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

[cj3209]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

[IkarusJohn]

7 minutes ago, cj3209 said:

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.

For you, maybe.

I’ve used this combination as a walkabout in New York and tramping here in New Zealand, very happily.  Not having to change lenses for differing focal lengths and weathersealing is a god send.  Too heavy?  It rests perfectly with the SL in hand.  My light option is with the 0.95 Noctilux, but it isn’t great in the rain 😂

I always wonder about people complaining about weight.  Coming from Nikons (FE, FM & F5), the SL is about right in my hands.  But, it balances really poorly, and I find it awkward, with smaller lenses - I much prefer well balanced lenses like the 21 Summilux, 28 Summilux, Noctilux and 75 Summilux.  Too fiddly with lenses like the 35 Summicron, Summilux pre-asph or even the APO Summicrons.

Each to their own.

Edited April 29 by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

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

[BLeventhal]

3 minutes ago, cj3209 said:

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.

While I'm almost 60, weight continues to be a non-issue. I've been hiking with my Z9, Z8, 14-30, 24-120, 100-400, and 400 f2.8TC S for the past year, and heavier gear before that. In fact, I was out photographing birds and tide-pools just yesterday, took a fall (face plant), wiped myself off and kept going. Sure the body hurts today 🤪, but that doesn't deter me. 

A Leica SL2-s (or two) with 24-90 and 90-280 (or 100-400) would be like carrying a feathered pillow around to me.. LOL 

bruce

[FlashGordonPhotography]

48 minutes ago, cj3209 said:

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.

Have travelled the world with the 24-90. While I absolutely would like a smaller and lighter lens I have yet to find one that's as good an all-rounder as the 24-90. The Sony GMII is sharp but aggressively so. The Canon isn't as good and the new 24-105 is huge even by Leica standards. I haven't used the 24-105 2.8 except in as

The 24-90 is only very slightly weaker at the long end. Better than almost every other standard zoom in this regard. It's nearly APO in how it handles CA. And it's built so well that you can actually hose it off when it get sandy. I have but you probably shouldn't do that last one.

I've seen two lenses I think are as special as the 24-90 in standard zooms. That's the spectacular Canon 28-70 f2.0 and the Hasselblad 35-75.

Gordon

[Chaemono]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb cj3209:

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

This reads like it was BI-generated…lol