Leica Vario Elmarit 24-90, keep or sell? As have Leica 35mm APO

[Dr. G]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I've had all three. A purely personal view: the 16-35 is good but perhaps I never really had the need for it - I didn't use it much. It is up for sale at ffordes. I can't imagine doing without the 24-90; I do most of what I do for others with that lens. I have the Apo 35 and 75 primes (and have had the 90), but never think of the 24-90 in the same terms - they are just that bit better. On the other hand, every time I look through the 90-280 I am gobsmacked at the crispness and colours in the EVF - I find it astonishing. Its reach, stabilisation and Apo colours are just perfect for close-ups in the theatre.

The 90-280 has been on my radar for some time.  I have nothing longer than 75 right now and every time I see images from the 90-280 I wonder why I don't yet have it.

[LocalHero1953]

4 minutes ago, Dr. G said:

The 90-280 has been on my radar for some time.  I have nothing longer than 75 right now and every time I see images from the 90-280 I wonder why I don't yet have it.

As an interesting sidelight on current partnerships and areas of expertise, it was reported here a while back that the 90-280 optical design is a Panasonic patent. Yet Panasonic has never made a lens using it. Perhaps the likely cost would have taken it out of the comfort zone for Panasonic's usual customers, while Leica and its customers do not have a problem with such pricing. It is marked 'made in Germany' as well. Even with modern supply chains, I would guess this means optical manufacture and final assembly happens in Germany, even if (e.g.) motors and electronics come from the Far East.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

22 hours ago, daned said:

Yes, I have thought about the M camera and lens but never used one and always have wondered how easy it would be to adopt to the system specially the manual focusing part.

You live in the US, so rental is easy if you’re not close to a dealer for demo.  Some bond with the RF experience; some don’t.  I did immediately, long ago.  But I use the M and SL systems for complementary needs and different shooting circumstances.

As for the original topic, I use the 24-90 almost exclusively, and sold an SL 75 for lack of use. Each person has different needs and tastes.

Jeff

[helged]

If fast AF, particularly AFc on SL3, is central to you shooting, SL24-90 is much faster than the SL-APO-Crons. I don’t have experience with the non-APO-Crons, but I understand these are fast focussing lenses as well.

[BernardC]

3 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

it was reported here a while back that the 90-280 optical design is a Panasonic patent.

LensRentals did a teardown of the 24-90 years ago, and it was is solid as any competing high-end zoom, and better than most. Obviously, Panasonic had much more experience designing modern AF zooms, they had the tooling to produce the required components, and they had the institutional knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if they designed the whole mechanical package as a sub-contractor, to Leica's specifications.

It reminds me of a similar "insider knowledge" thing many years ago, when word got out that Mamiya manufactured lens barrels for the Contax 645 lenses. This got a lot of fanboys excited, as you would expect. The reality is that you need very expensive tooling to make large lens barrels with the right level of accuracy. Mamiya had that tooling, along with spare capacity.

There is a long history of optical sub-contractors that toil in anonymity. We still don't know who built the TL lenses, and when people found-out who was building Hasselblad's XD lenses, it was a company no one had heard of (outside of industry circles). I'll bet it wasn't their only product.

I remember a story about a company that accidentally sub-contracted components to itself! They went through a broker to find the best bidder for components, and they had a division that bid on external contracts (have to keep those CNC machines busy!), so the inevitable eventually happened...

 

What's the harm, really? I know why companies don't comment on these matters: it's a distraction, and the loudest voices come from those that have the least industry knowledge. In the end, it doesn't really matter who made what, as long as it meets specifications. Kyocera made lenses for Leica, Zeiss, Yashica, Nikon, and others. We photography buffs (snobs?) rank these companies in a certain way, but the distinction isn't that simple.

[LocalHero1953]

FTAOD I have no hang-ups about who designed or made exactly which bit of Leica's lenses. My comment was really the curiosity factor that Panasonic hasn't made a lens they hold a patent for, but Leica has.

