SL 28-70 f2,8 on June 12?

[Erwin74]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The rumor of the day:

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!

https://www.l-rumors.com/first-leaked-image-of-the-new-leica-28-70-f-2-8-lens-coming-on-june-12/

=> Probably a copy of the Sigma 28-70 DG DN f2.8 C.

Regrettable that Leica did not prefer to copy the new Panasonic Lumix 24-60 f2,8 (which also weighs 544g).

I far prefer 24mm to 28mm.

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[LD_50]

I’m definitely ready for something from Leica that is a novel design. The SL line (note inclusive of the duplicate designs) with the APOs, the Summilux, and the three zooms is pretty decent but there’s not a lot new that signals Leica intends to be or stay a leader in FF lens design.

If Leica were designing new in-house lenses, what would everyone like to see?

My choices that I would buy immediately:

1- Statement Summilux lens for portraiture - do a 90 f/1.4 with all the best engineering - something deliberately focused toward portraits like Nikons 135/f1.8 Plena is what I have in mind with cost toward size/weight reduction and highest in

2- Revise the 50 Summilux to match

3- 1.4x teleconverter for the 90-280

 

[Erwin74]

I'm quite afraid that Leica is putting all its energy into developing a new medium-format line (replacement S) to the detriment of the SL line.

I regret that Leica is not developing a challenger to the Sony A7CII  => something like a Leica Q-LS (Rangefinder L-Mount & 24 Mpx).

We've heard nothing more about the SL 24 Summicron !?! 

@LD_50 => It's right that a Mark II of the 24-90 and 90-280 would be welcome (lighter/size).

Leica should focus on the SL line instead of developing a new medium-format line.

Edited 16 hours ago by Erwin74

[LD_50]

6 minutes ago, Erwin74 said:

I'm quite afraid that Leica is putting all its energy into developing a new medium-format line (replacement S) to the detriment of the SL line.

I regret that Leica is not developing a challenger to the Sony A7CII  => something like a Leica Q-LS (Rangefinder L-Mount & 24 Mpx).

We've heard nothing more about the SL 24 Summicron !?! 

@LD_50 => It's right that a Mark II of the 24-90 and 90-280 would be welcome (lighter/size).

Leica should focus on the SL line instead of developing a new medium-format line.

Unfortunately I don’t see Leica doing anything with the 24-90 or 90-280 now that they have the Sigma 24-70 and 70-200 designs available. The results are close enough that I can’t see them improving much. 

I think they need to focus on differentiating with new statement lenses, supplemented by the duplicate-design Sigma/Panasonics. A Summilux line can do that. 

I don’t personally see much value in a rangefinder shaped L-mount camera but it seems people like the smaller form factor of the A7CII sized cameras. I just don’t see how they can pull it off without sacrificing on EVF quality. Look at a Panasonic S9, and then add a good quality EVF and you have an idea of what’s possible. The Q is always mentioned as a comparison but its size is possible because of the fixed lens that is recessed into the body and basically mounted directly to the sensor. 

[Jeff S]

47 minutes ago, LD_50 said:

The SL line (note inclusive of the duplicate designs) with the APOs, the Summilux, and the three zooms

I count seven currently available Leica branded SL zooms.

[LD_50]

7 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I count seven currently available Leica branded SL zooms.

I was referring to the three that are not duplicates (or very close duplicates) of also available Sigma/Panasonic lenses.

16-35, 24-90, 90-280

I don’t intend for this to become a discussion about who designed what, who owns the patents, or whether Leica should rebrand or slightly redesign other brands’ lenses. I’m fine with the non-APO Summicrons and the zooms, even if I haven’t purchased any thus far. 

I do think there is value in Leica having halo products unique to the brand and would like them to expand on this premise with the SL line. 

Edited 15 hours ago by LD_50

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Panasonic has a 16-35 L mount lens.

[LD_50]

1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

Panasonic has a 16-35 L mount lens.

Take a look at the designs. They’re pretty different. 

