24-70 vs 24-90 for weddings and christenings

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys! So now I have both these zooms. And while I read everywhere that the 24-90 is somewhat, but not a lot better, to me they seem equally good and I love the handling on the 24-70.

 

So my question is which lens to use for events such as christenings and/or weddings?

I don´t know how far from "stage" I'll be seated, but the f stop on the 90 is only 4 and the SL2 has a crop mode of 20 mpx.

Any experience to share with me?

[Advertisement]

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

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Well, if you like the 24-70 then use that. I will say I think the 24-90 is the best standard zoom ever made. I have the Canon, Sony, Sigma and Panasonics to compare it to directly. The only ones that comes close to it are the shorter 35-75 XCD from Hasselblad and the staggering 28-70 f2 from Canon. The Leica/Sigma 24-70 is very sharp (a bit softer at the long end) but a bit clinical for my tastes compared to the 24-90.

I assume you're a guest because you'll be seated. If so a bit of high ISO and noise reduction in post will be more than fine. As a retired working photographer, I'd want something longer, personally. One of the 70-200's although I'd not be fussed about 2.8 or f4 if size is a concern.

Gordon

Edited April 7, 2024 by FlashGordonPhotography

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Well, if you like the 24-70 then use that. I will say I think the 24-90 is the best standard zoom ever made.

Can you briefly elaborate on why 24-90 is better than 24-70, apart from the better reach? Thanks!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Can you briefly elaborate on why 24-90 is better than 24-70, apart from the better reach? Thanks!

The 24-90 is really well balanced. It maintains incredible detail and micro contrast, while drawing nice and gently. It has near APO performance with CA. It's sharper than the 24-70mm at 70mm. The 24-70 is great but like any other high end Japanese lens. The 24-90 is something else. 

Gordon

[Luke_Miller]

Long time Nikon shooter and my most used lenses were the Nikon 24-70 and 70-200.  Most of my images were taken at 70 (on the 24-70) or 200 (on the 70-200).  So I went for the 24-90 and 90-280 when I went with the SLs.  In my case the extra reach of the 24-90 was well worth the investment.

[Leicaboy Norway]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The 24-90 is really well balanced. It maintains incredible detail and micro contrast, while drawing nice and gently. It has near APO performance with CA. It's sharper than the 24-70mm at 70mm. The 24-70 is great but like any other high end Japanese lens. The 24-90 is something else. 

Gordon

I actually thought the 24-70 was sharper in the long end? But maybe it was the other side around?

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lens worked fine, both in church and at a party later. Lacks a bit pop and need good light to show that nice drawing you guys mention. But zoom range very useful. Even shot some at ISO 5000 and they looked fine, even better after AI denoising in Lightroom

Brought my Leica Q (116) also, thought the images were nicer from the little marvel

Edited April 7, 2024 by Leicaboy Norway

[LocalHero1953]

On 4/7/2024 at 7:09 PM, Leicaboy Norway said:

Lens worked fine, both in church and at a party later. Lacks a bit pop and need good light to show that nice drawing you guys mention. But zoom range very useful. Even shot some at ISO 5000 and they looked fine, even better after AI denoising in Lightroom

Brought my Leica Q (116) also, thought the images were nicer from the little marvel

But which lens? Your OP says you have both!

[tom0511]

Imown both, 24-90 for long time, later adde 24-70 for smaller size and 2.8 at 70mm. Butnafter some time I now use the 2490 more often again. I likemthe longer reach, and for some reason  I prefer the rendering, looks more gentle and,prime like. I could NOT show this in direct comparisons, but its my feeling from real life images. Imcan t even explain what it is, color, tonality, overall look. Nothing wrong about the 2470 though.

I think for a wedding the longer reach of the 2490 wouldnt hurt.

 

 

[M11 for me]

I usually do not use 24-70 or 70-200 for events anymore. I much prefer fast fixed focal lengths lenses as a 50 and a 135mm. Just the 2 lenses are plenty for everything. That is my personal experience after carrying heavy lenses for many years. Often then inside a room (church, hall) with 200mm you need a shutter speed of at least that reciprocal value in seconds. But thats often not enough with that heavy equipment in your hands: After a while (1 hour or so) I tend to tremble a bit as I am not used to holding that weight. I often had a bit blured images even though I have image stabilisation. For me the investment in fixed focus lenses was an excellent investment. And where did this experience come from? Of course from owning my M cameras. I learned very quickly how great the non-zoom lenses were. So I decided to go the same way with my "Pro" stuff (I am actually not a pro but I do a lot of events etc.). The time one needs to turn the zoom ring and find the ringt focal lenght I have shot 5 images . . . 

[Leicaboy Norway]

On 4/10/2024 at 9:13 PM, LocalHero1953 said:

But which lens? Your OP says you have both!

