Leica Vario - Elmarit 24-70/2.8

[dennersten]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just received the lens and took it out for a first walkaround, but I’m very disappointed. I looked at three reviews, and what convinced me to get it was that this is the lens Leica lends to reviewers in Solms for major releases, like the SL3 recently.

Apologies for the poor pictures, but I’ve never had a lens that flares this badly.

Another issue is that the lens hood is visible in some shots (see attached). I’m not very experienced with zoom lenses—are there specific situations when I should remove the hood?

Otherwise, the lens is excellent—super sharp, with nice colors—when the sun isn’t near my frame. Since I primarily shoot nature and landscapes, this issue makes the lens unusable for me.

The flaring is so severe that I’m wondering if there might be a defect. Even my €300 Summicron-C from the ’60s performs much better in this regard.

 

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[LD_50]

That doesn’t look like the lens hood. A simple test with a white wall and zooming in and out should identify the problem. 

[PhotoCruiser]

First: Id it a brend new lens or a used one? If used, bought from Leica or from private person?

As above, make some tests to verify if the shadow of something is repeatable or not, then you should know what it is, do it wil lens hood installed and without.
A correctly installed lens hood should give a circular shadow, on your upper photo it may be the lens hood was installed diagonally.
Did you had a screw-on filter installed?

Not sure how much flare should be shown when shooting directly in the sun with a zoom lens, but it is my expression that my Nikkor zoom lenses flare more than fixed ones.
You may do another test shooting against the sun and vary zoom to see if the excessive flaring happen only at a certain zoom level.
Chris

 

This photo has flares as well and was shot using my Q2 with fixed 28mm lens

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!

Edited February 19 by PhotoCruiser

[Ivar B]

With the sun directly at you I think you would have to accept some flare. What you see in the photo is not the lens hood (provided it has been correctly mounted).

A zoom lens has many lens elements and is perhaps not as well protected against flare as a fixed focal length lens.

I cannot recall having read that users experience this problem with flare. What many users comment on is that the lens literally sucks dust, just like the Sigma sibling. I don`t know if this problem has been solved over time. My own 24-70 developed a lot of dust but Leica cleaned it under warranty (even if warranty had expired) but I never got a reply to my question if the underlying cause had been taken care of. 

[dennersten]

On 2025-01-27 at 21:39, pgk said:

Are you using the metalicised backing which further increases highlight reflectance. I've done this on colour prints and it can look amazing. I'm sure B&W would benefit too.

Sorry i don't know what that is. 

 

 

On 2025-02-19 at 08:46, PhotoCruiser said:

First: Id it a brend new lens or a used one? If used, bought from Leica or from private person?

As above, make some tests to verify if the shadow of something is repeatable or not, then you should know what it is, do it wil lens hood installed and without.
A correctly installed lens hood should give a circular shadow, on your upper photo it may be the lens hood was installed diagonally.
Did you had a screw-on filter installed?

Not sure how much flare should be shown when shooting directly in the sun with a zoom lens, but it is my expression that my Nikkor zoom lenses flare more than fixed ones.
You may do another test shooting against the sun and vary zoom to see if the excessive flaring happen only at a certain zoom level.
Chris

 

 

 

It's from MPB, the biggest second equipment dealer in Europe. The lens hood problem is solved. The lens hood is petal-shaped and twists easily when in my bag. So if I check it, every time I pick it from the bag. 

Thanks for your picture. What lens did you take it with? I think that amount of flare is OK

Here are two pictures from yesterday's walk.  

This is by margin the worst flaring lens I have, but it's the only Zoom I own. 

It's a pity; it's really a great lens if you don't have the sun in the picture. 

 

 

 

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!

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 5 Minuten schrieb dennersten:

Thanks for your picture. What lens did you take it with? I think that amount of flare is OK

The always attached Q2 Summilux 1.7 28mm Asph. lens
I make also many against the sun photos using my Sigma 14mm and flare is not so much as in your photos,
however that are fixed length lenses what i believe thy are less prone to flares as optics don't move other than focusing.
You may repeat the test when zooming to see if flare become less/more at a certain zoom level.
Chris

 

[dennersten]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

19 minutes ago, PhotoCruiser said:

The always attached Q2 Summilux 1.7 28mm Asph. lens
I make also many against the sun photos using my Sigma 14mm and flare is not so much as in your photos,
however that are fixed length lenses what i believe thy are less prone to flares as optics don't move other than focusing.
You may repeat the test when zooming to see if flare become less/more at a certain zoom level.
Chris

 

Thanks. Will do! Hmm could f-stop have an impact of the amount of flare also? 

[dennersten]

On 2025-02-19 at 11:30, Ivar B said:

With the sun directly at you I think you would have to accept some flare. What you see in the photo is not the lens hood (provided it has been correctly mounted).

A zoom lens has many lens elements and is perhaps not as well protected against flare as a fixed focal length lens.

