The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Just got an SL w/h 24-90 usead, need advice on some primes.

kuau

Workshop Member
As my title says, I just picked up a used SL with the 24-90 zoom lens.
Really liking it so far.

I now want to add some primes to my kit so when I don't want to use the zoom.
I purchased the Leica M-T adaptor though I am also considering getting the just released R-L adaptor also.
So comes lens choice.
I want to get a 28 and 50 to start with.
Looking at the newer 28 Elmarit which Sean Reid tested and seems to be a strong performer on the SL and maybe also a 50 Summicron or even the newer 50mm Summarit. I don't have the funds to get a Summilux.

I have read that smaller M lenses don't handle so well on the SL, though I have never tried to use one before.
I sold off all my M stuff when I purchased into the S system.

I am also considering the 80-200/4 R lens. I did get a chance to handle the SL 90-280 zoom, wow what a lens but it HUGE!!

Any thoughts?
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
As my title says, I just picked up a used SL with the 24-90 zoom lens.
Really liking it so far.

I now want to add some primes to my kit so when I don't want to use the zoom.
I purchased the Leica M-T adaptor though I am also considering getting the just released R-L adaptor also.
So comes lens choice.
I want to get a 28 and 50 to start with.
Looking at the newer 28 Elmarit which Sean Reid tested and seems to be a strong performer on the SL and maybe also a 50 Summicron or even the newer 50mm Summarit. I don't have the funds to get a Summilux.

I have read that smaller M lenses don't handle so well on the SL, though I have never tried to use one before.
I sold off all my M stuff when I purchased into the S system.

I am also considering the 80-200/4 R lens. I did get a chance to handle the SL 90-280 zoom, wow what a lens but it HUGE!!

Any thoughts?
The Elmarit-asph M 28 is a fine lens on the M (also makes excellent images on the SL), but it is no faster than the big 24-90 zoom, and you may find it awkward to reach around the bulk of the SL to the tiny aperture ring of the Elmarit. If you are watching cash flow, it would make more sense to stay with the initial combination and see which focal lengths you find yourself using (or noting the situations in which you don't bring the camera up at all). Use older R lenses or CV lenses (their 50/1.5 is fine and inexpensive) if you want the one lens discipline. Then when the accounts turn black, you can give them to a friend and buy the Summilux 28, 35, or 50 which would really make a difference.

With the new Leica R to SL adapter you get good use out of some R medium telephotos which provide quality and character which exceed the 24-90. The Summilux-R 80 and Summicron-R 90 are excellent, and the Macro-elmarit-(APO?) 100 is outstanding. All of these can be sold for what you buy them for as prices are quite stable, so it is inexpensive to experiment.

So it's up to you, but you really should explore the 24-90 first.

scott
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I've had my SL for a year (eight days from now!) and have been using a wide-ish range of mostly R and some M lenses on it, as well as the SL24-90. R lenses handle better on the SL than M lenses, in general, for me. In recent months, I've found myself using the SL24-90 more and more of the time: it really is a superb performer and gives up little or nothing to the R and M primes once you get over the fact that it's a bit bulky.

But I still like working with prime lenses more than working with a zoom. :D

If I*had no lenses and were to buy now, knowing what I know now about the camera and SL24-90 lens, I'd buy the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8 lens and Macro Adapter-R in a moment with no thought whatever to supplement the SL24-90. It is a superb performer, an excellent normal, and super-handy on the SL.

At the wide end, the SL lens already has you covered down to 24mm very nicely and the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH works absolutely brilliantly on this camera.

For a bit more reach, one of the R 180mm lenses is a good bet if you want a prime (I'm mostly using the Elmar-R 180mm f/4), although at this point I'd save my money there and just buy the SL90-280 lens. The image stabilization it provides is alone very well worth it over any of the adapted lenses of similar focal length.

Of course, more compact 50, and 28 to 35, and 90, primes are always a plus. Can't go wrong with a Summilux-R or Summicron-R 50mm of whatever year, can't go wrong with the various M and R 28mm lenses or 35mm lenses. The R 80 and 90 lenses are superb. But this is more a matter of "which wine's taste appeals to you more" rather than dramatic quality differences on technical points. The SL24-90 really is that good.

