SL 24-90 - still a good option today?

[thelivingyears]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 9 Stunden schrieb 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.

I absolutely appreciate your reply/replies! I am grateful. Thanks a lot. Very good impact. Personally, I have no problem with people using AI to research things like size of objects etc. No one would object researching via google, I suppose. That‘s the new way of doing it. However, AI (especially when it comes to sizes etc.) seems to be often incorrect. Now idea why. Still it‘s a wise decision to double check. 

So again, thank you very much for your valuable input!

[Advertisement]

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

[Markey]

I have the 24 -70 but have often thought about trading it in for the 24 - 90 .

The 90 fl would be useful .

I`m assuming that image quality between the two lenses is comparable and all I`d be loosing is the faster aperture.

[Tirpitz666]

According to all comparatives that I've seen so far, the 24-90 it's just in another league at all FLs and apertures (even with the 24-70 stopped down to match the slower corresponding 24-90 setting), both in terms of sheer sharpness and microcontrast. There are actual reasons why it costs new more than twice as much the 24-70 (more than triple if you consider the Sigma instead of the Leica version of the 24-70).

Everything I've seen of that lens make me drool about owning one as "the one lens to rule them all", but of course even used is quite the investment for a simple amateur like me..

[BernardC]

7 hours ago, lencap said:

My intent isn't to be an AI "fanboi", but to gather information quickly and accurately.

The dimensions that you provided don't match what's in the lens's specifications (length 138mm at 24mm setting), so accuracy was a total failure. I don't know about speed either, since it takes a second or two to type "Leica 24-90 specs" in a search bar. Did you manage to shave a few milliseconds off-of that? It hardly seems worth it given that the information you retrieved is wrong.

[lencap]

B - You seem to have a deep dislike of AI tools, and for my use of them.  That’s fine.  But you also seem to suggest that because I use them, and they occasionally “hallucinate” (provide erroneous data), that I must not use AI tools to conform to your believe of how forum members “should” interact.  That’s not fine.  Let’s just agree to disagree.

In terms of this specific thread, whether the lens is 7.5” or 6.25”  when extended the point is that having such a long throw does indeed suggest that the lens is big and bulky, a fact that we all agree is true.  I suggested Rock-N-Roll straps used cross body to help offset the discomfort.  If that works, great, if not also great.  My point was, and remains, that despite that the lens produces superb images for me, and apparently for you.  And that was what I’m trying to convey to the OP.

Whether a prime lens is “better” is a combination of objective and subjective evaluations, often based on personal choice and preference in specific use cases.  If the OP finds the posts helpful in making a decision - great!  That’s the point of a forum.  Differing views, free discussion and arriving at a decision by considering different points of view.

I come here to “unwind”, to discuss a hobby that’s given me joy for 60 years, to share thoughts, and to enjoy “social interaction” - nothing more.  Sorry if my comments offend, that’s not my intent.  And with that I’ll end my involvement in this thread.

[jaapv]

The problem with AI is that it doesn’t take the venerable IT truism GIGO in account. 

[thelivingyears]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 24 Minuten schrieb lencap:

 

I come here to “unwind”, to discuss a hobby that’s given me joy for 60 years, to share thoughts, and to enjoy “social interaction” - nothing more.  Sorry if my comments offend, that’s not my intent.  And with that I’ll end my involvement in this thread.

I am sorry to read this. You are not offending me as the one who asked for help, suggestions, experiences. Quite the contrary is the case. Thanks again for your contribution. Valuable and I appreciate it. I have no clue why others take offense in such a serious way and react so harsh. I hope this is not the usual way interactions are led in this forum. 

Edited July 10 by thelivingyears

[Stuart Richardson]

Earlier in the thread it was asked if there might be a 24-90mm version 2. Just to comment on that specifically, I believe that is not something to wait for. Leica does not have a habit of updating older lenses and calling them "version 2". They tend to just make a new lens or silently update it. It has become more common in the M lenses, as they have started adding things like FLE and close focus, but historically Leica has not tweaked lenses and then re-released them as a version 2...it will just keep the same name but be different. Users have started calling them Version I, II etc, but usually Leica just calls them based on their standard naming. They updated that a bit by starting to add ASPH and APO, but in general they have not differentiated unless there were new features. There have been cases where they have updated the design over the years and not really mentioned it or differentiated it at all (for example, earlier R 180mm APO Elmarits will not take the 1.4x APO Teleconverter, so they modified the rear element in newer lenses, but did not differentiate it), but typically they will just introduce a new lens. I think in the case of the 24-90mm, it is unlikely they would update it as it is a design they seemed to have sourced at least partially from Panasonic, and it is a lens that still performs at a high level. Since the SL system does not seem to be the fastest seller, I suspect that this lens will remain in place for a time yet. 

