Is the Leica 35mm f/2 APO-Summicron-SL ASPH Worth It If It Isn't Used Often

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings Everyone -

Once again I would like your thoughts about buying the 35mm APO SL lens.  I own the SL2-S bundle, including the 50mm SL-Summicron F/2.0 ASPH lens which came with the kit.  It's a fine lightweight 50mm lens, and resolves better than I can photograph.  I also wanted to own a Leica branded lens, regardless of the similarities to similar lenses made by Panasonic or Sigma.

What also intrigues me is the idea of owning a "special" lens, also branded Leica, to "challenge" me to be more mindful when creating images, and striving to continually improve my composition and final result.  I toyed with the idea of getting the M to L adapter, and using manual M lenses on the SL2-S body.  The feel of a manual lens, the ability to either "zone focus", or "hypercritical focus" always appealed to me when shooting film was the only option.  I even bought a Leica Q when it was released to have the "feel/haptics" of the M body, but found the 28mm focal length too limiting for the typical images I shoot (candid people, no external lighting or setup).  

After the experience of the Q I decided that the SL body was a better choice, allowing me to overcome aging eyes and astigmatism, and getting far better results with the autofocus.  I also thought that I could always add the M lenses with an adapter later, if I decided that was the best way to progress and continue to learn.  Instead, I found a bit of frustration as the 24-90 zoom I bought was a fine overall lens, but the size/weight (as others have noted) eventually caused me to leave it home more than I expected.  The Sigma Art 50 L mount lens was also a fine lens, but it too was rather large/heavy, and a far cry from my Leica M9, M-A, M-P film cameras.  The SL2-S bundle seems to be the best "overall" body/lens for most of my shots.

Which brings me back to my question: "Is the 35mm APO Summicron-SL worth considering?  I've been a 50mm shooter as a primary lens for many decades - I tend to see the world from that focal length.  I also enjoy the "bokeh porn" when I shot film with Nikon F bodies and f/1.4 lenses.  Most of my Leica glass for the M bodies were Summicron speed - great lenses, not necessarily bokeh master.  I realize the APO 35 isn't a bokeh master either, but some of the images I've seen others create with that particular lens are stunning.  I've also noticed that second hand prices for that lens are about 60% of retail, which seems like a good value.  My thinking is that if I find the lens or focal length aren't working for me, the resale risk seems relatively modest, at least in the world of Leica pricing.

The other option is to get the M to L adapter, and add the 35mm M Summicron lens.  I was surprised that the M version of the lens is over $8K(!?), almost 60% more than the SL version.  I don't want to compare the two mounts (M versus L), but only point out that the SL version of the 35mm APO seems like a better choice for me, both financially and with the option of autofocus (remember my eyesight issue) than the M body on an adapter.  That's what's attracting me to considering adding the 35mm APO lens to my kit.  It's an APO lens, built for the L mount SL body, and, at least on a relative price basis, a lower priced entry into an APO lens.

Finally, given the cost of the 35mm SL-Summicron f2.0 ASPH (the non-APO version), which is not much less than a used APO SL lens, it seems that I might get to try a special lens at a very attractive entry price.  And the new focal length will help me see in one of the two most popular Leica option - 35 and 50mm.

Your thoughts are welcome, and appreciated.  Thank you in advance.

[Almizilero]

Hi there! When I switched to the SL-System (from Sony), I had to think about this myself. First up: The 35 APO is an amazing lens. Basically the best 35mm I've ever tried. I pretty much flirt with it all the time. I drive past Wetzlar a lot and I can't even count the times anymore that I tried it out there. So why didn't I stop messing around and just bought it?

Two reasons.
First, plain and simple: Money. I knew that I would want the SL2-S with at least one APO lens and went for the 90mm, which is the focal length I use most.
Second: The Sigma 35/1.2! I had this lens on my Sony and was dead set to get it for L-Mount as well. It is a stunning lens with lots of character, it renders just beautifully. You can get all the “bokeh porn” you want from this lens. And still, the 35 APO lurks at the back of my mind. That's how good it is. Despite the “only” F/2 aperture. In direct comparison shots, the Sigma has more bokeh (of course), but the APO, just like my 90 vs. a 85/1.4, has this 3D pop. But in the end, the Sigma still wins the amazing/money competion. If I'm ever going to buy the 35 APO, I don't think I could trade in the Sigma. That's how good THAT is.