G
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Thanks Godfrey.
I was hoping you were going to chime in.
I will for sure look into getting the 60mm Macro lens.
So I guess you have had no experience the R 80-200/4 then.
I think for a ultra wide I may look at the newer Voigtlander 15 which I have heard works really well with the SL again would love the tri-elmar yet a little out of my budget.

I really like 28MM fov and was going to purchase a used 28/2.8 Elmarit the latest version, yet I am concerned about the handling on the SL, to small.. Do you have any experience with the R version of the 28?

Steven
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Thanks Godfrey.
I was hoping you were going to chime in.
I will for sure look into getting the 60mm Macro lens.
So I guess you have had no experience the R 80-200/4 then.
I think for a ultra wide I may look at the newer Voigtlander 15 which I have heard works really well with the SL again would love the tri-elmar yet a little out of my budget.

I really like 28MM fov and was going to purchase a used 28/2.8 Elmarit the latest version, yet I am concerned about the handling on the SL, to small.. Do you have any experience with the R version of the 28?

Steven
The Voigtländer Heliar 15 Mark III is the one to have if you want to go that way. It has different strengths/weaknesses compared to the Tri-Elmar (WATE). Both are excellent performers. I bought the WATE second hand, traded my Elmar-M 24mm for it as well to get the price down; I'm glad I did! It works brilliantly on both the SL and the M-P/M-D.

I've not used any R zoom lenses. I'm sure the R80-200/4 is a fine lens, but I have little interest in it. To me, this focal length range is where the SL90-280 lens is superior in every way due to its performance, image stabilization, and dynamics in use. I have the 180/4 because it's small, light, and was pretty inexpensive; I have both 180/2.8 and 250/4 because they are fine performers and again fairly inexpensive. I bought them all before the SL90-280 was available ... Now I'd bypass all of them and just go for the SL90-280.

In the R system, the second-series Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 II (1994-2009) is reputed to be the one to have.* It tends to sell for a relatively high price. I haven't used any of the Leica M 28mm lenses so can't speak to their performance.

(* 28mm lenses have rarely been my favorite on FF format, but I had an interest since I'd picked up the often-maligned Elmarit-R 24mm f/2.8.

The 24mm is a Minolta design, but the Leica version was produced entirely in Wetzlar and was in the R lens catalog from 1974 to 2006 without being optically upgraded; how bad could it be? A friend has the Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 II.

So we got together and did some test shots with both the 28/2.8II and 24/2.8 on both film and with the SL. In our (admittedly somewhat casual) testing, differences between them are more rendering nuance and FoV than anything else, and the rendering nuances are small. And the R24/2.8 tends to sell for half the price of the R28/2.8II.

Both are very very good performers overall, which FoV you prefer is up to you. I'd have to look carefully, however, to see how either performed compared to the SL24-90 at those focal length settings.)

enjoy,
G
 

vieri

Well-known member
Thanks Godfrey.
I was hoping you were going to chime in.
I will for sure look into getting the 60mm Macro lens.
So I guess you have had no experience the R 80-200/4 then.
I think for a ultra wide I may look at the newer Voigtlander 15 which I have heard works really well with the SL again would love the tri-elmar yet a little out of my budget.

I really like 28MM fov and was going to purchase a used 28/2.8 Elmarit the latest version, yet I am concerned about the handling on the SL, to small.. Do you have any experience with the R version of the 28?

Steven
Hello Steven,

about the Voigtlander 15mm and wider Voigtlanders, I definitely recommend them wholeheartedly on the SL - they work great and you won't break the bank with them. If you haven't done so already, might I suggest my reviews of both lenses:

15mm vs the Tri-Elmar on the Leica SL here:

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/07/leica-16-18-21mm-tri-elmar-vs-voigtlander-15mm-super-wide-heliar-iii-review-leica-sl.html

"surgery" on the 15mm to be able to use regular square filters with it:

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/surgery-voigtlander-super-wide-heliar-15mm-iii.html

10mm Voigtlander on the Leica SL here:

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/voigtlander-heliar-hyper-wide-10mm-f5-6-review.html

Just my 0.2 on the ultra-wide side :D Best,

Vieri
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Thanks Vieri
I have read all your excellent articles on your website and I will be ordering the Voigtander soon.

Steven
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I have the 80-200/4.0 but believe for anything but static subjects the 90-280 is the better choice. Even though admit it is a big lens and therefore often stays at home.
I would love a 80-200/4.0 AF lens.

