Apo 35mm M mount Vs L mount

[BritDoc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

After being a long term Nikon AF shooter, I now have an M10, SL2, along with asph 35mm summicron M lens, and fle 35. I love using the M glass with SL2 with the adaptor. Manual focus is a joy and I have no issues using it. However on many occasions, it feels nice to be able to just let the camera do the hard work, as I have done with D850.
I am looking at the apo versions of the two new summicrons. 
Sure, some have them both. Or have used or read proper reviews. I couldn’t find any. 
While price is a consideration, which apo 35 lens would do (much) better on SL2 body and possibly future SL3 body or even a monochrome version?

Logically the SL apo summicron should be an easier option to choose, due to the cheaper and more advantageous AF ability, I would like to explore before investing, as perhaps my last lens purchase of only one.

Thanks and I apologise if this has been already discussed but my sincere search did not reveal answers to my query and hence this long post.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

I haven’t had the Apo M 35, just the FLE, and I now have the 35SL. The latter is a real step up from the FLE but I can’t answer for the Apo M. I can say, though, that you should not be disappointed with the 35SL, unless size is your priority. 

[LeicaS2]

According to RedDotForum on YouTube, the SL version of the 35APO is ever so slightly superior to the M version, as could be expected given it is so much larger. It is easier to obtain.  The 35M APO is a triumph of miniaturization.  While more expensive than the SL version, it will probably retain it's value better. But since you want auto-focus occasionally, Only the SL will give you that.  I have the 35 M APO. I do not have an SL.  With you already having two M versions of a 35mm lens, I would recommend your third 35mm lens be the SL. Then you have a stellar lens that is: autofocus, in stock, and spend the $3,000 savings on other gear.

If you have access to a 35mm M APO, buy it and flip it for as much as a 50% profit. Then buy the SL for your use.

[ibramr]

11 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I haven’t had the Apo M 35, just the FLE, and I now have the 35SL. The latter is a real step up from the FLE but I can’t answer for the Apo M. I can say, though, that you should not be disappointed with the 35SL, unless size is your priority. 

Times two, to the letter.  Also, the SL body and lens are a safer platform if hiking is an important part of your regimen.   Regards.  

[Jeff S]

See comparison at 1:01:20

As Peter Karbe also shows in his video presentations, the SL35 is Leica’s best technically/optically performing lens. But there’s a lot more to lens rendering and choices than MTF, edge sharpness, etc. Some obvious differences between the M and SL 35 APOs are size, weight, weather sealing, AF, MFD, etc. And how you process and display your output matters… screen vs print, size, etc.

Personally, I keep my M lenses on my M and my SL lenses on my SL2.  Different shooting experiences and requirements.  YMMV.

Jeff

 

 

 

[ravinj]

5 hours ago, BritDoc said:

it feels nice to be able to just let the camera do the hard work,

SL 35 is your answer.

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

BritDoc,   I own and use both the M 35 Apo and SL 35.  LeicaS2 in his post #3 gives a good summary between the two.  I can say from my experience the M 35 Apo renders somewhat different with the SL2.  The SL 35 resolves more and renders like all the othe SL lenses, almost "perfect".  If rendering is important to your genre of photography, you might trial or rent each before buying the lens.  It will get down to personal choice as to how you wish your photographs to render.  You can also check out this site that provides photographs taken with both lenses.  You need to check the camera used when looking at the photographs.  But it does give you a good idea how the lenses render.  

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=4280&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32    (M 35 Apo link)

Try: https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=1497&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32      (SL 35 Apo link)

Hope this helps.  r/ Mark

PS...Welcome to the Leica Forum

Edited July 24, 2022 by LeicaR10

[robb]

SL 35 if you only have one.

Robb

[Stuart Richardson]

The only disadvantage to the SL is that you cannot use it on the M, and it is a lot larger and heavier. Those are real disadvantages. The advantages of the SL is that it is far cheaper, has AF, is optically even better, and is weather sealed. If you intend to use it on the SL2, and future bodies, it makes sense to me to get the SL lens. If you are more interested in resale value and longevity, the 35mm APO M is going to be better on that front. But for optical performance and value in the here and now, the 35SL would be my choice.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Stuart Richardson

[MakinMemories]

I just recently picked up the SL35 and it might just be the 'most perfect' lens I have used. I have three of the Leica SL zooms, 16-35, 24-70 and 90-280 and they are outstanding in their own right and far superior to any zooms I have used in the past, but the SL35 is crazy good! I wanted a 'fast' prime so I first bought the Lux  SL50 1.4, very happy with that lens and love the way it renders but no doubt the SL35 is technically superior...I thought about getting the Noctilux 50mm .95 but decided to go with newer design Lux SL50, still would love to play with a Noctilux or hear from others who own both!

