Leica 24-90 bad copy or is this normal...

[TVP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was an M user for years and left the system, but got back in recently with an SL3 and a Leica 24-70 2.8.  It has been great.  I've read and heard so much about the 24-90 though, and I saw various shots and comparisons where it was a solidly better performer.  I figured, let me try it out and see.  So I bought one and compared it to my 24-70 and was rather surprised.  Center sharpness was rather similar on both, but anything beyond that was WAAAY different.  The 24-70 I have blows it away consistently in any testing that I do and at all focal lengths.  This makes no sense based on what ive seen and heard, so now I am wondering if I have a really out of spec lens or is this actually typical?  

The 24-90 shows off major color fringing, even stopped down.  Corners are all substantially softer with less resolving than my 24-70 as well.  This is at F8 and F11.  I rarely shoot wide open.  Most of my work is around 24/35 and then around 100 or longer.  70 is a little short for me, so I figured the 90 would be just that much better.  Size and weight are no concern as Im always on a tripod tethered.  

Does the 24-90 really have this much color issue?

Here are two screen shots from Lightroom.  24-70 on the left.  Both of these are corners.  Thoughts?

 

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

[Jeff S]

You might have a bad copy.  I and others have been delighted with the performance of the 24-90.  It’s naturally weaker at 90mm than the wider end, but the 24-70 really sucks at 90mm.  The latest 24-70 gets good reports here as well; many related threads.

 

[TVP]

its one thing to be soft, but is it known to have that much color fringing?  If it's normal, im just going to not bother and stick with other lenses.  If its not supposed to look like that I might see if I can get it repaired/adjusted.

[Jeff S]

Mine isn’t soft and fringing is not a problem. Hopefully you bought from a reputable dealer that offers return/exchange.

[Dazzajl]

Neither of those look as good as I'd expect from those lenses. When I got my SL it was for using my M lenses with but on impulse I threw a used Panasonic 20-60 in the basket that was about £100. It's a cheap, plastic but serviceable kit lens affair. I've not actually use it yet ☺️ but just for comparison I fired off a few shots in the garden now. 28mm and 50mm at f8 and these crops are 100% and from the top corner.

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!

I think it would be fair in your shoes to be expecting better.

 

[TVP]

I might send this lens in for service.  If fringing is a characteristic ill cut my losses and look elsewhere for a different lens... I shoot backlit a lot in my work.  (Architectural photography)

So that corner on the first screen shot was not my point of focus and probably why you think it doesn't seem sharp.  The parts of that image that are solid in focus are tack sharp.  I only showed that one because of the color fringing.  The 24-70 I have is amazing in the center, and perfectly sharp in corners within the depth of field range.  No color aberration at all.  It's fantastic at 24 and gets better and better as it zooms in and stops down.  Im very happy with it.  In fact my retoucher asked me what in the world I did as they weren't used to images that were so evenly strong.  It's a solid lens.  Im impressed with it.  Also, I have a panasonic 100mm 2.8 Macro that is mind-blowing.  I know there are lens variations...but I didn't have any base line for the 24-90 aside from a lot of good internet praise.  So Im really hoping some owners chime in, especially about the color fringing behavior.  If it's just my copy, I'll send it for repair.  Especially if there is a chance it could come back as strong, or stronger than my 24-70.

 

Ice love to only use primes, but in my work clients want to see variants tethered and switching back and fourth is annoying.  Same with swapping between two cameras like I used to.  The zoom is just convenient when tethered.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not eligible for return or exchange?  That’s why I only buy from trusted dealers with warranty and return policies. And carry comprehensive insurance for issues outside warranty.

[LeicaR10]

TVP,   The SL 24-90 is out of calibration.  It needs to be serviced or returned.  If sending for service, include a few photographs taken at different settings.  Mark the photos on the back.  Leica will either repair or simply swap out the lens for a new one.  Hopefully you have copy of the receipt to include if under warranty.  If bought at a Leica dealer or authorized dealer, the store should handle the repair on your behalf.  The SL 24-90 out performs the SL 24-70 except for FL 24 when shot wide open.  The SL 24-90 should be very high resolving at f/5.6 to f/8 from center to corners at all focal lengths based on my experience with the lens.  r/ Mark

[Manicouagan1]

I suggest you confirm your results with tests at higher shutter speeds.   I find after reviewing my camera settings via Lightroom Classic that some of my images that seem "soft" may have a small amount of motion blur.  The 60 mp SL3 images reveal imperfections in my technique that I never knew I was making.   I often find a need to shoot at high speeds often 1/(4 times focal length).  I am old and my hands shake more than they used to.  

[jaapv]

According to Imatest -not the least of authorities- purple fringing is NOT a lens problem, but related to sensor blooming, especially with small pixels, AKA high resolution sensors. 
My personal observation: the better the lens, the more (micro)contrast, the more purple fringing. 
Use the appropriate slider in processing a raw image and it is gone. If left uncorrected it will be as bad on the DNG as the JPG, depending on the program's algorithms.