So, to get back to your question: If, as you say, you don't use 35 to often, and you can live with the size/weigth, have a look at the Sigma! It's about 3.500 EUR cheaper than the APO (2.000 if you buy used), or 1.000 EUR cheaper than the 35/2 ASPH so you can't go wrong.

Edited March 25 by Almizilero

[Advertisement]

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

[Olaf_ZG]

The 35apo was my first native lens. Sold it, as it was not my fav f/l. Meanwhile I bought the 24-90, 90-280 and the lux. The latter is my fav f/l.

[dpitt]

If you like to focus manually, then I would consider a nice Leica R prime lens. Yes, they are getting old now. The youngest are about 20 years old. But it was good glass, on par with the M lenses from that period. And they are much cheaper than their M siblings now. The size and weight is in between that of the M and the SL lenses.

You can choose to use them with a stacked M-L and R-M adapter or with the R-L adapters. For FL below 200mm it does not matter. The R lenses have the advantage of closer minimal focus distance. M vintage lenses are limited to 0,7 cm. And of course there are some very nice zoom R lenses too.

Using the expensive Leica R-L adapter only makes sense if you have ROM lenses. Other than EXIF info it does not matter much. I use mine either stacked on my Leica M-L adapter or with a simple mechanical URTH R-L adapter. The same for my URTH R-M adapter. Both adapters are built with almost Leica quality and at a fraction of the price.

A nice Summicron 50 R F2.0 and Summicron 35 R F2.0 are obvious choices, and do not forget the wonderful Summicron 90 R F2.0. My Macro Vario-Elmar 35-70 R F4.0 is on par with the Summicrons, but of course limited to F4.0. These 4 lenses together can be had for less than one Summicron 35 APO, and yes, it is probably a bit sharper and technically superior, but the character of the vintage lenses (R and M) is to me even more desirable.

Edited March 26 by dpitt

[mokona]

12 hours ago, dpitt said:

If you like to focus manually, then I would consider a nice Leica R prime lens. Yes, they are getting old now. The youngest are about 20 years old. But it was good glass, on par with the M lenses from that period. And they are much cheaper than their M siblings now. The size and weight is in between that of the M and the SL lenses.

I like the R lenses but the size of the adapter(s) is a bit annoying

[Dr. G]

This is so tough for me.  I love the images I get with my 35 APO, but I'm primarily a 50mm shooter.  I also have the 75 APO, which is a fantastic lens.  I actually think the 35 and 75 are slightly ahead of the 50 from an image quality standpoint.  So now I have the 21, 35, 50 and 75 APO lenses and the 50 Lux.  I rarely use the 35, but when I review my images I do wish I used it more.  A 28mm may make more sense in my kit, but I can't bring myself to sell "the best lens ever made."

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dr G,   Buy the 28 and 90 as well.  Then you are covered.  Always keep this epic saying in mind:  Never sell a Leica lens...   r/ Mark

[Dr. G]

8 hours ago, LeicaR10 said:

Dr G,   Buy the 28 and 90 as well.  Then you are covered.  Always keep this epic saying in mind:  Never sell a Leica lens...   r/ Mark

I hear you, Mark.  I’ve only sold two Leica lenses, one of which was… the original 50 APO Summicron M.  I’m not going to tell you how much I sold it for, but I kick myself everyday for doing it.

I’ve also had every Q camera and sold them all.  Not because I didn’t think they were great, but because I do not like 28mm.  I’ve tried.  

[lencap]

Dr. G - I too have trouble with the 28, and also sold my Q.  I tried, but couldn't find the magic formula to get comfortable with it.  I asked the original question about the APO 35mm because the vast majority of my shots over many decades occurs with a 50mm lens.  I was thinking that since the 35APO SL lens is a Peter Karbe favorite I might give it a try.

Having said that, I don't know how much use it will get, and dislike having great gear sitting around unused.  I tried the Sigma ART 50mm SL f/1.4 and loved the images, but the weight was a factor.  I have the relatively newly released Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH (sold as part of the Leica bundle) that seems to work very well for me.  It may be a "rebranded" lens from another manufacturer, but as part of the Leica bundle the cost was $700 more than the camera body alone.  At that price I'm delighted with it, and likely would have bought a Leica branded lens anyway.  The 50mm is my preferred focal length, relatively lightweight given the L mount size, and balances better than I expected.  I toyed with getting the M mount equivalent, but wondered if it was worth it.  Likely not for image quality, and speed of capture, but I greatly miss having a "real lens" with distance markers and setting hypercritical focus and just enjoying composition.  That's why the M body always tempts me - it's the thought of fully manual controls, even though that's not quite true.

