Leica 35mm APO SL mount or 35mm M Lens 1.4 for SL system

[daned]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Need some advice whether to get the 35mm L mount APO or the M mount 35mm 1.4 lens for the SL3. 
any pluses minuses for going the M route for lenses compared to the bulky L mount.

Idea eventually to get in the M system so don’t have to get lens again

[la1402]

I plan to use my incoming 😃 SL3 with my M lenses. Having said that, I have mixed emotions about my Summilux 35 FLE. The results vary between super impressive and quite harsh, while it is big on the M11 though small on the SL. I am thinking about replacing it with a pre-owned SL 35 APO AND a Ultron 35 ( I don’t really need 1.4). I may still have money left after that. But first I will see how things work over the next weeks. 

[Advertisement]

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

[tomasis7]

M lenses hold good value for very long. Also, it is nice to play with lenses for their character. I use M lenses on the SL body. 

I'm happy to exploit the character out of the lenses from the Mandler era. It depends on what you want from a lens. Clinically sharp and lack of character or vice-versa. 

I also don't want to change lenses too often. The choice for the SL body is given due to compatibility and design. I got SL instead of Sony and Nikon as I knew it'd work well with M lenses. EVF is cool as you could go with 135mm eller superwide lenses without struggle. 

[Photoworks]

There is no simple answer.

there are so many 35 Lux lenses, new and used. there are SL 35 apo and 35 ASPH SL.

But it is a choice between 1.4 and f2. 

dreamy at 1.4 and sharp at 2-2.8 get 35 FLE

35 ASPH  SL is a good lens with some character wide open. More like a normal lens

35 APO comes in M and SL. and they are both very sharp, and detail-rich.

the right answer is: get both summilux-m 35 and SL APO 35

[dpitt]

Even though I almost exclusively use Leica R and M lenses on my SL body, I think it is not really ideal to buy an M lens just for use on the SL3.

Yes, M lenses are excellent and they are very compact and light.
And also, the SL3 is probably the best non M body to use them on.

But still the M bodies and sensors are the best match.

Not only that but also there is kind of a mismatch:

1. M lenses size and weight advantage is negated by the large and heavy SL body
2. M lenses are designed for RF. This means that part of the production effort is not used on the SL.
   Worse, because of the RF limitations M lenses in general have a MFD of 0,7m or even 1m, and because they need to be small, some extra compromises are made in the design. This means that either the lens will be more expensive for the same performance or just not equal in performance.
3. SL native lenses play in a different league. They do not have the restrictions and design concerns involved with M lenses and are AF.
   IMO, the SL lenses are the future for Leica SL systems.
4. For vintage lenses. They do have their charm. Both M and R lenses perform equally well on the SL range. But the R lenses are much cheaper than their counterparts and do not have the MFD restrictions. They are also  bigger and heavier than M lenses, but on the SL body, the differences are negligible IMO.
   In R lenses there are some very good zoom and macro options too.
   Compared to the Leica SL range, any R lens in the same FL will look tiny and light.

So unless you have or intend to have an M body, using an R lens on the SL makes more sense to me. Of course, the R lens range was discontinued in 2009. So if you want the latest in Lecia design, it is either M or SL.

Edited March 21 by dpitt