Summicron 90mm SL vs. Sigma 85 DG DN

[sillbeers15]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, Almizilero said:

Well, if we learned anything from this holy war ... erm ... thread, then that “better” is relative. I kept the Summicron because that focal length is my favourite and I did something I normally don't do. I pixelpeeped so long until I was sure that the Leica had some distinguishing qualities the Sigma could not bring to the table. Mainly, that 3D pop in every other image that Sigma couldn't match even at F/1.4.

BUT: The Sigma has the 1.4 aperture. Therefore it can blur the background better and the blur is definitely to my eyes more pleasing than that of the Summicron. Even stopped down to F/2. And the Sigma is only 1/5 of the price of the Summicron, so that would make it better for most people. It's fast, it's sharp, has great contrast and flare resistance. At the price, it's brilliant! Yes, the Summicron has even better microcontrast and that Leica pop. That might be worth a lot to people, it was to me for this one lens. My other lenses are Sigma. And even one Panasonic

So, I don't really get what your point is, you say you've owned and disliked Sigma, but maybe only back in the 90s? They've come a looooooong way since then. The 85/1.4 DG DN is absolutley amazing and the 35/1.2 is an unmatched masterpiece. So yeah, go out and do your own real world comparisons! You might be surprised. Unless, of course, you approach it with that Sigma is shite mindset ...

I’ve heard lot’s of good things about the Sigma 85mm F1.4. Similar great comments about the lens from many other users. I was so close to paying for it after trying it in the store. The last minute pull back was I felt I wanted to utilise my SL75mm more. It is my favourite portrait lens on my SL2 as the color, blending & fall off is just so beautiful on the SL2 sensor. Enlarging the eye of the subject reveals the level of sharpness without disappointment. All great due to the effective & fast eye detect AF firmware update by Leica few months ago. This efficient AF attribute now makes me not want to mount my Noctilux 0.95 on my SL2 as it means I have to do manual focus. Coming back to Sigma 85mm F1.4, the favourable pricing of such a great lens actually disfavoured itself making some Leica users doubt its value. Today when it is so easy to fill light to subject via OCF on TTL ( unlike a decade ago when TTL was so much inconstant), the micro contrast you mentioned offered by Leica SL series lenses seem to diminish in value on portraiture application. Don’t get me wrong, I see my SL16-35 giving me the micro constraint my WATE cannot offer…and in landscape applications, it would be almost impossible for me to add light. However the lenses I now desire to add for my SL2 are Sigma 35mm F1.2 & 105mm F1.4 for portraiture applications which Leica has no equivalent to offer.

[Advertisement]

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

[Kristofferpaulsen]

On 11/26/2022 at 5:52 AM, Almizilero said:

Well, if we learned anything from this holy war ... erm ... thread, then that “better” is relative. I kept the Summicron because that focal length is my favourite and I did something I normally don't do. I pixelpeeped so long until I was sure that the Leica had some distinguishing qualities the Sigma could not bring to the table. Mainly, that 3D pop in every other image that Sigma couldn't match even at F/1.4.

BUT: The Sigma has the 1.4 aperture. Therefore it can blur the background better and the blur is definitely to my eyes more pleasing than that of the Summicron. Even stopped down to F/2. And the Sigma is only 1/5 of the price of the Summicron, so that would make it better for most people. It's fast, it's sharp, has great contrast and flare resistance. At the price, it's brilliant! Yes, the Summicron has even better microcontrast and that Leica pop. That might be worth a lot to people, it was to me for this one lens. My other lenses are Sigma. And even one Panasonic

So, I don't really get what your point is, you say you've owned and disliked Sigma, but maybe only back in the 90s? They've come a looooooong way since then. The 85/1.4 DG DN is absolutley amazing and the 35/1.2 is an unmatched masterpiece. So yeah, go out and do your own real world comparisons! You might be surprised. Unless, of course, you approach it with that Sigma is shite mindset ...

haha! No no. I owned the Canon Sigma ART 50.. and it was just always a little lacking compared to the Canon L's.. Like i'd go between the 35 and the 85, and whenever i got back to the Canon it was like a sigh of relief in my eyes. I know that's not what people on Leica forums who want scientific reasons, but there it is. there was just something not a nice. Oh and also it was a shit focuser. I remember being on a job and trying to get it to focus wide open and it was a nightmare. I eventually just plopped out the extra cash and got the Canon 1.2.. possibly not as sharp, but was just more pleasing all round.. Colours, contrast etc. Having said that I dont think I ever shot it wide open, so yeah. 

 

I always just laugh about when I was at college and the teacher told a story about some stupid like, 50-500 or something like that lens, and looking at photodo (i guess that was an older version of dxomark?) and looking at the scores, "cor! 4 out of 5..!? really? ohh wait, no that's .4 out of 5..!". 

So i dunno. Sure, they're fine.. but the extra money for Leica isn't for nothing. 

 

 

[Photoworks]

11 hours ago, Kristofferpaulsen said:

haha! No no. I owned the Canon Sigma ART 50.. and it was just always a little lacking compared to the Canon L's.. Like i'd go between the 35 and the 85, and whenever i got back to the Canon it was like a sigh of relief in my eyes. I know that's not what people on Leica forums who want scientific reasons, but there it is. there was just something not a nice. Oh and also it was a shit focuser. I remember being on a job and trying to get it to focus wide open and it was a nightmare. I eventually just plopped out the extra cash and got the Canon 1.2.. possibly not as sharp, but was just more pleasing all round.. Colours, contrast etc. Having said that I dont think I ever shot it wide open, so yeah. 