Haha, sorry!

I sold the 24-70 but am not sure if it was right or not. The 24-70 feels small and handy. And it´s a constant 2.8.

 

It feels like the 24-90 is almost unusable indoors since it very quickly takes me ISO 3200 and beyond.

 

I adjusted the min shutter settings to 1/50 s due to the SL2 having IS though.

 

How far can I take it with shutter speed on the SL2 with the 24-90, you guys?

[Leicaboy Norway]

On 4/11/2024 at 9:37 AM, M11 for me said:

I usually do not use 24-70 or 70-200 for events anymore. I much prefer fast fixed focal lengths lenses as a 50 and a 135mm. Just the 2 lenses are plenty for everything. That is my personal experience after carrying heavy lenses for many years. Often then inside a room (church, hall) with 200mm you need a shutter speed of at least that reciprocal value in seconds. But thats often not enough with that heavy equipment in your hands: After a while (1 hour or so) I tend to tremble a bit as I am not used to holding that weight. I often had a bit blured images even though I have image stabilisation. For me the investment in fixed focus lenses was an excellent investment. And where did this experience come from? Of course from owning my M cameras. I learned very quickly how great the non-zoom lenses were. So I decided to go the same way with my "Pro" stuff (I am actually not a pro but I do a lot of events etc.). The time one needs to turn the zoom ring and find the ringt focal lenght I have shot 5 images . . . 

Yes normally I don't use zooms either and haven't for years. Maybe I should get the SL 35 or 50 (non apo).

 

It´s strange. I´ve used the Voigtlander SL ii 58mm Norton 1.4 on Pentax K-1 (36 mpx) and Canon R5 (45 mpx), but so far I´m not getting great results on the SL2 even though I manage to hit focus. Don´t know what it is. Because, It´s a terrific lens, maybe the best lens I´ve used.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Haha, sorry!

I sold the 24-70 but am not sure if it was right or not. The 24-70 feels small and handy. And it´s a constant 2.8.

 

It feels like the 24-90 is almost unusable indoors since it very quickly takes me ISO 3200 and beyond.

 

I adjusted the min shutter settings to 1/50 s due to the SL2 having IS though.

 

How far can I take it with shutter speed on the SL2 with the 24-90, you guys?

I use the 24-90 almost exclusively indoors, but with the SL2-S, and my ISO limit is 25,000, though at 6400 and above it needs more noise reduction. 

[Leicaboy Norway]

14 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I use the 24-90 almost exclusively indoors, but with the SL2-S, and my ISO limit is 25,000, though at 6400 and above it needs more noise reduction. 

Wow! 

I usually want to stay below 800, maye 1600.

How good is the dynamic range of the SL2? And who supposedly makes the sensor? I'm guessing it's not Sony which for me personally is good colorwise, but maybe not so good dynamic range wise?

Seems my old Pentax K-1 with its Sony sensor has better dynamic range, I havent looked at it closely but initial impression seems so.

 

[LocalHero1953]

39 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

How good is the dynamic range of the SL2? And who supposedly makes the sensor? I'm guessing it's not Sony which for me personally is good colorwise, but maybe not so good dynamic range wise?

Sorry, I only have the SL2-S. 

Have you tried the latest noise reduction tools on higher ISO images? Shooting indoors you must be very constrained in lens choices if you want to shoot at 1600 or below. And wide apertures, as I'm sure you know, bring their own limitations. 

Edited April 16, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[Leicaboy Norway]

11 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Sorry, I only have the SL2-S. 

Have you tried the latest noise reduction tools on higher ISO images? Shooting indoors you must be very constrained in lens choices if you want to shoot at 1600 or below. And wide apertures, as I'm sure you know, bring their own limitations. 

Yes I tried Lightroom's AI noise reduction after this christening and shooting up to 5 000 iso. You're right I was surprised by how well it worked.

Yes shooting indoors is almost a non go above f/2. 

My Leica Q is the best camera I've had for indoor shooting.  Sharp from 1.7 and very good AWB, etc (allthough I shoot raw mostly)

On my M240 I shoot some indoors with my Voigtlander ultron 35mm 1.7 which is also very sharp wide open and with the focal length I can shoot comfortably at 1/40 s even without IBIS

[LocalHero1953]

With the SL series you have IBIS, and with the zooms you have OIS - for the slower moving parts of weddings and christenings (that's quite a lot of them) you should be able to shoot at slower shutter speeds than 1/f. I've just checked some theatre shots I took last night: at 90mm I took a couple at 1/10 sec (unintentionally - I forgot to open the aperture from f/10!); there was quite a lot of movement blur but static elements showed no shake.

In the end it comes down to the compromises you choose to make between (a) lens size, reach, price (b) your skill and willingness to apply noise reduction tech and (c) the IQ standards you are seeking. Your call🙂!