90-280 vs 100-400 for L system

[Enbee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I’m considering either the Leica 90–280mm or 100–400mm telephoto lens for events and family photography on the SL system. I already own the Sigma 150–600mm, but would prefer to move to a Leica lens rather than third-party options.

I’d appreciate your thoughts on which would be the better choice.

[Jeff S]

 

 

[Jeff S]

 

[Jeff S]

 

[Tirpitz666]

Don't know personally the 100-400, but can ensure you that the 90-280 is one of the very best lenses I've ever owned (and I had the luck toown or try quite a lot of "classics" over time).

The rendering is outstanding, the overall sharpness (also considering that is a zoom lens) absolutely prime-like, to me is a masterpiece (with an accompanying price to boot, but at least it can be found rather easily used).

 

Especially if you are into events and family photography rather than wildlife (for which you have the 150-600) I wouldn't choose anything else 🙂

[LeicaR10]

Enbee,   I suggest you watch this video and it might well help you decide which lens (Leica 100-400 or 90-280) is best for you.  r/ Mark

Try:  

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Enbee said:

 

I’m considering either the Leica 90–280mm or 100–400mm telephoto lens for events and family photography on the SL system. I already own the Sigma 150–600mm, but would prefer to move to a Leica lens rather than third-party options.

I’d appreciate your thoughts on which would be the better choice.

I am sure you will learn a lot from those threads. But to simplify it, if you insist on it being Leica and not third party, the 90-280mm is the only one that is made by Leica in house in Germany. The 100-400mm is a Sigma design. It seems likely that Leica also had third party help with the 90-280mm as well, but it is made in Germany, while the 100-400mm is made in Japan to Leica's spec.  

[jaapv]

If you already own the 150-600, wouldn’t 70-200 be a better range to consider, especially for the intended use?  There is a Leica version if you would like to have a Leica-style lens, and a Sigma version which is lighter and more versatile.  Optically as near-identical as makes no difference. 
 

Considering the original question, the heavier and more unwieldy, the less practical for the intended use. 

[Enbee]

Thank you - I missed 70-200 was released recently. In my mind, I only knew about the ones I mentioned. I will do some research on this lens on both Sigma and Leica. I have a sigma 50 and Sigma 150-600 - I have noticed a stark difference in image quality between Sigma and Leica L (24-90) lenses - hence I thought Leica may have a better picture quality. That's why this time I wanted to specifically a Leica lens and not a Sigma lens. However, I am currently researching to see what seems the right one. 

[Stuart Richardson]

If absolute image quality is your concern, the pretty strong concensus is that the 90-280mm is the strongest performer. It is rated even higher than the 24-90mm. I have the lens and can agree. It is not quite as good as the APO Summicrons or the best primes, but it is extremely good, particularly at the mid to long ranges. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Enbee said:

Thank you - I missed 70-200 was released recently. In my mind, I only knew about the ones I mentioned. I will do some research on this lens on both Sigma and Leica. I have a sigma 50 and Sigma 150-600 - I have noticed a stark difference in image quality between Sigma and Leica L (24-90) lenses - hence I thought Leica may have a better picture quality. That's why this time I wanted to specifically a Leica lens and not a Sigma lens. However, I am currently researching to see what seems the right one. 

70-200  is a Sigma design  rebranded in a Leica barrel.  Not for nothing that Leica chose this; it ( the Sigma) is one of the best lenses I ever owned.

[Enbee]

47 minutes ago, jaapv said:

70-200  is a Sigma design  rebranded in a Leica barrel.  Not for nothing that Leica chose this; it ( the Sigma) is one of the best lenses I ever owned.

Thank You - How do you say that it's a Sigma lens with no other design change? Is it like those flashes Leica used from Metz and rebranded? I did some research and wasn't able to find much about rebrand. 

[helged]

On 9/21/2025 at 1:11 PM, jaapv said:

70-200  is a Sigma design  rebranded in a Leica barrel.  Not for nothing that Leica chose this; it ( the Sigma) is one of the best lenses I ever owned.

+1. I did run some quick comparisons the other day, and yes, Sigma 70-200 DG DN is somewhat sharper/show more details compared to Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, one of Canon's most popular lenses.

Optically, the latter is considered on par with the later EF version III and the new RF lens, so Sigma is definitely among the top players. Other considerations, like AF-speed, flare resistance, colour rendering, IS stabilisaton, size/weight may differdifferent between the various 70-200 out there, so sharpness is 'only' one of many considerations. But good it is, the Sigma 70-200!

Edited September 23 by helged

[jaapv]

On 9/21/2025 at 1:59 PM, Enbee said:

Thank You - How do you say that it's a Sigma lens with no other design change? Is it like those flashes Leica used from Metz and rebranded? I did some research and wasn't able to find much about rebrand. 

 

28 minutes ago, helged said:

+1. I did run some quick comparisons the other day, and yes, Sigma 70-200 DG DN is somewhat sharper/show more details compared to Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, one of Canon's most popular lenses.

Optically, the latter is considered on par with the later EF version III and the new RF lens, so Sigma is definitely among the top players. Other considerations, like AF-speed, flare resistance, colour rendering, IS stabilisaton, size/weight may differdifferent between the various 70-200 out there, so sharpness is 'only' one of many considerations. But good it is, the Sigma 70-200!

Sigma uses dual AF motors and it is indeed the fastest L mount lens I own.  I do not know whether Leica omitted that part of the design on their clone, as they dis with other features like AF range limiter , aperture ring and OIS functions. 

[rcusick]

100-400 is pretty good.  Shot here with 1.4 TC. Sl3.  No crop. 560mm. 
 

 

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 9/21/2025 at 11:26 AM, Enbee said:

Thank you - I missed 70-200 was released recently. In my mind, I only knew about the ones I mentioned. I will do some research on this lens on both Sigma and Leica. I have a sigma 50 and Sigma 150-600 - I have noticed a stark difference in image quality between Sigma and Leica L (24-90) lenses - hence I thought Leica may have a better picture quality. That's why this time I wanted to specifically a Leica lens and not a Sigma lens. However, I am currently researching to see what seems the right one. 

The 100-400 s as Sigma design as well.  Still it has a good reputation.