[BernardC]

25 minutes ago, lencap said:

B - You seem to have a deep dislike of AI tools, and for my use of them.  That’s fine.  But you also seem to suggest that because I use them, and they occasionally “hallucinate” (provide erroneous data), that I must not use AI tools to conform to your believe of how forum members “should” interact.  That’s not fine.  Let’s just agree to disagree.

It's nothing personal, I was just correcting data that is trivially easy to check. If anything, it might make future version of AI better.

I'm not sure why you infer a deep dislike of anything from what I wrote. Tools are tools. If a tool doesn't work well in one role (unscrewing a fastener with a hammer, for instance), that doesn't make it unsuitable for all roles. As has been the case for millennia, understanding your tools is important.

[Jeff S]

Search skills have never been a strength of forum members, before or after AI. Otherwise, the number of forum inquiries would have been reduced by 75%.

[Olaf_ZG]

30 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Search skills have never been a strength of forum members, before or after AI. Otherwise, the number of forum inquiries would have been reduced by 75%.

Not only search skills…

[LocalHero1953]

The problem with your post, @lencapwas that it gave an AI response without giving the source, combined with the fact that you said you owned the lens - so you could have checked it anyway. 

But hey ho, we are all learning these things as we deal with AI. I use it quite a lot, but mainly to give me an idea of where to look for an answer, not for the answer itself - as a search engine that I can use with natural language. 

[lencap]

I give up.  I clearly stated that I used ChatGPT, disclosing the source.  “Owning a lens” doesn’t mean I memorize every technical spec, so I used a AI tool to get the information.  The tool provided an incorrect reply - a hallucination in AI lingo.  No intent implied. “It’s  not personal” certainly sounds and feels like it is.  

I can’t help but feel that while the OP appears to understand that the AI incorrectly misstated a fact, the AI tool was a very small part of my commentary, and frankly, from my perspective the error is irrelevant.  We agree on size/bulk.  The core issue - helping the OP consider the 24-90 as a potential tool for his Leica kit - was and remains my intent.

I agree with the OP - “I have no clue why others take offense in such a serious way and react so harsh. I hope this is not the usual way interactions are led in this forum.”

 

[LocalHero1953]

17 minutes ago, lencap said:

I give up.  I clearly stated that I used ChatGPT, disclosing the source.  “Owning a lens” doesn’t mean I memorize every technical spec, so I used a AI tool to get the information.  The tool provided an incorrect reply - a hallucination in AI lingo.  No intent implied. “It’s  not personal” certainly sounds and feels like it is.  

I can’t help but feel that while the OP appears to understand that the AI incorrectly misstated a fact, the AI tool was a very small part of my commentary, and frankly, from my perspective the error is irrelevant.  We agree on size/bulk.  The core issue - helping the OP consider the 24-90 as a potential tool for his Leica kit - was and remains my intent.

I agree with the OP - “I have no clue why others take offense in such a serious way and react so harsh. I hope this is not the usual way interactions are led in this forum.”

 

No offence taken. But your post giving the details did not say you used ChatGPT - that was only when someone checked your numbers - reading your post I assumed you measured your own lens.

This series of exchanges has been valuable - an important lesson for all of us that AI is not a reliable source of camera data on its own. I'm sorry you got caught up in it, but that doesn't make it less important.

Edited July 10 by LocalHero1953

[mirrorless]

I shoot weddings only with a Q3 28mm and a SL3 with the 75mm F2 APO Lens. This is a dream combo which places zooms in the background for me. I can switch very fast between both cameras and have a backup camera on top. Not to speak about a F1.7 and F2.0 aperture! With the MPX advantages cropping from 28mm until 75mm is a dream as well cropping from 75mm till approx. 135mm. I think about adding a 70-200mm Leica F2.8 and a 16-35mm Leica F4 down the road but these 2x lenses are the only zoom-lenses I would think about in the moment. My current combo simply makes a 24-90mm obsolete. Also the look from the primes has a lot of "soul". Many say the advantage of a zoom is the fast change of the FL but with both cameras around my neck I bet I am also that fast. The cherry on top is having only the prime on the SL3 avoids lens-swapping and dust on the sensor. Before I only shot 35mm and 85mm with Sony but 28/75mm is much better for my needs. 

