Small, cheap and good af lens for l mount

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys. I am looking for a small lens. Almost m size. But that has af and is not too expensive.

 

I landed on the sigma 45 f2.8 first 

 

But are there similar or perhaps better options? Thinking I might use it with the occasional video too 

[Advertisement]

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

[Camaro5]

I sometimes use a Sigma 24mm f/2 DG DN and have found it to be an excellent lens.  The total length is a tad under 3" which makes it easy to carry around.  

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

I landed on the sigma 45 f2.8 first 

do you realize you landed on a Leica brand? nothing is affordable.

I don't love the 45, glad I sold it. The Panasonic 50, 85, 100 are quite good. on the wide angle side, the Sigma lenses perform better, 24.

[Simone_DF]

You didn't tell us what kind of lens you are looking for. Wide? Normal? Tele? For what kind of use? Anyway, for size and weight, Sigma is the way to go.

I do have the 45mm, it's a nice walkaround lens with imho a very pleasant bokeh, but it's a bit slow to focus. 

[Leicaboy Norway]

On 5/8/2024 at 6:59 PM, Photoworks said:

do you realize you landed on a Leica brand? nothing is affordable.

I don't love the 45, glad I sold it. The Panasonic 50, 85, 100 are quite good. on the wide angle side, the Sigma lenses perform better, 24.

Don't know what you mean, plenty of affordable l mount lenses 

[Ivar B]

The Sigma 2.8/45 is not a bad lens at all - I am happy very happy with mine. I must admit I bough it as a supplement to the SL 1.4/50 which is huge and about 1 kilo og weight, but I since sold that and got the APO SL 2/50 which is not that large, so the Sigma 45 does not see that much use any more I fear.

[Yarosuav]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Sigma Contemporary 35mm and 50mm F/2 lenses are relatively small, cheap, and apparently very good. 

[Photoworks]

14 hours ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Don't know what you mean, plenty of affordable l mount lenses 

Often people buy the cameras to use the Leica lenses. To me the lenses are what are important in the image look.

[BernardC]

2 hours ago, Photoworks said:

Often people buy the cameras to use the Leica lenses. To me the lenses are what are important in the image look.

There are people who buy into the system exclusively for Leica lenses, but these people aren't complaining about cost. They knew what they were getting into.

For the rest of us: Lumix, Sigma, and "collaboration" SL lenses are price-competitive with other full-frame systems. They are also among the best optically.

The only thing missing are high-value telephotos. Keep in mind that these sell for well over 10,000€/$, and weigh several kilograms, so it makes sense to buy a dedicated Canon or Nikon body just for one lens.

[Leicaboy Norway]

 

On 5/10/2024 at 1:03 PM, Photoworks said:

Often people buy the cameras to use the Leica lenses. To me the lenses are what are important in the image look.

Yes but does Leica make any small, affordable AF lens for the L mount? Doesn't matter what other people do, I think my OP was pretty clear I wasn't filtering in on just Leica lenses.

Edited May 13, 2024 by Leicaboy Norway

[Leicaboy Norway]

On 5/10/2024 at 3:43 PM, BernardC said:

There are people who buy into the system exclusively for Leica lenses, but these people aren't complaining about cost. They knew what they were getting into.

For the rest of us: Lumix, Sigma, and "collaboration" SL lenses are price-competitive with other full-frame systems. They are also among the best optically.

The only thing missing are high-value telephotos. Keep in mind that these sell for well over 10,000€/$, and weigh several kilograms, so it makes sense to buy a dedicated Canon or Nikon body just for one lens.

You're right, the whole collaboration between Panasonic, Sigma and Leica was pretty central in making the L mount alliance wasn't it?

 

Also, it sound a bit silly to be very constricted to Leica lenses when you learn that for example the 35 and 50 mm asph non apo lenses essentially are the same as Panasonic lenses. Those facts don't fit well with being a Leica only glass snob.

 

That being said, I'm kind of a Leica glass snob myself. But having found out so much in this L system is perhaps not so Leica except the APO glass, I've decided to be more open to Sigma and Panasonic too and maybe give them a shot.

 

I saw a video comparison of the 50 mm 1.2 sigma dg dn for example, against the 50mm f2 summicron apo sl. Differences were hard to spot, also in terms of color. Makes one think.

 

[oculaii]

9 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

You're right, the whole collaboration between Panasonic, Sigma and Leica was pretty central in making the L mount alliance wasn't it?

 

Also, it sound a bit silly to be very constricted to Leica lenses when you learn that for example the 35 and 50 mm asph non apo lenses essentially are the same as Panasonic lenses. Those facts don't fit well with being a Leica only glass snob.

 

That being said, I'm kind of a Leica glass snob myself. But having found out so much in this L system is perhaps not so Leica except the APO glass, I've decided to be more open to Sigma and Panasonic too and maybe give them a shot.

 

I saw a video comparison of the 50 mm 1.2 sigma dg dn for example, against the 50mm f2 summicron apo sl. Differences were hard to spot, also in terms of color. Makes one think.

 

On the contrary, I found a big difference in this review. The Sigma has obviously much deeper and nicer bokeh. But the APO SL has better contrast, it also has better light transmition when both are set at F2, giving additional "pop" to the image (at least in the center).
I'm not sure because I never used both lenses but I can also imagine the SL APO has better highlight rendering and micro contrast, the SL and some Panasonic-Leica lenses I have used had nicer rendering than the Sigma DG DN in my opinion.

