SL2 and wideangle M lenses

[Malabito]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 hours ago, PDP said:

Thanks for all these helpful comments and hints. Finally I gave back the 18mm, fair approach from Leica! Really!

I tested the 16-35 from Leica, the above mentioned Sigma and the Lumix 16-35. Finally the Lumix made the race for one simple reason: weight. The Leica and the Sigma might be slightly better, but 1.2 kg are too heavy. The Lumix is certified by Leica (whatever that means), it is relatively compact and price is also ok. As I will use it anyhow between 16-21mm, which means not always, the money per picture rate seems good. There is one nice feature: the manual focus clutch.

IQ? It is good, really good, sharp, good contrasts and colors close to those of Leica. My SL2 handles the lens quite good, no issues with communication camera to lens.

I am also now on the same boat, searching for a wide-angle lens, don't need extreme wide, 21mm will be good enough. 

Trying to decide between the Voigtlander 21mm f3.5 or 1.4, (small and great vs big and awesome) or that Panasonic, which will be functional, but it will only be useful when paired with my sl camera, and i already have a 24mm f1.8 and 35mm so it will somehow redundant.

Mind sharing images taken with the pana?

 

Thanks!

[Advertisement]

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

[PDP]

Am 27.5.2022 um 08:23 schrieb Malabito:

I am also now on the same boat, searching for a wide-angle lens, don't need extreme wide, 21mm will be good enough. 

Trying to decide between the Voigtlander 21mm f3.5 or 1.4, (small and great vs big and awesome) or that Panasonic, which will be functional, but it will only be useful when paired with my sl camera, and i already have a 24mm f1.8 and 35mm so it will somehow redundant.

Mind sharing images taken with the pana?

 

Thanks!

OK, here some further information and personal views on the LUMIX 4.0 16-35.

• Lens is relatively light and compact and I have not faced any issues in communication with my SL2. I found the respective lens-profile on all pictures when opening LR. What I really like is the so called manual focus clutch allowingyou to focus manually. x The SL2 automatically provides a larger view of the focus area. Lens has no image stabilization, but who need that wide-angle. Aurofucus is precise and fast, but not such an issue for my use of the lens. Lens is made of plastics, but feels quite robust.
• My focus with this lens is wide-angle, meaning 16-21mm, for 28 and 35 I have M-lenses. I am happy with image quality. Attached a picture I made at F8 with 16mm. I reduced size to upload it here, but in fact one can count bricks on the wall and leaves. I have not made more than some auto-adjustments in LR.
  When it comes to 16mm I noticed some minor IQ-issues. For example leaves when having light behind them are not perfectly sharp at the edges of the picture. But when stopping down to F8 the image quality is really fine. I noticed that IQ in edges and corners is by far better than with the 18mm M-lens, by far better! I expect to make landscape with tripod anyhow, so my standard will be F8 and I am on save side.
  By the way: I bought the peak design travel tripod (all version) and I am really impressed.
• Colors are quite close to what I expect from a Leica-lens.
• I would not say that the lens has any kund of character or offers pictures where people see a specific look. For me it is a simple workhorse for landscape.
• I do not have an issue with F4, do not need more and I am not keen to carry more when climbing up to some locations. For sure the lens is not a Bokeh-champion and I would never use it for portraits, but F8 and short distance to subject are quite OK. Closest distance to a subject is 25cm, that is not so bad when shooting some flowers. The attached picture is handheld at 35mm against the sun, no piece of art, just a stupid test shot. But again result is OK.
• I've read positive reviews of this lens. Thus, the rationale for this lens was weight and compactness. The competitors from Sigma and Leica are heavier. I expect the Leica 16-35 to perform better, I saw pictures where it manages tricky situations quite well, but it simply does not feel balanced on the camera, at least not for me.

For my demand the lens is a good choice and it performs by far better than M-super wide-angle on my SL2 (I do not have a M-camera). I would recommend it for that specific use, but for 28 or 35mm the M-lenses have more character.

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!

[Photoworks]

I have been using the 21mm 3.4 on the SL2 for years, it is a lens that has less distortion then the tilt shift lenses.

Then I got the 20-60 zoom from Panasonic . After testing it with the 21 SEM I decided to use the Panasonic  when I need 20mm.

here is a sample of the 20-60. this shot didn't get any lens correction.

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!

 

[AZN]

16 hours ago, Photoworks said:

here is a sample of the 20-60.

Everything I have read about the Lumix S 20-60mm F3.5-5.6 is quite positive, except for the maximum aperture, which is f5.6 at the long end.  Ouch.  Better bring lots and lots and lots of light =/

[Malabito]

On 5/28/2022 at 11:33 AM, PDP said:

OK, here some further information and personal views on the LUMIX 4.0 16-35.

• Lens is relatively light and compact and I have not faced any issues in communication with my SL2. I found the respective lens-profile on all pictures when opening LR. What I really like is the so called manual focus clutch allowingyou to focus manually. x The SL2 automatically provides a larger view of the focus area. Lens has no image stabilization, but who need that wide-angle. Aurofucus is precise and fast, but not such an issue for my use of the lens. Lens is made of plastics, but feels quite robust.
• My focus with this lens is wide-angle, meaning 16-21mm, for 28 and 35 I have M-lenses. I am happy with image quality. Attached a picture I made at F8 with 16mm. I reduced size to upload it here, but in fact one can count bricks on the wall and leaves. I have not made more than some auto-adjustments in LR.
  When it comes to 16mm I noticed some minor IQ-issues. For example leaves when having light behind them are not perfectly sharp at the edges of the picture. But when stopping down to F8 the image quality is really fine. I noticed that IQ in edges and corners is by far better than with the 18mm M-lens, by far better! I expect to make landscape with tripod anyhow, so my standard will be F8 and I am on save side.
  By the way: I bought the peak design travel tripod (all version) and I am really impressed.
• Colors are quite close to what I expect from a Leica-lens.
• I would not say that the lens has any kund of character or offers pictures where people see a specific look. For me it is a simple workhorse for landscape.
• I do not have an issue with F4, do not need more and I am not keen to carry more when climbing up to some locations. For sure the lens is not a Bokeh-champion and I would never use it for portraits, but F8 and short distance to subject are quite OK. Closest distance to a subject is 25cm, that is not so bad when shooting some flowers. The attached picture is handheld at 35mm against the sun, no piece of art, just a stupid test shot. But again result is OK.
• I've read positive reviews of this lens. Thus, the rationale for this lens was weight and compactness. The competitors from Sigma and Leica are heavier. I expect the Leica 16-35 to perform better, I saw pictures where it manages tricky situations quite well, but it simply does not feel balanced on the camera, at least not for me.

For my demand the lens is a good choice and it performs by far better than M-super wide-angle on my SL2 (I do not have a M-camera). I would recommend it for that specific use, but for 28 or 35mm the M-lenses have more character.

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!

Those look like very nice images, seems like the pana 1635mm f4 is a winner. I ended up going for the Voigtlander 21mm f3.5, not because i think it's a better lens, but due to size and the fact that i could use in my m and sl, and in the sl image quality was the same as using the lens on my m.