmmaking.

Contrary to the general belief that Elmarit series Leica lenses are inferior, they are not. They are just not as fast as their Summilux and Summicron siblings. That can be an issue in stills lands, but the f 2,8 as the fastest stop isn't much of a problem in video. The classic f-stop for interior shots is T 2,8 - on an S-35mm sensor in cinematography. Anything faster will cause a shallower depth of field and less sharp footage until unusability. Shooting f 1,4 in moving pictures only rewards good results when using ultra-fast wide-angle lenses such as the 15mm Masterprime.

Since the Sl2 (-S) is a FF camera, and above experiences in mind, moving pictures' f 2,8 is plenty fast (roughly resembling f 2,0 in S-35mm cinematography). The question is, how good are the Elmarit R lenses at open rose? The Elmarit 60mm Macro is as sharp as the Summicron 50mm at F 2,8. From that perspective, the Elmarit range is an excellent option for soulful and relatively cheap tiny makeshift cine primes.

As your first R lens, I like to entrust the 60mm Elmarit to you. It's a wonderful lens. A lifelong keeper.

This is exactly the kind of information I want to know. I've been thinking about a set of Summicron and Elmarit lenses for the better part of a year as a complement/upgrade to my Minolta set of 24/2.8 MD, 35/2.8 W Rokkor MD III, 50/1.4 MC Rokkor and 135/2.8 Tele Rokkor. I also use M lenses like the Distagon 35/1.4 and Summicron M 50 for video work on my Panasonic S5, which render incredibly, but I would like shorter MFD and a bit longer focus throw. My plan is the Elmarit 28, Summicron 35, Summicron 50 and/or Macro Elmarit 60, Elmarit 90 and perhaps Macro Elmarit 100/4.

[hansvons]

13 minutes ago, Archiver said:

 My plan is the Elmarit 28, Summicron 35, Summicron 50 and/or Macro Elmarit 60, Elmarit 90 and perhaps Macro Elmarit 100/4.

Sounds like a plan. But you'll be surprised how expensive the 35mm Summicron R is. Approx as much as all the other lenses together and more. The 35mm R's (I can't speak of the Summilux) are somewhat of oddballs. They vignette heavily at F 2,8 and show a pretty bent focus plane in medium closeup distance. If you don't want that strong vintage feeling, the vignetting needs some adjustment in post. That's neither an issue with video nor with stills. But bent focus plane is more of a problem with stills if you focus in the middle of the frame and then re-composition because you cannot correct the slightly shifting focus in post. Again, in video not much of an issue because the pictures are moving and slightly occurring softness in faces will be somewhat compensated by the movements. But if that doesn't shock you, the 35mm R rewards you with tons of soul (and the bent focus plane isn't as bad as it may sound).

For FF, I'd advise the 60mm Elmarit instead of the 50mm Summicron, other than you are specifically looking for halation in strong highlights at f 2.0 (the famous Leica-glow). But since a 50mm Summicron in good working condition is a bargain and has its place, I'd get both. 

 

 

[matted]

That plan is incredibly close to my plan, save for the 35 Summicron due to the price as Hans alluded to. Unfortunately the local 50 Summicron-R I was eyeballing was pulled before the auction ended. There is an abundance of these around though so I'm not worried.

 

Thanks Hans for putting the 60 Macro on my radar. I think I will be picking up the 60 and 100 Macros as they will be useful for both stills and video, and then adding the 28 Elmarit, 50 Summicron, and 90 Elmarit strictly for video work.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[IkarusJohn]

I wanted to be able to use my M lenses with an EVF camera, with the option of AF , zooms and macro, so I got the SL and 24-90 zoom. Loved it, and it was great with my M lenses.  I then added the 16-35 zoom, 50 Summilux-SL, 75 APO Summicron-SL and 90-280 zoom.  All fabulous lenses. Then I looked at my equipment, shook my head and sold all the SL lenses, except the 24-90 zoom.

Now, I have that one AF zoom, my M lenses (21-75) and an APO Elmarit-R 180/2.8 and couldn’t be happier. There’s no question in my mind that the SL primes are better in all respects (other than size, and mechanical manual focus) than the M lenses of all focal lengths. The 50 Summilux-SL is especially good. But, we’re dancing on the head of a pin.  I love my M system, and the SL is a great universal body. But one all weather, AF zoom lens is enough; and the 180 Elmarit is one of Leica’s great lenses, surpassed only by the 280/4.