SL 24-90 - still a good option today?

[Oxfordian]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 6/20/2025 at 9:21 PM, thelivingyears said:

The little Q3 43 has brought the joy of photography back to me. The last time I experienced something like that was with my Pentax camera. With Sony, it was more of a sober "working relationship." And who likes working anyway?  
Well, I'm currently considering getting an SL to see if photography is as much fun with it.
I would need a standard lens for that. The 24-70 2.8 and the 28-70 2.8 are nice in terms of form factor, but the design is Sigma. Unfortunately, the zoom ring also turns the "wrong" direction for me. I know some people say you get used to it, but with the Sigma for my Sony, I always turned it the wrong way at first. If you don't have any other lenses with a different rotation direction, it might get better again sooner.
I like that it's 100% Leica, as far as I understand it. It's even "Made in Germany"! Unfortunately, it's very expensive and relatively heavy. I'm actually in favor of lighter combinations.
But for targeted use, this might be a nice addition to the Q3. At least I can use the batteries interchangeably .
Does anyone use this lens? Do you have any experience with it? Some say it's one of the best zooms ever made. Unfortunately, it's not that fast, so it's probably only of limited use for portraits. But it's probably very, very good for other things. However, most of the reviews I found were several years old. A lot has changed in the meantime. For example, I have the Tamron 35-150 for Sony (f2.0 - 2.8). That's quite a statement. But I expect more from the Leica.  I am really impresse by the lens Leica used for the Q3 43.

Maybe someone has experience and wants to share it. 

At the moment you don't have a SL (any version) so if you purchased a Sigma 24-70 or 28-70 or 28-105 you would get a zoom lens which is getting excellent reviews. How does it turn the wrong way when you don't have anything to compare it to, if the lens turns the same way as your Sony variants then you would be use to it and it would feel familiar.

The Leica 24-90 is a damn fine lens, rated very highly by those that have one, but it does weigh a bit and as some have commented an SL plus the 24-90 is a lump to carry around all day.

I have the Sigma 24-70 Art version 2, it is very very good, I have absolutely no complaint about the image quality at all, but whilst it isn't built to the same standard as the Leica 24-90 it is certainly well built and I have no concerns about it lasting me many years.

If you really really really have to have the Leica lens then you have to have one, nothing that I write is going to change your mind but a 24-90 Leica is an expensive purchase even used, the Sigma's new are around 50% or less of the cost of a used 24-90, in fact you could almost get a second hand SL plus a Sigma 24-70 Art V2 for the cost of a Excellent ++ or Mint 24-90. A quick check on MPB (UK) has a SL for £1450 with all it bits including box, a new (WEX) Sigma 24-70 Art V2 is £1180 making £2630 in total, an 'Excellent' Leica 24-90 from MPB (UK) is £2320.

It's your call what you decide to do, I am very happy with my SL2 and Sigma 24-70 f2.8 DGDN Art II.

 

[Luke_Miller]

I don't think anyone knows if a Version 2 of the 24-90 is in the works.  If they did they would be enjoined from acknowledging it. I use my copy of the 24-90 on my SL, SL2, and SL2-S.  It performs beautifully on all three bodies and I would be amazed if someone reported an issue on the higher resolution SL3.  The internet lore of "older" lenses working less well on high resolution sensors has pretty much been debunked. Since the SL3 adds phase detection to the AF-C mode, performance is improved, but reportedly not to the level many would like. The contrast detect AF-C in my current bodies works fine in my use. I bought the 24-90 used as my first SL lens.  It impressed me enough to add the 90-280 and several APO primes.  If one is patient they can be found used at a much more affordable price.  I paid around $3000 for mine.