Edited March 27 by LocalHero1953

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

FTAOD I have no hang-ups about who designed or made exactly which bit of Leica's lenses. My comment was really the curiosity factor that Panasonic hasn't made a lens they hold a patent for, but Leica has.

No worries, I was expanding on what you wrote, not disagreeing. I don't think the lens was in the right market position to wear the Lumix branding. Maybe it could have been sold under their broadcast or cinema divisions, but those usually need bigger zoom ranges and smaller sensors.

[Slender]

Let us be reminded that one of Mr P.Karbe's first "job" at leica was the design of the Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90 F2.8-4.5... It took him allegedly 10 years to design the 50 summilux god knows how long it could have been for this one and the 24-90 SL.

[jrp]

I do slightly wonder.  Some of the SL lens designs are attributed to Tampon, eg.  But putting down a patent is not the same as producing a finished lens.  There are trade-offs and production challenges.  Competition is a good thing.  If you look at Sony / Zeiss lenses from when the FE-mount was originally introduced (or even go back to the E-mount), the differences in performance are night and day.  But so is the price.  And the weight has also become a priority, after being sacrificed, for a while.  Leica SL lenses have also been down a windy road: the initial zooms covered quite a lot of common uses for amateurs.  Then the 50mm f1.4 produced magical rendering at the expense of bulk and (in the case of the Panasonic release at a similar time) the absolute performance.  The Summicrons have been almost cinema lens quality, at reduced price, but the capacity to build them is almost exhausted, compared to the aspirations of the road map.

In the meantime, Sigma and Panasonic have filled a range of size/weight / price / performance holes.

And in the meantime, meantime, the software developers have discovered AI that will, ultimately denoise your pics and / or render them cleaner, whereupon the glass will become slightly less important.

 

Edited March 27 by jrp

[dpitt]

On 3/26/2024 at 9:07 PM, daned said:

Yes, I have thought about the M camera and lens but never used one and always have wondered how easy it would be to adopt to the system specially the manual focusing part.

 

On 3/27/2024 at 7:18 PM, Jeff S said:

You live in the US, so rental is easy if you’re not close to a dealer for demo.  Some bond with the RF experience; some don’t.  I did immediately, long ago.  But I use the M and SL systems for complementary needs and different shooting circumstances.

As for the original topic, I use the 24-90 almost exclusively, and sold an SL 75 for lack of use. Each person has different needs and tastes.

Jeff

+1
I would strongly advise to try a Leica M.
Some will hate it, some will immediately fall in love with it, like I did when I held my first one almost 20 years ago.
Currently there is hardly any competition for the Leica M system, its size and handling is basically unique, so it plays in a league of its own.

Most people will worry about manual focusing, but I think that if you give it some time this is actually very easy to learn for most people. It is the other things you have to 'give up' that could potentially be even more reason to not use it as a primary tool. Focusing can actually be more accurate/faster than with AF or manual lenses on a mirrorless system. Using it is a joy when you love to be involved in the scene

The main decision is if you can live with the limitations of the rangefinder system.
When you really need a zoom lens for some reason, or really need a long tele lens.
Also, if you like to go really close for macro or effects, the 0,7m close focus limit of the rangefinder can be a concern.
For occasional use LV and en EVF can help but any mirrorless will be so much easier to use in these area's.
Shooting sport events or anything with (very) fast moving objects and with high fps rate is not for the Leica M either. After some practice, shooting playing children can be done with the M. IMO the M is not suited for anything faster than that.
And of course video is not even available on most models.

If you think you can live with the limitations above, or even better, if you have a mirrorless camera to use in these area's, then the Leica M experience can be wonderful. It is the one system that gives me the most satisfaction, both in use and in results.

Do not make the mistake to just try it quickly by renting it for a short period, and dismissing it. That is like someone who never rode a bike renting it for a day. He will probably not like it because he can not keep his balance.