 

I always just laugh about when I was at college and the teacher told a story about some stupid like, 50-500 or something like that lens, and looking at photodo (i guess that was an older version of dxomark?) and looking at the scores, "cor! 4 out of 5..!? really? ohh wait, no that's .4 out of 5..!". 

So i dunno. Sure, they're fine.. but the extra money for Leica isn't for nothing. 

 

 

you are probably talking about the sigma DSLR lenses. that was a different Era.

Most modern lenses (mirrorless) by most manufactures are calculated by computer assistance, and canon , sigma, Sony have comparable quality to Sl Leica lenses in 2-3% difference .

Even Leica is confident to partner with sigma  and is happy to send costumers over to sigma for lenses they don't make.

[Simone_DF]

The Leica SL 24-70 is just a rebranded Sigma 24-70 with a different barrel. If Leica thinks it's good enough for them to just slap a red dot and a different housing barrel, then the Sigmas are not that bad

[Kristofferpaulsen]

On 11/26/2022 at 2:25 PM, sillbeers15 said:

I’ve heard lot’s of good things about the Sigma 85mm F1.4. Similar great comments about the lens from many other users. I was so close to paying for it after trying it in the store. The last minute pull back was I felt I wanted to utilise my SL75mm more. It is my favourite portrait lens on my SL2 as the color, blending & fall off is just so beautiful on the SL2 sensor. Enlarging the eye of the subject reveals the level of sharpness without disappointment. All great due to the effective & fast eye detect AF firmware update by Leica few months ago. This efficient AF attribute now makes me not want to mount my Noctilux 0.95 on my SL2 as it means I have to do manual focus. Coming back to Sigma 85mm F1.4, the favourable pricing of such a great lens actually disfavoured itself making some Leica users doubt its value. Today when it is so easy to fill light to subject via OCF on TTL ( unlike a decade ago when TTL was so much inconstant), the micro contrast you mentioned offered by Leica SL series lenses seem to diminish in value on portraiture application. Don’t get me wrong, I see my SL16-35 giving me the micro constraint my WATE cannot offer…and in landscape applications, it would be almost impossible for me to add light. However the lenses I now desire to add for my SL2 are Sigma 35mm F1.2 & 105mm F1.4 for portraiture applications which Leica has no equivalent to offer.

Oh man i had such buyers regret for a week or two after buying my 90mm when i found myself at 75 on my 24-90 sooo much.. still so interested in that lens. Gotta try it. I find myself not finding going that wide open necessary? And the gorgeous look at feel of the 90 more than makes up for not going to 1.4, imo. I really should try the sigma though..

[Kristofferpaulsen]

I was just sharing some photos on instagram that I shot of cricketer Sam Curran for the times, and it occurred to me one of them is a great example of what I like about the 90mm..

 

Full image here https://www.dropbox.com/s/nnquj4m1g2c1c4i/221123_SamCurran_Shot04_58421_CREDIT_KRISTOFFER_PAULSEN.jpg?dl=0

I love how i just plucks the subjects eyes and face from the scene and lets everything drop off, and the feel is just so beautiful. It’s also so tiny and unassuming, so lovely for getting in close to people. The minimum focussing is also rather useful. I find I’m using it a lot on food as well. The vivacity and richness of colour is gorgeous. Needless to say, it’s devastatingly sharp, like you crop in and it’s all just “there”.

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!

[insomnia]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

that's at least 0.8 out of 5

[Kristofferpaulsen]

7 minutes ago, insomnia said:

that's at least 0.8 out of 5

Ha, wow. 

[Planetwide]

The SL 90mm is a superb lens, as is the Sigma. It comes down to whether you want f2.0 or F1.4 - or both  These are from the SL 90mm F2

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 December 14, 2022 by Planetwide

[jplomley]

Bumping this thread up....anyone use the SIGMA 105/1.4 DG HSM on the SL2? Having bought the 50/1.2 DG DN Art recently, I am floored by the performance (and yes, I own 21-35-75 APO's, so I understand the benchmark) to the point I now want to try the 105/1.4......but seems it is unavailable in DG DN.

[Dr. G]

13 hours ago, jplomley said:

Bumping this thread up....anyone use the SIGMA 105/1.4 DG HSM on the SL2? Having bought the 50/1.2 DG DN Art recently, I am floored by the performance (and yes, I own 21-35-75 APO's, so I understand the benchmark) to the point I now want to try the 105/1.4......but seems it is unavailable in DG DN.

Not on the SL series (I had the SL2, SL2-S and now SL3) but had it for E mount when I shot Sony (a7r iv, a1, a9 ii). It is a spectacular lens but it is very big and very heavy.  It makes the 50mm Summilux SL feel like an M lens in comparison.  
 

FWIW, I just got the Sigma 50 1.2 and am planning on shooting it against my Summilux-SL and 50mm APO Summicron-SL to see if it can replace both.  I also own the 21/35/75 APO SL lenses (so we understand the same benchmark).

Edited June 30, 2024 by Dr. G

[Almizilero]

vor 47 Minuten schrieb Dr. G:

Not on the SL series (I had the SL2, SL2-S and now SL3) but had it for E mount when I shot Sony (a7r iv, a1, a9 ii). It is a spectacular lens but it is very big and very heavy.  It makes the 50mm Summilux SL feel like an M lens in comparison.  
 

FWIW, I just got the Sigma 50 1.2 and am planning on shooting it against my Summilux-SL and 50mm APO Summicron-SL to see if it can replace both.  I also own the 21/35/75 APO SL lenses (so we understand the same benchmark).

Same with me. The results of the 105/1.4 are stunning, but I rarely used an my Sonys due to the size. Especially after the new 85 came out. Let's hope for a smaller/lighter DN version.