Leica VE 24-90 f2.8-4 compared to Sigma SL 28-105mm f2.8

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 11 Stunden schrieb CptSlevin:

There is no "Leica look"
Lens costs 6k USD and resale value around 3k, it says a lot.

Look at ratio between original sales price and used price of lenses of other brands...Welcome in the century of "I want new every 2 years" 

[Advertisement]

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

[BernardC]

4 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

Look at ratio between original sales price and used price of lenses of other brands...Welcome in the century of "I want new every 2 years" 

Maybe that's what he meant. Compare and contrast with a 10-year old standard zoom from other brands. They'll have depreciated a lot more than 50%. It says a lot.

[tom0511]

Who cares if its a "Leica" look or just a good look or just one look (some) (or many) people like.

And people have different taste.

 

 

[Ivar B]

The 24-90 is a superb lens. It says a lot that it is optically better than almost all Leica M lenses, save the newest APO lenses.

It comes at cost, though. Nobody will claim it is compact. But chief designer Peter Karbe at Leica always stresses that achieving optical superiority goes hand in hand with size and weight, although a recent M lens like the APO 2/35 is said to almost mach the SL APO 2/35. 

[tom0511]

Yes, it's not a small lens. It's more like a "tube" where you hold both the lens and the camera. I use the zoom when I have to switch focal length quickly (events), or weather is bad, if I want max flexibility.

When I have more time I use primes often.

When you get to a certain level, I don't understand why size / weight is so important.

I have carried a Leica S with 3 lenses in a backpack for hours, as well as a SL2 + 2490 and 90280 when hiking. If you water bottle is empty or full makes a difference of one kilo. Do you feel that difference in your backpack? (I am not talking extreme adventures, I am talking what 95% of us might do).

If weight is so important I would rather bring a Canon G1xIII or a Sony or a Fuji X System or a Q3.

[andybarton]

Just a reminder that fighting is not allowed on this Forum. If you want to do that, please go elsewhere.

Thanks. 

[davidmknoble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/13/2024 at 7:46 AM, CptSlevin said:

Leica 24-90 might be nice, but it's not a viable option in comparison at all, heavy, big, overpriced.

That is your opinion, but it is not my opinion.  Viable to me is not all about size and weight.  The 24-90 was almost an APO designation, but Leica is too picky and so it isn’t. The 24-90 also has a smaller f/stop because Leica does not offer an f/stop to sell, but offers wide open usability. Glass is heavy, there is no way around that and the glass is more important than the camera.  Really great glass is not cheap.

So, viable option would have to be defined. For me, viable is image quality, period.  I am not going to waste my time taking photographs to make my arms feel good, but would rather come home with images I love.  This is a good 1 lens option.

The price / weight is not for everyone, which is why there are choices.  The Sigma lenses are very good. I believe the Leica lenses are better in many cases because of the results I’ve gotten with both.

[Homo Faber]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb davidmknoble:

That is your opinion, but it is not my opinion.  Viable to me is not all about size and weight.  The 24-90 was almost an APO designation, but Leica is too picky and so it isn’t. The 24-90 also has a smaller f/stop because Leica does not offer an f/stop to sell, but offers wide open usability. Glass is heavy, there is no way around that and the glass is more important than the camera.  Really great glass is not cheap.

So, viable option would have to be defined. For me, viable is image quality, period.  I am not going to waste my time taking photographs to make my arms feel good, but would rather come home with images I love.  This is a good 1 lens option.

The price / weight is not for everyone, which is why there are choices.  The Sigma lenses are very good. I believe the Leica lenses are better in many cases because of the results I’ve gotten with both.

Well put.

[Planetwide]

On 12/15/2024 at 7:20 AM, davidmknoble said:

That is your opinion, but it is not my opinion.  Viable to me is not all about size and weight.  The 24-90 was almost an APO designation, but Leica is too picky and so it isn’t. The 24-90 also has a smaller f/stop because Leica does not offer an f/stop to sell, but offers wide open usability. Glass is heavy, there is no way around that and the glass is more important than the camera.  Really great glass is not cheap.

So, viable option would have to be defined. For me, viable is image quality, period.  I am not going to waste my time taking photographs to make my arms feel good, but would rather come home with images I love.  This is a good 1 lens option.

The price / weight is not for everyone, which is why there are choices.  The Sigma lenses are very good. I believe the Leica lenses are better in many cases because of the results I’ve gotten with both.