About the small, cheap and good af lens, I think the 50mm f1.8 Panasonic is one of the best value of the system, it is not big, really cheap used, has fast AF, and a good copy is very sharp wide open.

[Leicaboy Norway]

1 hour ago, oculaii said:

On the contrary, I found a big difference in this review. The Sigma has obviously much deeper and nicer bokeh. But the APO SL has better contrast, it also has better light transmition when both are set at F2, giving additional "pop" to the image (at least in the center).
I'm not sure because I never used both lenses but I can also imagine the SL APO has better highlight rendering and micro contrast, the SL and some Panasonic-Leica lenses I have used had nicer rendering than the Sigma DG DN in my opinion.

About the small, cheap and good af lens, I think the 50mm f1.8 Panasonic is one of the best value of the system, it is not big, really cheap used, has fast AF, and a good copy is very sharp wide open.

It is better, but what me and many of the commenters found was - is the price difference worth it? Maybe not.. It's also a 1.2 lens.

Thank you regarding the Panasonic. It seems, my impression, is that Sigma 35mm f2> Leica 35 summicron sl asph > Panasonic 35 1.8 (not by a lot, theyre basically the same lens)

 I already have so many 50mm and  I want a tiny lens with af and preferably wider than 50 since I also want to use it for the ocassional video.

So I think I'll try and get a sigma 35mm f2.

[jjesp]

Love the Sigma DG 35mm f/2 for my SL2-S. Sharp and compact. But somehow I like the rendering from the Panasonic 50mm f/1.8 even more. And the focus seems a bit faster and more quiet. (Not that the Sigma DG makes much noise though) Both great lenses for the price.

[BernardC]

6 hours ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

That being said, I'm kind of a Leica glass snob myself. But having found out so much in this L system is perhaps not so Leica except the APO glass, I've decided to be more open to Sigma and Panasonic too and maybe give them a shot.

There are many different ways to be a "Leica lens snob!"

Don't forget that for a very long time the most popular Leica lens was the Summicron-M 50. That lens isn't a groundbreaking optical design (maybe it was in the 1950's, but not since);  it's a fully optimized classical design. The Lumix-based ASPH-SL lenses are the same, where Leica takes relatively simple designs and makes them the best they can be. Arguments about that lens took place in magazine pages and camera store counters, but they were the same then as they are now: "Nikon. Canon, etc. make cheaper lenses that are F:1.8 or 1.7, and those are just at good at taking pictures of brick walls and resolution charts, why pay for a red dot?"

It's an argument that goes way beyond photography, of course: "why pay more for a tarte tatine at a starred restaurant, when the bistro down the street uses the same recipe?" We face these types of decisions all the time.

[JohnathanLovm]

Personally I think the Lumix S f/1.8 lineup is a good balance between price and performance especially video work.

[Leicaboy Norway]

Yeah but I'm confused regarding primes. For once, the Sigma 35mm f2, Lumix 35 f1,8 and Leica 35 summ asph sl seems to be just as good but to completely different prices.

It would be silly to stick with Leica here just to say I bought a Leica camera to shoot Leica lenses, because that's where the image quality is. Because these 3 lenses look excactly the same! I've seen multiple videos now. So it seems the Leica asph are rebranded lumix lenses. Personally I dont like that Leica did that.

I might get one of those small lenses, but I am not paying 3x for for the same lens to have 5% better iq because of some coating and metal, again I dont like this move from Leica, I expect quality from them.

[oculaii]

45 minutes ago, JohnathanLovm said:

Personally I think the Lumix S f/1.8 lineup is a good balance between price and performance especially video work.

I agree, this is why I like it. Even if it was slighty more expensive, it would be a good value. The size and performance are great for hybrid shooters.
Not sure I would keept it if it was only for photography though

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

7 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Yeah but I'm confused regarding primes. For once, the Sigma 35mm f2, Lumix 35 f1,8 and Leica 35 summ asph sl seems to be just as good but to completely different prices.

It would be silly to stick with Leica here just to say I bought a Leica camera to shoot Leica lenses, because that's where the image quality is. Because these 3 lenses look excactly the same! I've seen multiple videos now. So it seems the Leica asph are rebranded lumix lenses. Personally I dont like that Leica did that.

I might get one of those small lenses, but I am not paying 3x for for the same lens to have 5% better iq because of some coating and metal, again I dont like this move from Leica, I expect quality from them.

Leica has been rebranding lenses for many decades. From Sigma, Schneider,  Minolta, etc…

[oculaii]

5 minutes ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Yeah but I'm confused regarding primes. For once, the Sigma 35mm f2, Lumix 35 f1,8 and Leica 35 summ asph sl seems to be just as good but to completely different prices.

It would be silly to stick with Leica here just to say I bought a Leica camera to shoot Leica lenses, because that's where the image quality is. Because these 3 lenses look excactly the same! I've seen multiple videos now. So it seems the Leica asph are rebranded lumix lenses. Personally I dont like that Leica did that.

I might get one of those small lenses, but I am not paying 3x for for the same lens to have 5% better iq because of some coating and metal, again I dont like this move from Leica, I expect quality from them.

From my experience (I have used the Sigma 35mm F2 and the Lumix 35mm f1.8), the Sigma is sharper stopped down and has better microcontrast. However, the Lumix 35mm f1.8 focus way faster on the non PDAF cameras and it has nicer colors (in my opinion). Both are much less impressive than my 35mm GM.