[Markey]

5 hours ago, Tirpitz666 said:

According to all comparatives that I've seen so far, the 24-90 it's just in another league at all FLs and apertures (even with the 24-70 stopped down to match the slower corresponding 24-90 setting), both in terms of sheer sharpness and microcontrast. There are actual reasons why it costs new more than twice as much the 24-70 (more than triple if you consider the Sigma instead of the Leica version of the 24-70).

Everything I've seen of that lens make me drool about owning one as "the one lens to rule them all", but of course even used is quite the investment for a simple amateur like me..

Thank you  (holds head on hands ) 

[LD_50]

2 hours ago, mirrorless said:

I shoot weddings only with a Q3 28mm and a SL3 with the 75mm F2 APO Lens. This is a dream combo which places zooms in the background for me. I can switch very fast between both cameras and have a backup camera on top. Not to speak about a F1.7 and F2.0 aperture! With the MPX advantages cropping from 28mm until 75mm is a dream as well cropping from 75mm till approx. 135mm. I think about adding a 70-200mm Leica F2.8 and a 16-35mm Leica F4 down the road but these 2x lenses are the only zoom-lenses I would think about in the moment. My current combo simply makes a 24-90mm obsolete. Also the look from the primes has a lot of "soul". Many say the advantage of a zoom is the fast change of the FL but with both cameras around my neck I bet I am also that fast. The cherry on top is having only the prime on the SL3 avoids lens-swapping and dust on the sensor. Before I only shot 35mm and 85mm with Sony but 28/75mm is much better for my needs. 

Does cropping from 28 to 75 (or 75 to 135) really give a comparable look to a native prime? I can’t see that being the case unless the subject is far in the distance and eliminates the distortion/compression effects of these different focal lengths and/or the aperture chosen yields so much DOF that the unique look is limited. 

I used to shoot a Nikon 200 f/2 and the magic in that lens (one of my all time favorites for IQ) was the look at 200mm and f/2, not the reach. In other words there’s no comparison to a 100mm lens cropped to the same 200mm level magnification. 

Edit- I should clarify, I’m not suggesting you’re wrong in the cropping assessment. I just have no experience with the Q 28mm lens and how its results actually compare to longer primes. 

Edited July 10 by LD_50

[Tirpitz666]

I would totally agree that cropping is not a "perfect substitute" of actual FL, perspective, subject isolation, compression, everything will be of course much different.

Of course in limited range, you can "get away with that" somehow and a non super critical viewer most likely won't care much (if the shot is a good one of course), so I can imagine that for many it can actually work instead of having to lug around too much heavy gear.

 

P.S. still sporting a Nikon 200 F2 in my arsenal as a specialty lens, as you said, it just has a pretty unique look, especially for full body shots wide open, there isn't anything quite similar on the market yet as dedicated ML lens, so very curious to see what Sigma will be able to pull off with their upcoming 200 F2 (taken for granted that the optics will be spectacular, I'd me more curious to see how much they will be able to reduce the bulk and weight of the Chubb, which are pretty substantial and render it pretty impractical for a day of handheld shooting).

So far, in my experience the only two lenses that could replicate somehow similar results (apart form the corresponding Canon one of course) are the Nikon and the Sigma 105 F1.4, both really outstanding lenses.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Archiver]

13 hours ago, mirrorless said:

I shoot weddings only with a Q3 28mm and a SL3 with the 75mm F2 APO Lens. This is a dream combo which places zooms in the background for me. I can switch very fast between both cameras and have a backup camera on top. Not to speak about a F1.7 and F2.0 aperture! With the MPX advantages cropping from 28mm until 75mm is a dream as well cropping from 75mm till approx. 135mm. 

You're in good company. Greg Williams uses a SL2/SL3 with 75 APO and Q2/Q3 for event/celebrity/red carpet/backstage work. 

https://www.instagram.com/gregwilliamsphotography/

Edited July 11 by Archiver

[Jeff S]

7 hours ago, Tirpitz666 said:

I would totally agree that cropping is not a "perfect substitute" of actual FL, perspective, subject isolation, compression, everything will be of course much different.

 

 

No it won’t.  Perspective won’t change, etc.  
 

 

Edited July 11 by Jeff S