Give the M at least a few days, if possible a few weeks, and then decide.
The easiest and probably cheapest way to do that is to buy a used one, and resell it later if need be. They keep their value amazingly well.
Any digital M would do for that purpose, but I would go for the Leica M(240), the first one with LV and EVF possibilities, or later models.


 

Edited March 31 by dpitt

[dkCambridgeshire]

The SL 24-90mm can produce outstanding images at any aperture throughout its zoom range. When I first acquired my example I invariably 'stopped down a bit' thinking that smaller apertures enable better results – but I soon learnt that full aperture can be used with impunity. 

[lencap]

I owned the 24-90 as my first lens for my SL601.  I became frustrated with the weight, and sold the lens, swapping it for a Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4, trying to optimize image quality versus cost.  After a short time the weight of the Sigma lens became an issue as well, and I sold the camera and lens, relying upon my original Leica Q.

Soon I realized that the reason I bought the SL601 was that I didn't like the 28mm lens as a solo tool.  So, when the SL2-S/50mm SL-Summicron bundle was announced last year I decided to reconsider the SL platform.  When Leica offered the $1300 rebate I jumped at it, and now own the bundle as my sole camera.  I also sold the Q, still at odds with the FL - it's not the camera, it's me.

That should be the end of the story, but it isn't.  Last weekend I was at an event, and didn't have my camera with me.  All I had was my Apple iPhone 14 Pro.  I've been trying to convince myself that was really all I needed - a lightweight, "do it all" camera always in my pocket, with an ecosystem that allowed for easy sharing/editing and video.  I took a lot of shots over a few hours, and to be frank, several were both well composed and exposed.  But many weren't - a pro camera is heavy for a reason.  That's when I realized that the 24-90 zoom was the best tool for the job at hand, and I didn't have one.  I was continually zooming with the iPhone, including using the supplied long FL lens, as well as extending with digital capture.  Those images were far lower quality - camera shake, lighting shifts, crowd movement, etc. all made tracking/composing a challenge.  The SL body would have handled it with ease.

So, now I'm looking to reacquire a 24-90 zoom, even though it will be used infrequently.  I considered adding a M to L adapter and using M lenses as an alternative, but in "event" settings changing lenses ins't always practical, and having a simple reliable zoom with good range is a definite benefit.

I did make one change - I bought a longer strap for the SL2-S body, and I think that will make a difference with weight distribution on the heavier zoom.  My old setup had the standard Leica strap, which forced the 24-90 to tilt uncomfortably as it didn't balance well.  Lugging it around was a chore.  A longer strap places it lower on the hip, allows cross shoulder carry, and in general makes life a bit easier.  I'd suggest you try a longer length strap before deciding on what to do.  If you do decide to sell, let me know!

 

[tom0511]

Keep!!! Just spent 10 days vacation at the northern sea in Germany in very mixed weather. The 24-90 + 90-280 work great. The primes stay a lot inside.

And while the 28 and 50 APO SLs are certainly a class of its own, the 24-90 doesn't have to hide. You can mix the images and it would be hard to tell which image which lens (if you don't zoom into the corners, or shoot at f2.0  )

The 2490 was my first SL lens, there were times when I tended to use lighter lenses like the Panasonic 24-105 or 20-60 or later Leica 24-70. But in the end, when I need a midrange Zoom outside/ for travel or also for events, the 24-90 serves me very well. There were times when I thought about selling it, but I won't. It's the other direction, the other lighter lenses now collect dust. Same about 90280. Bought a 70-300 Pana because its much lighter, and its a good lens. But the 90280 images just have another pop and look.

The combo of a faster prime for indoors, and the 24-90 for flexibility is great IMO. Yes, it's heavy, but it's still fine to handle. Just don't think about it.

Edited April 12 by tom0511

[jrp]

Yeh, I started off with only M lenses (which I loved, because of their compactness) the eventually caved to the 24-90, which was so perfect that it became boring, to which I added the Summicrons, which are stupendous.