24-90 or 24-70

[James1975]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the opportunity to buy a brand new SL 24-90 for only 1300€ more than the newer 24-70. I am aware of the greater weight and non constant aperture. But for pure image quality would you guys recommend it, or is the difference negligible? I’ve been going back and forth on it. 
it would be used with the SL2. 

[LeicaR10]

James1975,  Based on my experience with the SL zooms to include the 24-90, the lens is better than the 24-70.  If you really need a constant aperture, then 24-70 is answer.  If you want a longer reach, excellent close up capability and better resolving, the 24-90 is another choice.  IMO, the 24-90 is the better choice.  The good news, you have two choices.  r/ Mark

PS  These two links might help you decide on photographs created by each lens.

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=4297&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=343&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Edited June 29, 2023 by LeicaR10

[James1975]

33 minutes ago, LeicaR10 said:

James1975,  Based on my experience with the SL zooms to include the 24-90, the lens is better than the 24-70.  If you really need a constant aperture, then 24-70 is answer.  If you want a longer reach, excellent close up capability and better resolving, the 24-90 is another choice.  IMO, the 24-90 is the better choice.  The good news, you have two choices.  r/ Mark

PS  These two links might help you decide on photographs created by each lens.

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=4297&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=343&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Many thanks. I hate choices 😂

Those links are very useful. The 24-70 gallery on Leica’s site is shockingly poor and really put me off the lens. The 90 looks much more interesting to me. 

[buj]

24-90 for sure!

 

[LeicaR10]

James1975,  Depending on your genre of photography, the 24-90 might well be more useful to you.  Its a very good lens.  I am going to send you a PM for some ideas.  r/ Mark

[James1975]

Just now, LeicaR10 said:

James1975,  Depending on your genre of photography, the 24-90 might well be more useful to you.  Its a very good lens.  I am going to send you a PM for some ideas.  r/ Mark

Portrait, landscape, street, documentary. But I have a Q3 and M11M as well. So the SL2 with the zoom (and my adapted M lenses) will be used for the pro stuff and things with purpose and not a grab and go. Hence the weight being a non-issue. 
I think I’ll pick up the new 100-400 as well for moon and landscape shots even though I won’t use it much. 

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

James1975,  The combo of the 24-90 and 100-400 will be all the SL lenses you will need for those genres.  r/ Mark

[TeleElmar135mm]

 

I go with teh 24-90. Look at Fred Mirinda, there was a comparison between the 24/90 and the 24/70. Or look at red dot videos and the quality of the 24/90

[LocalHero1953]

I haven't tried the 24-70, but I wouldn't be without those extra 20mm on the 24-90.

[hansvons]

The 24-90 is the best standard zoom in the industry. It's also the largest and most expensive. It renders highly dimensional images and is amazingly sharp for a zoom. I owned it for three years and sold it because I no longer need a zoom lens for my work. However, I'd repurchase it without hesitation if I were again in the market for a standard zoom.

In Europe, you can find them used in good condition for 2,5 K EUR.

[northernlights]

I beg to differ. In Singapore, second hand shops are stuck with 24-90s and 24-70s

i owned and sold the 24-90 twice. Buy it only if you have a need for zooms (working pro in weddings, events) and landscapist. It’s too heavy and large  

If none, i really advise you consider summicron APO primes. They are lighter and sharper. 

[Stuart Richardson]

It’s an extremely good zoom, but as said above, the primes are just that much better and easier to handle…but anyway, that is an age old debate. 

[Mikko Kankainen]

I use 24-70 professionally and I think that it is as good as my former Canon L zooms were. I am very pleased with it. I use it in studio and corporate shoots a lot. And the weather sealing has also been tested. 
I have never shot with 24-90 but it is great for sure. 

[PeterBoyadjian]

My 2nd shooter at weddings uses a sigma 24-70 while I have the 24-90. He consistently says man I wish I had a little more reach. 
 

24-70 also looks a little softer to my eyes, 24-90 has that leica magic. Sl apo lenses still rule all. 

[mumu]

If you have the need for a zoom lens and you are in the L—Mount Alliance, go for the 24—90, no doubt. I use it myselfe since years and it is my workehorse. It is more than perfect in built quality, in sharpness, in color rendering, etc.

[Mikko Kankainen]

One example from yesterday, one of many shots but one to show the sharpness of 24-70. And may I say I love the colors and build quality of this lens. I owned it for a few months but shot with it about 10 000 photos and love it. I do prefer primes but there is a place for quality, compact zoom lens.

 

 

 

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 June 29, 2023 by Mikko Kankainen

[Jeff S]

19 hours ago, James1975 said:

 Hence the weight being a non-issue. 
 

If weight and size are non-issues, I can’t think of a good reason not to choose the 24-90 (price aside). It’s a superb zoom, optically and functionally.
 

The 90-280 is even better optically, but mine gets too infrequent use on my SL2 and will be sold. The 24-90 is all I really need as a complement to my M10 Monochrom and M10-R.  I keep my M lenses (28/35/50) on my M bodies, RF only, and use the SL2 for different, complementary circumstances. 

Jeff

[robb]

My 24-90 is very sharp across the field even wide open from 24 to about 60mm.  Past that you will need to stop down 1 or two stops to keep it looking nice.  Even then it is not as sharp as the apo summicron 75 and 90.  But if you want to only carry one lens, and realize this need on the long end, you are good to go.  Most of my images in the field with this lens is set to 5.6-8.  Looks great.  I’ve also shot it at 90 wide open but it’s just not as razor sharp as I prefer… maybe that’s a good thing if you are shooting portraits, but I am always wanting the sharpest results possible.  It was focusing in front of my portrait subjects about 6-8” closer than the focusing point so I’ve sent it to Leica to revise.

I’m not as big a fan of the 24-70 because of the change in zoomtwist orientation.  I’d rather all my lenses or the same way, and this being an adapted lens, it doesn’t match the others.  

Robb

[tom0511]

I own both and if I use a zoom (overall I prefer primes) I reach for the 2470 more often. reach and iq of the 2490 might be better, but in terms of size the 2470 feels more adequate for a flexible midrange zoom.

the focal length range of the 2490 is quite useful however

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[DadDadDaddyo]

I agree with all the endorsements of the 24-90: a wonderful lens, hefty, but superb. 

As for constant aperture: if I correctly understand what I've read (and I hope for clarifications if not), on many constant aperture lenses that constancy is achieved simply by reducing the physical aperture of the barrel to mask the optical formula's largest aperture to the point at which the achieved largest aperture no longer changes with focal length. 

In other words, a variable aperture design simply gets the greatest effective aperture achievable by the optical formula, even if it means that formal varies by focal length.

Sounds like a feature to me, not a bug. 

Edited July 2, 2023 by DadDadDaddyo