Leica sl2 here we go

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys. Decided to trade my canon r5 and two lenses for a sl2 and a 24-70 vario elmar 2.8 lens. I have a Leica q and m240 already.

I'm not a fan of big lenses and not a fan of a Leica lens that's not a Leica lens. So a bit sceptic towards the 24-70🤔 I might sell it.

Does leica make any not so huge sl glass with af? 35 and 50 crons?

Other than that I'm planning to use my summicron r 50 f2 and maybe a few m mount lenses on the sl2.

A few years ago I had a Sony when the sigma 85mm 1.4 dg dn came out and I had that lens for some months and loved it. I might also get that for sl2?

 

[LocalHero1953]

8 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Does leica make any not so huge sl glass with af? 35 and 50 crons?

Yes, the 'Leica lenses that are not Leica lenses'🙂: the 24-90 is larger than your 24-70; the apo Summicrons are larger than the non-apo lenses.

[Leicaboy Norway]

Hmm maybe I'll just skip af then! 

[Luke_Miller]

54 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Hmm maybe I'll just skip af then! 

That is always an option.  My Leica and Voigtlander M lenses works nicely on my SL and SL2. But I prefer the image quality from my APO SL primes over that of any of my M primes.  And my 24-90 and 90-280 zooms are the best zoom lenses I've used.  You might consider borrowing or renting one of the "Leica SL lenses that ARE Leica lenses."  You might find (as I did) the extra weight is worth it.

[GFW2-SCUSA]

I would just add to what Luke said that, in my opinion, the Sigma L Mount lenses that I have are excellent. I wouldn't hesitate to give any Sigma ART or contemporary lens a serious try. As wonderful as Leica lenses are, the L mount offers other top quality choices. I find my vario-elmarit 24-90 beautiful but a heavy beast. Luke, a better photographer than I, doesn't mind the weight. So you have lots of choices! And lots of opinions to sort through. 

[RBB]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

the 24-90 is larger than your 24-70

But is a stellar performer!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Hey guys. Decided to trade my canon r5 and two lenses for a sl2 and a 24-70 vario elmar 2.8 lens. I have a Leica q and m240 already.

I'm not a fan of big lenses and not a fan of a Leica lens that's not a Leica lens. So a bit sceptic towards the 24-70🤔 I might sell it.

Does leica make any not so huge sl glass with af? 35 and 50 crons?

Other than that I'm planning to use my summicron r 50 f2 and maybe a few m mount lenses on the sl2.

A few years ago I had a Sony when the sigma 85mm 1.4 dg dn came out and I had that lens for some months and loved it. I might also get that for sl2?

 

In general, the DG DN lenses are well worth considering. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Generally, the Leica SL glass is the best available. You pay for that in weight size and cost. Your 24-70 is an excellent lens. In line with what Canikony are making right now. But the 24-90 is better. The SL APO Summicrons are the best matched set of primes ever made. But there's no issues with the IQ of the other L mount glass. I rather like the cheap and tiny DG DN Sigmacrons. But the weather sealing is iffy. The 100mm 2.8 macro from Panasonic is just excellent. 

One of the advantages of the SL is the L mount. Lot's of excellent options to play with. But the Leica ones are bigger and heavier to squeeze the best performance they can get. Apparently the APO Summicrons were made for 100MP sensors.

Gordon

[Leicaboy Norway]

Thanks guys! Lots of valuable info here!

 

I do wonder though. Having used Sony a few years ago.

Why does Canon RF and Leica SL have to be so big to reach perfection? Sony 50 1.2 is on par with Canon 50 1.2 and the Sony 35 1.4 is perhaps the best af 35 made. And it's 400 g or something.

Are the sl lenses that much better than the tiny m lenses? Because in my experience many of the m lenses stand well up against modern mirrorless.

I also think thought that mirrorless cameras would mean smaller lenses, and some said that the new tech would allow for that. 

