"Budget" Lens Suggestion for Leica SL (Typ 601) User

[BLeventhal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,... This is a follow-up to a previous thread where I asked for input about purchasing an SL2 or SL2-S. As the title now suggests, I decided to take a less expensive option and purchased a Leica SL to see if I enjoy the Leica SL and L-Mount experience. 

I am a nature photographer with a very expansive and expensive Nikon mirrorless system that includes a Z9, Z8, 14-30S f4, 24-120S f4, 100-400S f4.5-5.6, 400S f2.8TC, and Z-TC14. Clearly, my investment in gear (about 30K) is heavily biased to Nikon and the Nikon gear is what I shoot 90% + of the time. I am not looking to use the Leica for my wildlife and landscape work, instead it will be used as a walk-around camera. While I do intend to do a bit of landscape photography with the SL, it would be used off the tripod for spontaneous work. I fully realize that I am using an "old" tech MILC, but there is something quite enjoyable about the design ethos of the SL and its newer siblings.

I purchased the SL w/ a Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary lens and find it to be surprisingly sharp and robust. The size of the lens is ideal for the SL, and it is reminiscent of lenses I used back in the 1980's and 90's. So it is with this in the bag that I am seeking advice from experienced SL users. I am not interested in spending $3500+ on the APO Asph lenses, as the camera would not be used enough to justify the use. On the other hand, I would be willing to spend up to $1800 on a Leica SL Summicron Asph (Panasonic Leica hybrid) or less on another Sigma DG DN Contemporary. 

Given the description of how I intend to use the camera, do you think the Leica-badged lenses would add value in terms of AF or optical performance? Instead, would you suggest that I explore other Sigma lenses... I've read that the 65 f2 is quite nice... are there other options within my budget that make sense? 

Thanks and regards,

Bruce

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

And the 28-70 DG-DN which is a great walk-around lens. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I'd keep going with the Sigmas. Compared to the non-APO Leica's all you're missing is the Leica weather sealing for the contemporary lenses. The Sigmas are fabulous optically. Anything with the Sports or Art designation should be sealed about the same as it's Leica counterpart. I have the 20, 50 and 85 *i* primes and the 14-24 and 100-400 zooms. All excellent. The latter zooms are also available in Leica branded versions.

I'd also look at the new 50mm 1.2 and existing 85 1.4 if you want something a bit special (but a bit heavier).

I will say that the SL APO Summicrons are the pinnacle of the system. Everyone in the SL system deserves to try at least one SL APO.

Gordon

[dpitt]

Not sure how you feel about  using MF lenses, but if I think of my SL as a walk around camera, then I mostly use it with a M or R lens. They offer great character and all that in a very small package compared to a native SL or Z lens.

Best value for money would be a simple mechanical adapter with e.g. the superb Leica 1:4.0/35-70 Macro Vario Elmar R lens. There are lots of excellent primes too. You can choose the lens profile manually. It does not have to be ROM on a simple adapter. If you invest in the Leica R-L adapter your lens profile is stored in the EXIF info and with a ROM lens there is auto registration of aperture and zoom position used. For me that is not enough to justify the extra budget.

Some of the M lenses could also be of interest. Even smaller, but more expensive compared to their R counterparts.

Edited April 21, 2024 by dpitt

[earthphoto]

I use Lumix-S Lenses on my SL(601) and the SL2 (20-60 and 85/1.8 mm) and Leica M-Mount on the Leica adapter. Works perfect for me.

[Andi Devon]

I actually only own two lenses for the 601 and they are the 65 f/2 and 35 f/2 sigma contemporary. The 65 rarely comes off the body. 

[costa43]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been using my M lenses on the sl2s with good results. If you want a light setup for walking around it doesn't get any better really. Pics below as an example of what you can expect. I use an sl2s so the sl will give you a similar result.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[BLeventhal]

1 minute ago, costa43 said:

I've been using my M lenses on the sl2s with good results. If you want a light setup for walking around it doesn't get any better really. Pics below as an example of what you can expect. I use an sl2s so the sl will give you a similar result.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

What lenses did you use for these pictures?

[costa43]

Just now, BLeventhal said:

What lenses did you use for these pictures?

these were both with the 24mm Elmar f3.8. A gem of a lens. 

The beauty of M lenses is that you can adapt them to pretty much any digital camera you choose, or use them on film bodies. They stay with you forever.

Edited April 24, 2024 by costa43

[tomasis7]

i really enjoy M lenses on the SL601 I bought recently as well. 

 

M lenses from 1970 or newer Voigtlander, and Zeiss lenses are good. I dont miss AF at all. If you want AF, Panasonic and Sigma looks good. 

[bdolzani]

On 4/25/2024 at 2:27 AM, tomasis7 said:

i really enjoy M lenses on the SL601 I bought recently as well. 