[LD_50]

2 hours ago, Luke_Miller said:

I don't think anyone knows if a Version 2 of the 24-90 is in the works.  If they did they would be enjoined from acknowledging it. I use my copy of the 24-90 on my SL, SL2, and SL2-S.  It performs beautifully on all three bodies and I would be amazed if someone reported an issue on the higher resolution SL3.  The internet lore of "older" lenses working less well on high resolution sensors has pretty much been debunked. Since the SL3 adds phase detection to the AF-C mode, performance is improved, but reportedly not to the level many would like. The contrast detect AF-C in my current bodies works fine in my use. I bought the 24-90 used as my first SL lens.  It impressed me enough to add the 90-280 and several APO primes.  If one is patient they can be found used at a much more affordable price.  I paid around $3000 for mine.

If there were an update to either the 24-90 or 90-280, I wouldn’t be looking at IQ for a reason to upgrade. 

Size and weight would be #1. 
Teleconverter compatibility for 90-280 would be #2. 
AF speed on 90-280 would be #3. 
Extending zoom and zoom creep on 24-90 would be #4. 

[Jeff S]

Or perhaps internal zoom for 24-90, if they could minimize lengthening.

[LocalHero1953]

45 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Or perhaps internal zoom for 24-90, if they could minimize lengthening.

That would be my first choice, but I assume that would require a complete redesign, with impact on the optical performance. Since I assume they wouldn’t make it worse, I suspect it would be at least as heavy, if not more so. Just guessing

[vdeneke]

Is the 24-90 AF fast enough on a SL3-S ? I´m thinking of exchanging my 24-70

 

Cheers,

Volker

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

43 minutes ago, vdeneke said:

Is the 24-90 AF fast enough on a SL3-S ? I´m thinking of exchanging my 24-70

 

 

For my shooting style, yes (but I don’t own the camera).

Edited June 27 by Jeff S

[Slender]

Hands down the one item that brought the most money into my business since 2020, its this Leica SL Vario-Elmarit Asph 24-90mm F2.8-4.

The most incredible combo I carried for the most demanding jobs. Always delivers, and you can consider it to be a 24-150mm with the SL2/SL3, easily.

THE lens, the reason that brought Steve McCurry into Leica.

Sure its heavy and wide but altogether lighter and easier than carrying primes, be it M lenses or the SL primes.

For light weight (mind you its all brass since I am a silver addict) strolls I have M10r with 35 and 50 (and a 28f2 for sale)

For old shcool heavy duty, an S with a growing selection of primes... It was this or getting a Summilux SL 50. Had I not lusted for going back to optical viewfinde experience its the only complement you can need/want to an SL with 24/90.

(an example of a female photographer rocking the heaviest lenses of the SL platform: 24-90, 50f1.4 and 90-280 https://leica-camera.com/en-GB/stories/xiomara-bender-sl2-power-of-dreams?srsltid=AfmBOooeg0v4hZhcRWg6xM1XlvhG-pyBEHTvN1kUYYM9DyTa03k2tR2x )

It is not by chance Leica put out these 2 lenses first. Its really all you could ever need if you can carry it.

 

PS last shot is handheld in the dead of night... OIS+IBIS+Weight of the thing means you can leave your tripod at home most of the time

 

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 June 27 by Slender

[LD_50]

41 minutes ago, vdeneke said:

Is the 24-90 AF fast enough on a SL3-S ? I´m thinking of exchanging my 24-70

 

Cheers,

Volker

I don’t have any concerns with AF speed on the 24-90 with SL3-S. 

[thelivingyears]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Slender:

Hands down the one item that brought the most money into my business since 2020, its this Leica SL Vario-Elmarit Asph 24-90mm F2.8-4.

The most incredible combo I carried for the most demanding jobs. Always delivers, and you can consider it to be a 24-150mm with the SL2/SL3, easily.

THE lens, the reason that brought Steve McCurry into Leica.

Sure its heavy and wide but altogether lighter and easier than carrying primes, be it M lenses or the SL primes.

For light weight (mind you its all brass since I am a silver addict) strolls I have M10r with 35 and 50 (and a 28f2 for sale)

For old shcool heavy duty, an S with a growing selection of primes... It was this or getting a Summilux SL 50. Had I not lusted for going back to optical viewfinde experience its the only complement you can need/want to an SL with 24/90.