 

[dpitt]

14 hours ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Does leica make any not so huge sl glass with af? 35 and 50 crons?

I hope Leica will release a few small and light primes for the L mount. My smallest Leica AF option now is the excellent Summilux 35 TL F1.4. Of course that will switch the SL to cropped mode, so it becomes a 50mm eq. and 'only' 24 MP on the SL2, but I think it produces results that are on par with the best of the Leica L mount lenses, and at a fraction of the price and size of them.

For most other purposes, I found that Leica R lenses provide a very compact alternative for the quality they bring. My Macro Vario Elmar 35-70 F4 is very good on the SL as a general purpose lens. I found that the difference in weight and size is of the M lenses is not a huge advantage on the heavy SL bodies. The R lenses feel more at home on this body compared to my tiny Summicron 35 M, which almost feels like a body cap on the huge body (certainly if I use the multi function grip). The convenience of zooms and lower price of the R lenses makes that they get more use on my SL.

If you want a cheap, general purpose AF lens, I can recommend the Lumix 20-60mm. It is very sharp and light, although I prefer the character of R lenses most of the time. I do not mind manual focus, but in a lazy mood, this is the perfect walk around lens for me.

I have tried a few other  lenses from Sigma and Lumix, and Zeiss but keep returning to Leica glass.
YMMV

[Leicaboy Norway]

Thank you, dpitt! Great and informative answer. That TL lens is interesting, I'll be checking it out.

 

I do have the one Leica Summicron-r 50mm version 2, which I plan to use on the SL2.

 

I know the R lenses are highly regarded.

 

Is there a site which has a good list of reviews or ranking of these lenses? I'm after which lenses offer the "best IQ for the money", and while I know it's partly subjective, usually one can draw some reasonable conclusions from such comparisons.

 

Fred Miranda has a site where people share their opinions and photos but it's more coincidental than a real summary or ranking.

 

For example I read several people saying the Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 was considered to be one of the best 28 mm made, then I almost bought one before finding out that this is the v2, which is 3 x the price of v1 on eBay for example. 

[lanetomlane]

You mentioned the Sigma 85mm f1.4; I use it on the SL2 and in my opinion it's a great lens.

[Leicaboy Norway]

Ok guys so I did a silly thing perhaps, but I bought that 24-90 2.8-4 also.

So now I have 2 zooms. I think I will be selling the 24-70 though, because I've heard from so many owners and pre-owners of the 24-90 and surprisingly almost everyone says it's the best lens they've used. It's rare to come by such an overwhemgingly postitive feedback on an individual lens.

[lanetomlane]

1 hour ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Ok guys so I did a silly thing perhaps, but I bought that 24-90 2.8-4 also.

So now I have 2 zooms. I think I will be selling the 24-70 though, because I've heard from so many owners and pre-owners of the 24-90 and surprisingly almost everyone says it's the best lens they've used. It's rare to come by such an overwhemgingly postitive feedback on an individual lens.

I have both the 24-70 and 24-90mm and find having both useful. I had the 24-90 with the original SL (Type 601) when it first came out and love the lens, except for its weight and size. When the 24-70 was introduced I was tempted to trade the 24-90 but the results from it were so good I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Anyway, I came across a used 24-70 and bought it, thinking I would compare them and then decide which to sell. To be honest the 24-70 is such a good lens I decided to keep them both. When I go traveling, or want a walk-about lens I use the 24-70 but when I go out on a specific photoshoot I take the 24-90.

If you don't have to sell it, I would keep them both for the time being as I do find it useful having them.

[LocalHero1953]

You should have been around when the 24-90 was launched: too heavy, too large, focus bugs, not good quality at 90. Now it’s been out for a good many years, of course, it’s the best lens Leica has ever made. C’est la vie. 
Now you have both lenses, you can make your own decision which one to keep, without having to rely on what you have heard from those who have “pre-owned” the lens.