 

M lenses from 1970 or newer Voigtlander, and Zeiss lenses are good. I dont miss AF at all. If you want AF, Panasonic and Sigma looks good. 

I thought I read this somewhere else too...I'm considering an SL and can you not use pre-1970 M lenses on them? I'm mostly thinking of my 1964 50 summilux.

My thought for an SL would be to use that, plus the 24 Elmarit, and 90 summicron mid 1970's. 

Edited April 29, 2024 by bdolzani

[BLeventhal]

OP here... I'm continuing to explore "budget" options. 

First, I returned my SL w/Sigma 35 f/2 and replaced it with an SL2-s and Lumix S 35mm f/1.8. The price of the upgrade was $1500 and the SL2-s was in really good condition when comparing it to the SL I had for about a week. Furthermore, I reasoned that the IBIS and backside sensor were worth the price of admission. The swap in lenses related to an equivalence logic... if Leica thought the Panasonic was good enough to rebuild in Leica housing, it must be an optically strong lens. While I wish I could have afforded the Leica version, the price difference was 4 times that of the lens I purchased. 

I would like to add a telephoto to the mix, as this is a more comfortable perspective for how I like to shoot. I am considering the Lumix S 85mm f1.8 to maintain some consistency in design, filter thread, and coatings. Thoughts on this?... Please chime in if you have experience with this lens.

While I still long for some genuine Leica L-mount lenses, I am holding out for the moment. Being a landscape and wildlife shooter, the 24-90 and 90-280 seem like logical lenses for me. I, however, am not ready to commit to spending $8000 to $1000 on optics for my "other" system.

cheers,

bruce

Edited April 29, 2024 by BLeventhal
complete a few thoughts

[tomasis7]

2 hours ago, bdolzani said:

I thought I read this somewhere else too...I'm considering an SL and can you not use pre-1970 M lenses on them? I'm mostly thinking of my 1964 50 summilux.

My thought for an SL would be to use that, plus the 24 Elmarit, and 90 summicron mid 1970's. 

yes, you can! I have a few old lenses and it works pretty nice Except Super Angulon 21mm 3.4. 

SL works better than I would imagine. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, BLeventhal said:

OP here... I'm continuing to explore "budget" options. 

First, I returned my SL w/Sigma 35 f/2 and replaced it with an SL2-s and Lumix S 35mm f/1.8. The price of the upgrade was $1500 and the SL2-s was in really good condition when comparing it to the SL I had for about a week. Furthermore, I reasoned that the IBIS and backside sensor were worth the price of admission. The swap in lenses related to an equivalence logic... if Leica thought the Panasonic was good enough to rebuild in Leica housing, it must be an optically strong lens. While I wish I could have afforded the Leica version, the price difference was 4 times that of the lens I purchased. 

I would like to add a telephoto to the mix, as this is a more comfortable perspective for how I like to shoot. I am considering the Lumix S 85mm f1.8 to maintain some consistency in design, filter thread, and coatings. Thoughts on this?... Please chime in if you have experience with this lens.

While I still long for some genuine Leica L-mount lenses, I am holding out for the moment. Being a landscape and wildlife shooter, the 24-90 and 90-280 seem like logical lenses for me. I, however, am not ready to commit to spending $8000 to $1000 on optics for my "other" system.

cheers,

bruce

Panasonic 100mm macro. 

Generally, while optically very very good, the Panasonic 1.8's focus on behaving in video areas over absolute optical performance. So far less focus breathing and a bit of fall off in the edges of the frame. A small bit. The small Sigma *i* primes are a bit better across the frame and are more *photo* orientated but with less weatherproofing. The Sigma Art lenses are optically fantastic and properly weather sealed. Then the APOs.

So, you're not going to get a bad option. Just 90, 95 and 98% optical performance as you climb the tree. The 85 1.8 will match the great performance of your 35. You'll get a bit more bite from something like the Art 85mm 1.4 Sigma. The 100mm Panasonic has a bit more optical performance than the 85 in the same body but you lose a stop.

The real problem is you're spoiled for choice in the L mount. There are no bad choices. Just the ones that suit your budget and carry limits.

Gordon

p.s. for a landscape zoom the 24-90 *is* the option. One of the best standard zooms ever made.

[DadDadDaddyo]

Agreed. The 24-90 is justifiably becoming a legendary lens. 

I often carry 4 primes with my M-series bodies: a 24mm, a 35mm, a 50mm, and a 90mm. Truly, for my use cases, they're almost all I ever need. 

For that reason, if you can handle the size and weight, the 24-90 is really a lens you can simply leave on the body.

Doing so can save you thousands on lenses you won't have to buy. 

[BLeventhal]

Thanks Flash Dadx3... 

I'm thinking about diversifying my kit... Leica for Landscapes and Nikon for wildlife. 