(an example of a female photographer rocking the heaviest lenses of the SL platform: 24-90, 50f1.4 and 90-280 https://leica-camera.com/en-GB/stories/xiomara-bender-sl2-power-of-dreams?srsltid=AfmBOooeg0v4hZhcRWg6xM1XlvhG-pyBEHTvN1kUYYM9DyTa03k2tR2x )

It is not by chance Leica put out these 2 lenses first. Its really all you could ever need if you can carry it.

 

PS last shot is handheld in the dead of night... OIS+IBIS+Weight of the thing means you can leave your tripod at home most of the time

 

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!

 

Wow, amazing shots. Thank you for putting things into perspective, both in words and pictures! Very helpful!!!

[Slender]

9 hours ago, thelivingyears said:

Wow, amazing shots. Thank you for putting things into perspective, both in words and pictures! Very helpful!!!

I have to be fully honest, it’s a workhorse that can produce masterpieces. Surely the best I have ever tried…. But for sheer joy when there is no job related pressure… it’s hard to beat the smaller offerings like M or Q.

The joy part of the SL for me lies more in the results than the journey towards them. With the M its the opposite you have so much pleasure using it that sometimes you can not be bothered to find out if what you did is actually in focus or not ahaha… I easily let pictures accumulate for days or weeks inside the M like with film… and then I will open it in Lr and revisit the memories (and rediscover the charming effects of most M lenses).

With the SL in the context of work I don’t have that luxury everything need be edited straight away… but I head to the digital darkroom with supreme confidence after a hard day of carrying it with the heavy 24-90

 

Edited June 28 by Slender

[LocalHero1953]

I agree with all you wrote, @Slender . The SL2-S and 24-90SL account for 90% of my photos where getting a result in almost any circumstances is the priority. For other stuff it’s the Q3-43 or analogue. See my website for the scenarios I work in.

Edited June 28 by LocalHero1953

[thelivingyears]

I have just ordered a used Leica 24-90mm. So thank you all very much for your replies. The have convinced me to give it a try. What was so striking (here and in other forums/threads) are the comments that read like: I have sold much lenses, but I have always kept my 24-90mm and I still enjoy (or even love) it today.

In addition, I have ordered a Leica SL2-S. I hope (in terms of image quality => photos) it‘s a good fit. The SL3 was too expensive for me. I hope the SL2-S will do.

[helged]

4 hours ago, thelivingyears said:

I have just ordered a used Leica 24-90mm. So thank you all very much for your replies. The have convinced me to give it a try. What was so striking (here and in other forums/threads) are the comments that read like: I have sold much lenses, but I have always kept my 24-90mm and I still enjoy (or even love) it today.

In addition, I have ordered a Leica SL2-S. I hope (in terms of image quality => photos) it‘s a good fit. The SL3 was too expensive for me. I hope the SL2-S will do.

Excellent combo, SL2-S and SL24-90; enjoy! 

[lencap]

Congrats on your decision!  You'll LOVE it!  I bought the 24-90 with my SL601 years ago.  Loved the images, hated the 24-90 weight and sold it.  Replaced it with primes (including the Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH and others) and convinced myself that I made the right choice.  "It's lighter, and boy that feels better".  After a while I found I was shooting the camera less and less.  Turns out lighter weight wasn't as enjoyable as looking at the24-90 photos on my iMac 27" 5K retina display.  

I missed the 24-90 so much I bought another one.  Use the weight to stabilize the camera when shooting.  The IBIS in the SL body and OIS on the 24-90, added to the benefit of larger pixel size compared to the Q3 43 and you'll find, as I did, that night photography with the SL kit is well worth the extra weight.  You can hand hold the camera at very slow shutter speeds with a little practice - no need for tripod.  And if you ever shoot video the SL weight is a benefit - no camera shake, solid grip, no hand fatigue.