While I appreciate the point of your post, that Leica lenses are better, I feel that Leica could also "do better". Glass elements maybe heavy, but the rest of the lens can be lighter. Modern carbon composites are harder wearing and significantly lighter. Since we expect the best from Leica, it would behoove them to make this type of investment.  I, for one, feel that Leica has significantly slowed the in house development and production of the SL Line of lenses.

Conversely, the competition is making this type of investment, and as Leica's optical gap narrows vs its competition, their product will/is becoming less compelling for new entrants.

Also,  like you, I love the look of the lenses. But, I also like the output and weight of my Canon RF glass - and optically, its getting very close... Rebadging Sigma lenses further lowers the perceived value of Leica's brand.

Lastly, where is my APO SL 35mm Summilux?

IMHO

[davidmknoble]

Good points @Planetwide.  At my age, I am working to see less plastics for the environment, and using film cameras in the 1980’s, I prefer the aluminum lenses for durability and sustainability.  I do not like what happens to plastics in the long term - the way it can degrade and get sticky or simply we find it wasn’t the right polymer to use.  Leica lenses have rubber rings and seals that can be replaced (and pure rubber is still better than plastic for the environment).

Lighter has advantages.  Plastic can sometimes absorb impact better.  In the end, I really don’t care what the weight is.  If it is too heavy, I use a monopod or tripod.  If I cannot, I simply accept it or choose a lighter lens!

You won’t see SL Summilux lenses.  Leica designed these to have such a fast focus falloff, that the summicron 35 looks like a Summilux or very close (according to discussions I have had with Peter Karbe, the designer).  Clearly a Summilux would need less light for a given shutter speed, but the ISO performance in modern cameras is so good, that matters less today, especially for 1 stop!

Thanks for the conversation!

[Planetwide]

Mr Karbe has designed very beautiful F/2.0 lenses. But his 50mm SL Summilux is a masterpiece. I would say probably the best 50mm F/1.4 lens available, simply a stunning lens. The Summicron, just doesn't match the Summilux's look and bokeh - please see there comparison video below. @14min

With regards to Carbon composite vs metal. Todays carbon composites are not your grandfathers plastics, they are dynamically very stable, light and strong. An example of the use for this would be the Boeing 787 fuselage, designed to withstand extreme temperature changes, pressure cycles and aerodynamic forces. These aircraft are expected to last 30+ years. 

Leica has a unique opportunity to further enhance the SL system, by making it not only optically class leading, but ergonomically (weight wise) class leading. The two would be very compelling, and allow for much faster lenses or image stabilization. I would argue that metal has significant thermodynamic disadvantages vs a carbon composite. This is why Canon paints their telephoto lens white, to minimize thermodynamic expansion, and the corresponding optical misalignment. A thermal bridge can be designed in to a metal lens body, but it unnecessarily adds complexity, weight and cost. 

Has anybody shot the Sigma 28-105mm, if yes, could you kindly post some examples.

Thanks

 

 

[davidmknoble]

Just a quick note - yes the SL Summilux is beautifully - but size and weight were one of your concerns.  The SL Summilux lens is an incredibly heavy lens - even if it were a plastic body the glass is really, really heavy and the focusing incredibly slow.  If you read my note, you will also see that I agree plastic has an impact advantage. 

In the end, if you want plastic and light weight, go with sigma.  If you want the best glass, go with the Leica SL APO’s.  It’s everyone’s choice.  For me, the Leica lenses produce the best images for my style and work.  Weight is not the factor.

[Planetwide]

Canon just released a 50mm F/1.4 that is 580g vs 1065g for the Leica. The Canon is very very close in optical performance.  The only thing stopping Leica from making lighter weight APO class lenses is Leica. 

Anyway's lets get the thread back to the Sigma 28-105mm. Do you guys think Leica will release a rebadged version?

Edited December 27, 2024 by Planetwide

[swatch]

On 12/28/2024 at 5:42 AM, Planetwide said:

Canon just released a 50mm F/1.4 that is 580g vs 1065g for the Leica. The Canon is very very close in optical performance.  The only thing stopping Leica from making lighter weight APO class lenses is Leica. 

Anyway's let’s get the thread back to the Sigma 28-105mm. Do you guys think Leica will release a rebadged version?

Only genuine zoom lenses from Leica for SL are 24-90 & 90-280.  I guess Leica simply let alliance partners to do whatever zoom lenses and only rebadge those entry models to attract new users of SL.  In short, I don’t think 28-105 to be rebadged.

Edited February 24 by swatch