CA always comes two opposing fringes of complementary colours ( think of the better-known lateral CA -Red-Green).
In this case there is no Yellow counter-fringe to the Purple so the cause cannot be longitudinal CA, which leaves only sensor blooming on high-contrast edges as a cause. 

So blame the 60 MP of your SL3 and the superb quality of your lens...TANSTAAFL

 

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!

[jaapv]

On 4/25/2025 at 8:18 PM, Dazzajl said:

Neither of those look as good as I'd expect from those lenses. When I got my SL it was for using my M lenses with but on impulse I threw a used Panasonic 20-60 in the basket that was about £100. It's a cheap, plastic but serviceable kit lens affair. I've not actually use it yet ☺️ but just for comparison I fired off a few shots in the garden now. 28mm and 50mm at f8 and these crops are 100% and from the top corner.

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!

I think it would be fair in your shoes to be expecting better.

 

That is because the Panasonic lens has less edge contrast. Well within the blooming resistance of a 24 MP CMOS sensor. CCDs were much,much worse. 

[Ivar B]

I believe there is no doubt you have a bad copy. Maybe quality control did not see this (can happen even at Leica) or something might have happened since new.

I own the 24-90 and have never experienced anything like this. This is a superb lens. I also owned the 24-70 for a while. More compact, and constant 2.8. This is also a very good lens, and you need to examine very carefully to see that the 24-90 is superior (but double price). Leica will no doubt sort this out for you. 

[jaapv]

By all means have the lens checked by Leica, and I would be happy to be proven wrong, but you have not used the lens on a 60 MP sensor, Ivar. 

[jpark114]

That purple fringing is not normal although I've never used 24-90.  However, if any of reputation regarding that lens is true, it shouldn't.  While I don't have that much experience with SL lens in general, I do have a lot of experience, especially in 24-70 range with Canon EF & RF almost all variation, Nikon F & Z and Sony v1 & v2.  Nikon and Canon with 40ish mega pixels, and Sony with A7CR & A7R5 in which both have 60 Mpixels, I don't see that much purple fringing with nowadays's standard zoom lens.  Hence, your copy of 24-90 definitely has an issue.

[TVP]

The lens is currently in for repair with leica.  Waiting to find out the results, but they initially saw the images and felt it wasnt proper either and had me send it in.  I did more testing, and leica had me run a few more specific tests with strobe as well and my 24-90 was bad, but especially so on one side.  So im guessing something is off inside. 

 

I’ll update as i hear results.

[Luke_Miller]

I am very happy with mine. My Nikon DSLR bread and butter lens was the Nikon 24-70 f2.8. I took more than 10K images with it. It is a great performer. My Leica 24-90 is better.  Hopefully you will be happy with yours when Leica gets it back to you.

[TVP]

I finally got my lens back.  I have tested it heavily against my leica 24-70, and another 24-90 i got my hands on.  Lens is fixed, and night and day difference.  Definitely was decentered and well off calibration.

i tested it against a great copy of the 24-90 and both are virtually equaly.  Standrd variation, one copy ws a tiny bit more resolved at certain focal lenths or apertures comapred to the other, but it equaled out pretty much.  Close enough as to not care.  And tested against my 24-70, they are fairly equal.  The 24-70 resolves slightly better and has better corners.  It also has no color issues.  My 24-90 has slight chromatic aberration at 24mm at the extreme edges.  My other test copy also did.  However, 70, and especially 90mm are not so hot on the 24-90 on the sl3.  It looks fabulous at  36mp and below.  At 60 i honestly dont feel it holds up that great.  My panasonic 100 S blows it away by a wide margin,  especially outside the center.  And my 24-70 is a bit better at 70 as well.  
 

it has a fabulous look and is the best feeling zoom lens ive ever used.  Im just a little disapointed that this lens just doesnt seem to have the sheer performance at 70 mm and beyond on 60mp.  Especially when everyone i hear says its the best zoom ever.  
 

 

[Chris Nebard]

Thanks for sharing your findings TVP. I’m a very happy 24-70 VE user but I’ve always had the impression (rightly or wrongly) from the forum that the 24-90 is the superior performing lens of the two. I’ve taken weddings and events for fifty years and the 24-70 is as good a medium zoom as I’ve ever used, but, I was always wondering if I’d be better with the 24-90. Having read of your experiences and conclusions, I’m sure that the 24-70 was the right choice - for me - after all. I have absolutely no problem that it’s made in Japan, either, especially if (as rumoured) it’s Sigma who makes it. Their Aizu factory  produces amazing lenses these days. 
Enjoy both your lenses and thanks again 👍

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[harbelot]

Extreme top left corner crop on SL2-S (70mm).
Looks fine enough for me.

 

 

 

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!

[RBB]

I had the 24-70 in the Leica version alongside the 24-90 because of its constant f/2.8, slightly lighter weight, and slightly smaller size. The photos were accurate but didn't do anything for me; I never once thought, Wow spectacular. Every time I regretted leaving the 24-90 at home on a trip, I eventually sold the 24-70. So, for me, the 24-90 remains my favorite lens, even on the SL3.