When I shoot I always use the EVF, so the camera is close to my face, balances very well, and gives me the flexibility of 6 primes without changing lenses or taking my eye off the subject.  When the lens fully extends the weight is more obvious, but that doesn't occur all the time.  When retracted the lens is under 4" in length, and at full extension a bit over 6".  Add the Rock-N-Roll strap as a a way to better distribute the weight when you're not shooting.  You won't need a camera bag, one lens one body.  You can add an "L" bracket as well, allows the lens to face downward, but the Rock-N-Roll is likely all you'll need.  Turn off the WiFi and Bluetooth and the battery will last longer too!  Plus you have dual SD card slots on the SL2 body, very useful when you are taking serious photos.

Do I feel the weight - Yes.  Is it something that is unbearable and makes me stop using it?  It did with my the SL601, but no longer.  Shooting is an "occasion".  Some suggest the SL isn't fun.  Maybe so, but there's a lot of fun when I have a lens that can do anything and always puts a smile on my face when I see the image. One more thing - my local Leica dealer reminded me that when Leica introduced the SL601, a brand new platform, the ONLY lens available was the 24-90.  That stuck with me.  Leica had a lot on the line with a new camera design very different from the M.  Why wouldn't I want to shoot with the lens Leica decided was a "showcase lens"?  To me the 24-90 is the best combination of Mandler and Karbe design.  High precision across the vast majority of the frame, yet still providing "character" and the "Leica look" on every shot.  Brilliant!

And if 3 pounds makes the difference in having "THE Lens" or not, buy a 5 pound dumbbell, use it daily, and in three weeks you'll be fine.

Edited July 9 by lencap

[LD_50]

2 hours ago, lencap said:

Congrats on your decision!  You'll LOVE it!  I bought the 24-90 with my SL601 years ago.  Loved the images, hated the 24-90 weight and sold it.  Replaced it with primes (including the Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH and others) and convinced myself that I made the right choice.  "It's lighter, and boy that feels better".  After a while I found I was shooting the camera less and less.  Turns out lighter weight wasn't as enjoyable as looking at the24-90 photos on my iMac 27" 5K retina display.  

I missed the 24-90 so much I bought another one.  Use the weight to stabilize the camera when shooting.  The IBIS in the SL body and OIS on the 24-90, added to the benefit of larger pixel size compared to the Q3 43 and you'll find, as I did, that night photography with the SL kit is well worth the extra weight.  You can hand hold the camera at very slow shutter speeds with a little practice - no need for tripod.  And if you ever shoot video the SL weight is a benefit - no camera shake, solid grip, no hand fatigue.

When I shoot I always use the EVF, so the camera is close to my face, balances very well, and gives me the flexibility of 6 primes without changing lenses or taking my eye off the subject.  When the lens fully extends the weight is more obvious, but that doesn't occur all the time.  When retracted the lens is under 4" in length, and at full extension a bit over 6".  Add the Rock-N-Roll strap as a a way to better distribute the weight when you're not shooting.  You won't need a camera bag, one lens one body.  You can add an "L" bracket as well, allows the lens to face downward, but the Rock-N-Roll is likely all you'll need.  Turn off the WiFi and Bluetooth and the battery will last longer too!  Plus you have dual SD card slots on the SL2 body, very useful when you are taking serious photos.

Do I feel the weight - Yes.  Is it something that is unbearable and makes me stop using it?  It did with my the SL601, but no longer.  Shooting is an "occasion".  Some suggest the SL isn't fun.  Maybe so, but there's a lot of fun when I have a lens that can do anything and always puts a smile on my face when I see the image. One more thing - my local Leica dealer reminded me that when Leica introduced the SL601, a brand new platform, the ONLY lens available was the 24-90.  That stuck with me.  Leica had a lot on the line with a new camera design very different from the M.  Why wouldn't I want to shoot with the lens Leica decided was a "showcase lens"?  To me the 24-90 is the best combination of Mandler and Karbe design.  High precision across the vast majority of the frame, yet still providing "character" and the "Leica look" on every shot.  Brilliant!