With that in mind, the 24-90 is becoming more interesting to me... I'm sticking with the 35mm f1.8 for now, but am always on the lookout for a bargain.

cheers,

bruce

[IkarusJohn]

5 minutes ago, BLeventhal said:

Thanks Flash Dadx3... 

I'm thinking about diversifying my kit... Leica for Landscapes and Nikon for wildlife. 

With that in mind, the 24-90 is becoming more interesting to me... I'm sticking with the 35mm f1.8 for now, but am always on the lookout for a bargain.

cheers,

bruce

The benefits of the 24-90 are (1) it’s a very fine optical lens; (2) AF & zoom make it a very useful walkabout lens; and (3) its weathersealing.  If you have an SL, then this is an excellent one lens solution.

Mine is at Wetzlar having a bit of TLC, and will be listed in the Classified section once I get it back.

[cj3209]

On 4/20/2024 at 11:05 AM, Chaemono said:

Based on search results, it seems that the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary lens is a capable and affordable option that can provide good image quality and performance for your intended use of the Leica SL camera. The search results indicate that the Sigma lens offers impressive sharpness and contrast, even when shot wide open, and the compact size is well-suited to the SL system[1][5].

While the Leica SL Summicron ASPH lenses may offer slightly better optical performance in terms of sharpness, contrast, and rendering[2][3][4], the search results suggest that the difference may not be significant enough to justify the much higher cost, especially if you do not plan to use the camera extensively. The Sigma lens appears to be a very capable and cost-effective option that can deliver excellent results for your needs[1][5].

Sources
[1] Leica SL 35mm f2 Summicron ASPH (non APO) vs Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/377138-leica-sl-35mm-f2-summicron-asph-non-apo-vs-sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn/
[2] Leica 35 mm f2 APO vs. Sigma 35 mm f2 Contemporary für L-Mount https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIW97R6w1C8
[3] Leica Summilux-TL 35 mm f/1.4 ASPH vs Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN https://versus.com/de/leica-summilux-tl-35-mm-f-1-4-asph-vs-sigma-35mm-f-2-dg-dn
[4] Leica APO 35mm F/2.0 vs Sigma 35mm F/2.0 - Leica Forum https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/317925-leica-apo-35mm-f20-vs-sigma-35mm-f20/
[5] Das Sigma iSeries 35mm DG DN für Leica L-Mount - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfQWpyIhreg
 

Based on search results, I would suggest that you explore other Sigma lenses, particularly the Sigma 65mm f/2 DG DN Contemporary lens, as it seems to be a compelling option within your budget.

The search results indicate that the Sigma 65mm f/2 lens is well-suited for portrait photography and could be a good complement to the Sigma 35mm f/2 lens you already own[1]. The search results also highlight other Sigma lenses in the Contemporary line, such as the 45mm f/2.8, that may be worth considering for your Leica SL system[1].

Additionally, the search results suggest that Sigma offers a range of high-quality L-mount lenses that are compatible with your Leica SL camera, including the Sigma 24mm f/2 DG DN, 50mm f/2 DG DN, and 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art lens[3][4]. These lenses could provide you with additional focal length options and performance characteristics to suit your needs, all within your stated budget.

Sources
[1] Sigma Lenses For Leica https://mrleica.com/sigma-lenses-for-leica/
[2] Leica SL 35mm f2 Summicron ASPH (non APO) vs Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/377138-leica-sl-35mm-f2-summicron-asph-non-apo-vs-sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn/
[3] Leica Lenses | SIGMA Photo https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/leica
[4] Best L-Mount Lenses for Leica SL, Lumix S and Sigma fp Cameras https://www.kielia.de/photography/lenses/l-mount/
[5] ALL SIGMA 35mm L-Mount lenses | ULTIMATE TEST on the Leica SL2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEGoTi5fFZk

This reads like it was AI-generated...lol

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[cj3209]

32 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

The benefits of the 24-90 are (1) it’s a very fine optical lens; (2) AF & zoom make it a very useful walkabout lens; and (3) its weathersealing.  If you have an SL, then this is an excellent one lens solution.

Mine is at Wetzlar having a bit of TLC, and will be listed in the Classified section once I get it back.

LOL, the 24-90 is NOT a walk-around lens; it's too big and heavy.  For WA, I would suggest a nice 21 SEM for around $1,800 or a compact asph 28mm summicron (not the newest version).  And even a compact 35mm summicron would work.  Of course, both of these lenses require the Leica M-L adapter.

[cj3209]

43 minutes ago, BLeventhal said:

Thanks Flash Dadx3... 

I'm thinking about diversifying my kit... Leica for Landscapes and Nikon for wildlife. 

With that in mind, the 24-90 is becoming more interesting to me... I'm sticking with the 35mm f1.8 for now, but am always on the lookout for a bargain.

cheers,

bruce

While the 24-90 is optically a really good zoom, it's just too heavy and big - hence why it's selling at a steep discount (~$2,400).  I owned this lens but couldn't bring it around so it just sat in my bag.