I cannot recall having read that users experience this problem with flare. What many users comment on is that the lens literally sucks dust, just like the Sigma sibling. I don`t know if this problem has been solved over time. My own 24-70 developed a lot of dust but Leica cleaned it under warranty (even if warranty had expired) but I never got a reply to my question if the underlying cause had been taken care of. 

Yes, it flares something almost every time, but I have primes that flare nothing in situations like the one above, also. 

Thanks great to know about the dust thanks. 

 

[Ivar B]

20 hours ago, dennersten said:

Yes, it flares something almost every time, but I have primes that flare nothing in situations like the one above, also. 

Thanks great to know about the dust thanks. 

 

If you have flare all the time, something is not in order. I would have Leica check it. Perhaps Sigma quality control is not as good as Leica. 

[Bikie John]

@PhotoCruiser asked if you had a filter on the lens. These later examples with multiple blobs look like absolutely classic reflections from the inside of a filter - it is very common in night shots with point sources of light like streetlamps. Of course, if you don't have one, I've no idea what could have caused it!

John

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Bikie John:

@PhotoCruiser asked if you had a filter on the lens. These later examples with multiple blobs look like absolutely classic reflections from the inside of a filter - it is very common in night shots with point sources of light like streetlamps. Of course, if you don't have one, I've no idea what could have caused it!

John

@dennersten
the question is for you even i was tagged as i asked this already.

Chris

Edited February 21 by PhotoCruiser

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Ivar B:

Perhaps Sigma quality control is not as good as Leica. 

?

OP Dennersten has a Leica Vario-Elmarit and it has a lot of flare but he bought a used lens.
I have the fixed Q2 Summilux 1.7 28mm Asph. lens and she does not flare excessive, not do my Sigma lenses.
Chris

[dennersten]

6 hours ago, Ivar B said:

If you have flare all the time, something is not in order. I would have Leica check it. Perhaps Sigma quality control is not as good as Leica. 

No it's the Leica version of the lens. 

[dennersten]

3 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

@dennersten
the question is for you even though I was tagged as I asked this already.

Chris

No filter unfortunatley. 

[PhotoCruiser]

Well, i am sorry for your problem and suggest to either contact Leica or the seller MPB to return or replace it.
As i don't know the specific lens i can't judge if the flare is normal or exaggerated and there is a problem.
Chris

 

 

[dennersten]

3 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

Well, i am sorry for your problem and suggest to either contact Leica or the seller MPB to return or replace it.
As i don't know the specific lens i can't judge if the flare is normal or exaggerated and there is a problem.
Chris

 

 

Thanks. Yes I will do that. 

[Ivar B]

On 2/21/2025 at 5:52 PM, dennersten said:

No it's the Leica version of the lens. 

Yes, but this is still a Sigma lens made by Sigma.

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Ivar B:

Yes, but this is still a Sigma lens made by Sigma.

Are you sure about that? I understood that the Leica have a different barrel and get assembled by Leica and are not a 100% Sigma rebranded lens.
But i can be wrong (what would be disappointing if Leica simply rebrand a Sigma made lens)
Chris

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[BernardC]

3 hours ago, Ivar B said:

Yes, but this is still a Sigma lens made by Sigma.

It's different from either version of Sigma's own 24-70/2.8, so it's a Leica lens made by Sigma. Sigma first made lenses for Leica's R system in the 1990s, but other third-party manufacturers have made some lenses for Leica since the 1930s.

[Ivar B]

6 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

Are you sure about that? I understood that the Leica have a different barrel and get assembled by Leica and are not a 100% Sigma rebranded lens.
But i can be wrong (what would be disappointing if Leica simply rebrand a Sigma made lens)
Chris

Leica nor anyone else has confirmed anything, but looking at the lens design one sees they are identical, just like the 14-24, 70-200 and the 100-400 lenses. But still the "Leica" 24-70 behaved "better", I see users saying it woke up much faster than the Sigma after the camera was switched on. Both the Sigma and the Leica version have this dust problem, but this is apparently fixed in the upgraded version 2 of the Sigma 24-70. If you want a real German Leica zoom in this focal length range you need to get the 24-90. 

As far as I know, the 24-70 lens is completely "Made in Japan" so not assembled by Leica in Germany or anywhere else. But even if the optics are identical, the "Leica" lenses are much upgraded mechanically. I have owned both the Sigma and the "Leica" 100 - 400 and while there is no optical difference the"Leica" version gives a much more high end impression. It is the same with the Summicron 35mm and 50mm lenses (Not the APOs). These share the optical properties with Panasonic and have identical optical performance, but are vastly upgraded mechanically. Enough of the value added in production is done in Portugal, so these lenses are made in Portugal.

I have no problem with Leica in this respect. These are all first class lenses. Just like the APS-C lenses for T/TL/CL - all but the 35mm and 60mm of these were sourced from Japan and I believe the only information given by Leica was that the producer did not sell any lenses under its own brand name. Also the Leica filters are made in Japan.