And if 3 pounds makes the difference in having "THE Lens" or not, buy a 5 pound dumbbell, use it daily, and in three weeks you'll be fine.

I have had the 24-90 since launch, as well as a handful of other SL lenses (35 APO, 50 Summilux, 16-35, 90-280, Sigma 15 macro). I still use it regularly.

That said I’m surprised the IQ from the 24-90 has you choosing its images over SL primes.
 

Also the SL 601 you referenced doesn’t have IBIS but maybe you replaced that and it wasn’t clear in the post. 

The 24-90 is definitely not 4” at 24 and 6” at 90. It’s actually around 5.5” at 24 and around 7.5” at 90. 

When people talk about the weight of the camera or lens, it’s not because they can’t lift it. I don’t think carrying around a 5 lb dumbbell on a camera strap would be pleasant. The size and weight is the major  drawback for the 24-90. No amount of weight lifting changes that. 

[lencap]

I appreciate your viewpoint, and I agree.  My comments about the 24-90 zoom length came from a ChatGPT with this query:  "Provide the maximum and minimum length of the Leica SL Elmarit 24-90 ASPH Lens" that gave these results: 

Sure! Converting the lengths from millimeters to inches (1 inch = 25.4 mm):

• Minimum length (at 24mm): 95 mm ≈ 3.74 inches

• Maximum length (at 90mm): 160 mm ≈ 6.30 inches

So the lens extends from about 3.7 inches fully retracted to about 6.3 inches fully extended.

 

If those figures are inaccurate, my apologies.  I wasn't trying to distort the size, but merely relied upon the AI reply for accuracy.  

My camera is the SL2-S, replacing my SL601.  The combination of OIS and IBIS is noticeable and helpful.  Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Although not specifically noted in the above comments I did mention that my comments about the 24-90 were made in the context of decisions made "for me" (Post #3).  Clearly others will, and should, view the comments from their perspective.

In terms of primes, I agree that dedicated primes provide a "better" image, but to me having to carry several primes, change them as needed, and realizing that I'll likely not use all of them led me to the 24-90 for my most recent purchase.  On the SL601 that was my only lens until I added the Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4 - which is also a large chunk of glass.

Before adding more primes to my SL2-s  I relied upon MathPhotographer's review of the 24-90 along with his comparison of the zoom versus primes.  His conclusion is that the dedicated primes are indeed better, especially APO, but in real world use the difference isn't always visible, and for me it's relatively insignificant.  My SL- Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH does all I need and the combined weight and bulk is much easier to take anywhere.

His videos are here: 

And here: 

And here:  

 

 

The Rock-N-Roll straps do make a significant difference in perceived, not actual, weight and balance and adding an L mount improves it further, allowing the lens to hang facing downward along the hip instead of perpendicular to the body.  Again, the perspective is "for me" and my use case.  They make a cross body strap that also helps balance the load.

The reference to a 5 pound dumbbell was an attempt at humor - which apparently didn't work as intended.  Sorry if it offended - that wasn't my intent.

Edited July 10 by lencap

[LD_50]

18 minutes ago, lencap said:

I appreciate your viewpoint, and I agree.  My comments about the 24-90 zoom length came from a ChatGPT with this query:  "Provide the maximum and minimum length of the Leica SL Elmarit 24-90 ASPH Lens" that gave these results: 

Sure! Converting the lengths from millimeters to inches (1 inch = 25.4 mm):

• Minimum length (at 24mm): 95 mm ≈ 3.74 inches

• Maximum length (at 90mm): 160 mm ≈ 6.30 inches

So the lens extends from about 3.7 inches fully retracted to about 6.3 inches fully extended.

 

If those figures are inaccurate, my apologies.  I wasn't trying to distort the size, but merely relied upon the AI reply for accuracy.  

