Help me understand: Leica’s “B” line

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 9/11/2024 at 4:47 PM, Chris Nebard said:

Absolutely bang on. Couldn’t agree more. I trod the same path - getting the 24-70 VE, using my M lenses and adding Sigma DG DN primes. I have a photographer friend who would never consider Sigma because of the brand name and its less than perfect history. He won’t accept that recent years’ offerings have altered the perception of the brand. As I’ve said on these threads before, I wouldn’t have moved into the SL system without there being small, well built, optically good a/f primes - with aperture rings. The 35 DG DN i-contemporary is a fantastic example of this, as is the 24 f3.5 (along with a number of other native L-Mount lenses from Sigma). I doubt that Leica would limp along with an L-Mount Partner whose gear neither complemented nor met Leica standards. As a Nikon user since the 1970s, I would never have used third party lenses on my cameras. The L-Mount is different; Leica benefits from the alliance as much as the other companies do (in the ways detailed here by others). But, it wouldn’t last long if Sigma and Panasonic optical/lens products didn’t meet proscribed standards.  Like you, I’m tempted by owning an SL APO (never say never!) but the 28mm I tried didn’t have me rushing to replace my 24 and 35 Sigmas. And that is no criticism of the APO at all. It’s just an indication of how much I like the I-contemporary DG DNs. 

Leica has been working with Sigma since the early 1990-ies, even rebranded some of their lenses, and codesigned a number of Panasonic MFT lenses which Panasonic sells under the Leica brand. So the L alliance is not something that materialized out of thin air. 

[Advertisement]

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

[chrismuc]

On 9/7/2024 at 3:25 PM, JoshuaRothman said:

I'm new to the SL system and only own the Sigma 35 f/2 DG DN and the Leica version of the Sigma 24-70. Going in, my assumption was that I would be disappointed by these lenses; on some level, I figured that I'd use them for a while, then upgrade to the Leica 35 APO SL and 24-90. Now that I've used the lenses extensively, however, my views are a little different. I'm still open to the idea of upgrading, and will probably rent a 35 APO SL, but the Sigma lenses have really impressed me, and I'm no longer sure that the improvements offered by the Leica glass will justify the price for my use. It's really changed my perception of L-mount; it now feels much more like a partnership system between Leica/Panasonic and Sigma.

The aperture ring situation has turned out to be highly relevant to me. I've realized that my enjoyment of my SL2-S is much higher with the aperture ring on the lens. This lets me map shutter speed to the top dial and ISO to the back dial. On the SL3, I'd have a dedicated ISO dial, but I'd still prefer an aperture ring. Comparing my experience between the Sigma 35 (with ring) and the Leica 24-70 (without), I prefer the aperture ring so much that I'm considering selling the Leica 24-70 to get the Sigma 24-70 II (or 28-105). So I find myself headed towards a world in which I use my SL camera almost exclusively with Sigma lenses (and adapted M glass). This is a big change from what I assumed going in, which is that I'd be working my way towards a first-party setup with the SL, just as I have with my M over the years.

Conversely, I feel that I get the "B" line aspect of the lens lineup more. The optical quality of the Sigma glass is very high. And so it's really not that different from M mount, where I'm okay with paying a lot more for a a 35mm Summicron because of handling and first-party integration, even though, optically, the Voigtlander 35s are basically equally good. I only wish that Leica had chosen the Sigma DG DN lenses, with aperture rings, to rebadge, instead of the Lumix ones. But I understand the thinking, from a design perspective.

I 100% agree. I use the Sigma 17f4, 24f2, 35f2, 65f2, 85f1.4, 105f2.8M lenses, all with aperture rings. I love the handling and the optical performance and see no need to invest in SL APO primes. Next investment in Sigma glass will quite definitely be the phenomenal 50f1.2. It’s great to have such a wide choice of lenses within the L-mount alliance, even they are quite niche compared to the big-players Canon, Sony and Nikon. 
… and I hope the S1RII will offer really competitive PDAF C-AF performance 😋

[Chris Nebard]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

Leica has been working with Sigma since the early 1990-ies, even rebranded some of their lenses, and codesigned a number of Panasonic MFT lenses which Panasonic sells under the Leica brand. So the L alliance is not something that materialized out of thin air. 

I don’t think I suggested that it did. Nevertheless, the L Mount Alliance is only around six years old and, older collaborations notwithstanding, my own perception (rightly or wrongly) is that Sigma’s production of reputation enhancing, high quality lenses, consistently and regularly, is relatively recent. Whatever, I’m a fan these days. 

[jaapv]

For instance the Leica 28-70 R was a Sigma lens and made by Sigma. It was a rather nice lens -I used to own one- and it shows that Sigma made quite good lenses back then as well.