Panasonic: 16-35 f/4, 12 elements in 9 groups, 3 aspherical

Leica: 16-35 f/3.5-4.5, 18 elements, in 12 groups, 4 aspherical

Panasonic may have designed the Leica version, I’m not sure. 

[TeleElmar135mm]

Good news for Sigma lover: First we saw the 24-70 rebranded and some weeks later Sigma announced the Vers. II with besser optical performance. I wouldn't be surprised if a Sigma 28-70II C appears soon - also with better performance. Why not the Art 28-105? Too close to the 24-90? And what is with the Sigma 16-28? When das this lens comes with a red dot?

As many have already written here, an in-house development has been missing for a long time. Mention should be made of the 24mm Apo or longer focal length than the 90. Not to mention a macro. Nothing against the "Holy Trinity" from 14-200mm "borrowed" from Sigma - but that doesn't meet the expectations of the Leica brand. Launching one special model after another onto the market may generate sales, but it is not the final answer.

There are also people who want to take photos with it..  

 

[vkdev]

Thanks leica. but that was the last straw. I wont invest in the l system anymore and might sell it. I bought the system with top lenses but have expensive copies of 3 dollar lenses.

[Stuart Richardson]

I don’t know, but it certainly is something private equity does in other sectors. I have talked about it in other threads, but a bit more than ten years ago Blackstone bought a over 40% take in the company, and Leica ramped up its outsourcing and collaborations with other companies. The watches, Q, L mount alliance and even the Panasonic/Sigma heavy SL system are all in the wake of that. The S and M systems were in house. Their prices demonstrate the cost of doing it mostly themselves. 
I am just happy the companies they are working with are good and they seem to have decided to make the best lenses they can and keep the usage a priority, vs allowing themselves to fall completely into a luxury trap. Remember the Hasselblad Stellar and Lunar fiasco?

[LD_50]

3 hours ago, vkdev said:

Thanks leica. but that was the last straw. I wont invest in the l system anymore and might sell it. I bought the system with top lenses but have expensive copies of 3 dollar lenses.

They have quite a few top lenses for the SL system that are unique to Leica:

Summicrons: 21, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90
Zooms: 16-35, 24-90, 90-280
Summilux: 50

It doesn’t make a lot of sense to switch systems unless the cameras and lenses available don’t meet your needs. That goes for any system. Most of the talk online about switching is usually centered around one system being “better” than the other, but rarely addresses why one system or another actually fails to meet the needs of the photographer.

I mentioned in another post that I want Leica to introduce more unique lenses for the system. I also considered this year a switch back to Nikon because I was anticipating more shooting of sports and wildlife (where the longer lenses and more advanced AF of the Z system would be very helpful). Things changed and I don’t need that capability as often as I was expecting so I am sticking with the SL system and purchased an SL3-S. Whatever the other brands are doing doesn’t make my current system any worse than what I bought into it. 

[LD_50]

2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I don’t know, but it certainly is something private equity does in other sectors. I have talked about it in other threads, but a bit more than ten years ago Blackstone bought a over 40% take in the company, and Leica ramped up its outsourcing and collaborations with other companies. The watches, Q, L mount alliance and even the Panasonic/Sigma heavy SL system are all in the wake of that. The S and M systems were in house. Their prices demonstrate the cost of doing it mostly themselves. 
I am just happy the companies they are working with are good and they seem to have decided to make the best lenses they can and keep the usage a priority, vs allowing themselves to fall completely into a luxury trap. Remember the Hasselblad Stellar and Lunar fiasco?

I agree that Leica has leveraged the partnerships to improve the product line. While I don’t prefer the lenses that appear to be very close copies of other brands’ lenses, if they use that revenue to invest in what I do prefer, it’s worth it to me. 

The Hasselblad Stellar and Lunar was terrible for the brand and signaled the worst of the luxury trap you mentioned. Leica needs to keep the M system going along with expanding the SL system with more unique offerings to stay far from that trap. I don’t think they need another larger sensor system but rumors continue. While the S system was intriguing, it’s also an expensive dead-end I’m glad I narrowly avoided. I would like to see that effort put into M, SL, Q.