My camera is the SL2-S, replacing my SL601.  The combination of OIS and IBIS is noticeable and helpful.  Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Although not specifically noted in the above comments I did mention that my comments about the 24-90 were made in the context of decisions made "for me" (Post #3).  Clearly others will, and should, view the comments from their perspective.

In terms of primes, I agree that dedicated primes provide a "better" image, but to me having to carry several primes, change them as needed, and realizing that I'll likely not use all of them led me to the 24-90 for my most recent purchase.  On the SL601 that was my only lens until I added the Sigma ART 50mm f/1.4 - which is also a large chunk of glass.

Before adding more primes to my SL2-s  I relied upon MathPhotographer's review of the 24-90 along with his comparison of the zoom versus primes.  His conclusion is that the dedicated primes are indeed better, especially APO, but in real world use the difference isn't always visible, and for me it's relatively insignificant.  My SL- Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH does all I need and the combined weight and bulk is much easier to take anywhere.

His videos are here: 

And here: 

And here:  

 

 

The Rock-N-Roll straps do make a significant difference in perceived, not actual, weight and balance and adding an L mount improves it further, allowing the lens to hang facing downward along the hip instead of perpendicular to the body.  Again, the perspective is "for me" and my use case.  They make a cross body strap that also helps balance the load.

The reference to a 5 pound dumbbell was an attempt at humor - which apparently didn't work as intended.  Sorry if it offended - that wasn't my intent.

I really don’t understand using AI to respond on a forum. I come here for real opinions and conversation, not for ChatGPT or any other LLM. It sort of reminds me of playing chess while having the computer tell the player what to do, I don’t see the point. If anyone is going to use LLMs to provide information, I hope they’ll note it every time as such. I think I’ve seen you or others do that here before and I’ve appreciated the notification so I can skip the post. 

I know all that is wishful thinking on my part and there’s no going back to pre-LLM days. 

Regarding the value of the 24-90 when comparing to carrying multiple prime lenses.. I agree it provides a compelling use case. That’s why I shoot it. What you’d posted was that looking through the images you found the 24-90’s IQ to be compelling. I don’t exactly understand why it would outperform SL primes. It could be that your use is similar to my own. I shoot so much more with it than primes that I have more top 24-90 images than any other lens.

[Olaf_ZG]

13 hours ago, thelivingyears said:

I have just ordered a used Leica 24-90mm. So thank you all very much for your replies. The have convinced me to give it a try. What was so striking (here and in other forums/threads) are the comments that read like: I have sold much lenses, but I have always kept my 24-90mm and I still enjoy (or even love) it today.

In addition, I have ordered a Leica SL2-S. I hope (in terms of image quality => photos) it‘s a good fit. The SL3 was too expensive for me. I hope the SL2-S will do.

Good choice, and a good start. May be in future you can add an Apo for your favorite f/l or the summilux if you do portraits, but the 24-90 will give you gorgeous images.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lencap]

My intent isn't to be an AI "fanboi", but to gather information quickly and accurately.  Realizing that AI tools are subject to error I always disclose that I'm using them.  I don't use AI for any other purpose, and if anyone chooses to skip the post because of AI use that's perfectly fine with me.

My main point was to give my opinion about the 24-90 zoom, and how I found it to be a highly useful option with optical quality that is fine for my use cases.  That's basically what the OP requested.  Since I owned that lens, sold it, then rebought it, I thought that experience might be useful, along with why I made those decisions.  Others are free to disagree, and in that regard a forum with real live people is the best way to share differing thoughts and perspectives.

I didn't mean to suggest that primes don't provide better absolute performance, but that in my particular use case absolute performance isn't the primary goal.    Flexibility, always having the option to change FL or reframe without changing lenses, and avoiding missing a shot because the FL I had mounted wasn't ideal for a candid shot filled with emotion and expression are, for me, more important than absolute image quality.  

It's likely that having 60 years experience, and much of it with B/W film and ASA ratings no higher than 400, shaped my biases, with capturing emotion as my primary goal.  That doesn't mean it's for everyone, nor should it be.