Bottom line: For what its worth from a Leica rookie, the SL35 is an outstanding lens! Plus you may be able to get a $500 discount code/coupon from Leica!

*Prior to joining the Leica family just this past spring, I had really only shot with Canon and Canon glass...lots of great Canon glass! 

[Guest]

Facing the same decision, with a M-Apo 35mm on perpetual backorder (already paid for it), I ended up in the interim satisfying my 35mm needs with the 35mm 1.4 Zeiss Distagon (ZM) and the Sigma DG DN 35mm 1.2 (L-mount). Since both are great lenses in their own right, unlikely to experience buyers remorse due to too much overlap with the M-APO (use case small size, close focus, slower speed) and perhaps avoid the need to buy SL35mm in addition.

[SiggiGun]

Take the 35SL and a less expensive 35mm, Lux is great. 

[AZN]

FWIW I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but there are also the M-Mount Voigtlander 35mm alternatives: Nokton f/1.2 version III or their own APO-Lanthar f/2.0.  Substantially cheaper than the Leica options, both are compact and can be purchased immediately, and you really need to be splitting hairs to complain about their optical performance.

[Photoworks]

Peter Karbe said that the Sl35 is minimal better then APO-M35.

I was not able to get APO M35 , but using the 35 FLE and 35SL  I can say they are both great lenses and enjoy using both.

But to me sharpness in not the ultimate requirement. I like the look at 1.4 and the SL lens can do that. Often 1 extra stop is important in the paces where I shoot.

I was curios about getting a 1.4 lens for SL2. I have tested the sigma 35mm 1.4 on the SL2. It is an amazing lens and better then the 35FLE on SL2. The new sigma is at f2 very similar to 35SL. there where so minimal differences that in a blind test you would not tell them apart in normal viewing.

Voigtlander has been coming out wit amazing new lenses too, but they look a little funny sometime on the outside. I love the utron 28mm and it is better then summicron-m 28.

I would get them from a store where you can test them and make your own opinion based on your needs, and return the one you don't want. I like B&H for there 30 days returns options.

 

[SJH]

I was one of the first lucky ones to get an APO M35 and at the time I had the SL35 APO also, long story but I sold the SL35 APO as I can use my M version on both my SL2s and my M11. I picked up the Sigma 35mm 1.4 DG DN and I have to say it’s extremely good, I really struggle to see any differences in normal viewing at f2.

That said a I do miss the SL35 a bit as with all thing’s Leica you do know it’s the ‘best’.  The advantage for is the APO M35 will be brilliant on both your M10 and SL2 and the Sigma’s are superb now.

[Jon Warwick]

3 hours ago, AZN said:

FWIW I'm surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but there are also the M-Mount Voigtlander 35mm alternatives: Nokton f/1.2 version III or their own APO-Lanthar f/2.0.  Substantially cheaper than the Leica options, both are compact and can be purchased immediately, and you really need to be splitting hairs to complain about their optical performance.

It’s a good point, and Reid Reviews (subscription website) did a very detailed comparison of the Leica M 35mm APO vs the Voigtlander 35mm APO Lanthar.  

FWIW, I have the 50mm version of the APO Lanthar, which is magnificent on my M10 Monochrom, and most likely will get the 35mm Lanthar too.

Whilst the image quality is impeccable, the downside of these Lanthars is they’re slightly longer than their Leica equivalents. Whether that means they’re more telecentric in design and might play more easily too on non-native SL bodies, I don’t know but maybe someone has a view?

[Simone_DF]

17 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said:

Whether that means they’re more telecentric in design and might play more easily too on non-native SL bodies, I don’t know but maybe someone has a view?

Both lenses were also released in Sony mount. I suspect wide compatibility with non-M bodies was an inherent part of the design, and one of the reasons for the slightly longer barrels compared to the Leica counterparts.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Simone_DF

[LocalHero1953]

In summary, if you want AF and the best 35, get the 35SL. If you don't want/need AF, there's a lot of choice out there!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jeff S]

43 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

In summary, if you want AF and the best 35, get the 35SL. If you don't want/need AF, there's a lot of choice out there!

Or weather sealing.

Jeff

[LocalHero1953]

Just now, Jeff S said:

Or weather sealing.

Jeff

Yes, I should have added that. I rely on weather sealing in the SL, so picking a lens without it would be a (my) mistake.