On the other extreme, despite selling the SL 24-90 Elmarit Zoom, largely because of weight, I do miss having a Leica branded lens with the equivalent of 6 prime lenses built into it.  I don't often use a 24, really find the 28 overly challenging, maybe use a 35, already have a 50, can appreciate a 75 for portraits, and maybe have a use for the 90 FL.  It's a heavy beast, and I don't really need many of the focal lengths, and it's terribly uncomfortable carrying on a strap. It likely wouldn't get much use, just like the first time I bought one.  Despite all of that, I still want one.  Not because I need it, or even want it, but more because I love how it feels in hand.  It makes me want to shoot with it.  Sounds like a typical Leica owner - I can justify anything if I work at it!

As I review each person's post, I think it's helped me clarify things a bit.  Neither the 35 APO or the 24-90 zoom will get much use, but like a rarely used tool in a large toolbox, when you need/want it, it's worth having it at hand.  Used prices for the zoom are near $3K or so, the 35mm APO a bit more perhaps.  Still from these levels the downside depreciation doesn't seem too severe.  It may be worth considering.

Thanks everyone - other opinions are welcome.

Edited March 29 by lencap

[Archiver]

From what you've written, it seems like the 35 APO wouldn't a lot of use, but you would appreciate it when you do. Note that the 35 APO is considerably heavier than the Summicron 50 SL, the reason why you gave up the Sigma 50mm ART, although the weight is less of an issue if you only use the lens rarely.

When I tried the 35 APO on the SL2S, I was astounded. My favourite camera/lens combination is the M9 with Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4, which produces stunning sharpness, clarity and rendering. But the 35 APO on the SL2S was a revelation. It was like looking into through a perfectly clear window into reality, if that makes sense. I had never seen such clean, clear images and smooth focus falloff. But it is a large, heavy lens and very costly, even secondhand.

If you are able, try a Zeiss Distagon 35 ZM on your SL2S. It has excellent build quality, manual focus, distance scales and all the niceties that come with a high quality RF lens. I sometimes use mine on my Panasonic S5 with good results.

[oculaii]

On 3/29/2024 at 8:23 AM, Archiver said:

From what you've written, it seems like the 35 APO wouldn't a lot of use, but you would appreciate it when you do. Note that the 35 APO is considerably heavier than the Summicron 50 SL, the reason why you gave up the Sigma 50mm ART, although the weight is less of an issue if you only use the lens rarely.

When I tried the 35 APO on the SL2S, I was astounded. My favourite camera/lens combination is the M9 with Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4, which produces stunning sharpness, clarity and rendering. But the 35 APO on the SL2S was a revelation. It was like looking into through a perfectly clear window into reality, if that makes sense. I had never seen such clean, clear images and smooth focus falloff. But it is a large, heavy lens and very costly, even secondhand.

If you are able, try a Zeiss Distagon 35 ZM on your SL2S. It has excellent build quality, manual focus, distance scales and all the niceties that come with a high quality RF lens. I sometimes use mine on my Panasonic S5 with good results.

I'm also interested by the SL 35mm APO.

On my L system, I only have one 35mm, the 35mm F2 DG DN. It has good micro-contrast but I don't really like the output and colors.
However from what I've seen of the 35mm APO SL, it looks really really good, I really like the output.
But on my Sony system, I also have the 35mm GM, which I like more than the Sigma, I like the output at f1.4 and the very good micro-contrast. But I need a good 35mm for my L cameras, and to be honest, I don't really like the colors of the 35mm GM (and most of my FE lenses).

Anyone used both the 35mm GM and the 35mm APO SL ? I wonder how much there is a difference between sharpness, micro-contrast and depth.
And speaking about the Zeiss 35mm ZM f1.4, I used this lens a bit and I think it has the best micro-contrast I ever seen, but I much prefer an AF lens ... Is the 35mm APO SL as good ?

[tom0511]

If you are a 50mm shooter...why get the 35 APO? I would get the 50 APO, and sell your Summicron 50.

Weight...if you carry a SL camera, are 200 or 300g really that important?

 

 

[jrp]

The 35mm APO SL is an astonishingly good lens, but it's not going to help you if you're a 50mm shooter.  If you have $ to spend, consider the new 50mm f1.2 Sigma L lens or the 50mm L Summicron, which is of comparable perfection to the 35mm.  These are suitable only if you don't rely on "character" to make your images. 

Edited 10 hours ago by jrp