For my part I rather have M primes than R primes, because I can use the M primes also on my M camera.

I find a 35/1.4 very usefull on the SL, because in the end I allways use the 24-90 except light is too low. And if light is too low the 35/1.4 is a very good lens.
 

vieri

Well-known member
Thanks Vieri
I have read all your excellent articles on your website and I will be ordering the Voigtander soon.

Steven
Hello Steven,

thank you for your kind words, I am glad to hear that you enjoyed the articles and to be of help! :)

All the best,

vieri
 

kuau

Workshop Member
I have the 80-200/4.0 but believe for anything but static subjects the 90-280 is the better choice. Even though admit it is a big lens and therefore often stays at home.
I would love a 80-200/4.0 AF lens.

For my part I rather have M primes than R primes, because I can use the M primes also on my M camera.

I find a 35/1.4 very usefull on the SL, because in the end I allways use the 24-90 except light is too low. And if light is too low the 35/1.4 is a very good lens.
Paratom,
Thanks for your input.
Of course I would love the 90-280 but I just cant justify the price at this time and yes the size, the thing is HUGE..
For sure if I was still an M shooter I would invest in M glass, yet at this point I am a SL and S shooter. If and when Leica introduces a M mount camera with a built in EVF then I would for sure switch.


Steven
 

D&A

Well-known member
Steven, congrats on the choice in cameras (the SL). I've demoed it quite a few times and have often been tempted to moving over to it, funds not withstanding. Great EVF (coming from one who does not favor EVF's) and lovely output in addition to lens choices which is far more limited with non live view in a traditonal Leica rangefinder body.

I may be mistaken but I have a feeling the SL for now is Leica's answer to a camera having a EVF that accepts Leica M lenses and that a rangefinder with a dedicated EVF (as oposed to an optional external one) is a ways off. I could though envision a rangefinder accepting a external very high quality EVF as their next step. Guess we'll see.

In meantime, I look forward to following your experiences and subsequently viewing your images. Its always an adventure.

Dave (D&A)
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Dave
Yep quite a camera and as usual forr me I purchased the SL, 24-90 and a second battery used for $8500 I just couldn't resist.

I also agree with your assessment in regards to Leica and EVF, this is the SL and the future M will still be a rangefinder with an external EVF probably the same one they use on the Leica T/TL

I hope at some point they release more primes for the SL besides the 50 Summilux which will a. Be amazing and b. Cost a fortune.

How about some Summicrons
manual focus glass for the SL 😀😁

Steven
 

D&A

Well-known member
I honestly don't think Leica at this time will release any manual focus lenses for the SL since there are a treasure trove of R used glass but I do believe evntually they will release some smaller and somewhat less expensice AF summicrons.

Interestingly the nearest camera in many ways I could compare to the Leica SL is the new Hasselblad C1D. A very solid small light elegantly designed, sime interface camera that is unique to the genre and class of camera it falls into. Both have many advantages.

Dave (D&A)
 

PeterA

Well-known member
As my title says, I just picked up a used SL with the 24-90 zoom lens.
Really liking it so far.

I now want to add some primes to my kit so when I don't want to use the zoom.
I purchased the Leica M-T adaptor though I am also considering getting the just released R-L adaptor also.
So comes lens choice.
I want to get a 28 and 50 to start with.
Looking at the newer 28 Elmarit which Sean Reid tested and seems to be a strong performer on the SL and maybe also a 50 Summicron or even the newer 50mm Summarit. I don't have the funds to get a Summilux.

I have read that smaller M lenses don't handle so well on the SL, though I have never tried to use one before.
I sold off all my M stuff when I purchased into the S system.

I am also considering the 80-200/4 R lens. I did get a chance to handle the SL 90-280 zoom, wow what a lens but it HUGE!!

Any thoughts?
1. All M lenses handle very well on the SL - a pity you sold out of M lenses
2. Zeiss Otus and Milvus lenses are awesome performers on the SL - the 100/macro is stuningly good.
3. The SL zooms 24-90 and 90-280 are fabulous lenses.

Well done on getting into the system at a good price point. As others have said - you can pretty much use anything you like on this camera via adaptor and the zomm function makes focusing even a Noctilux for example - a piece of cake.

-Pete
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...
I hope at some point they release more primes for the SL besides the 50 Summilux which will a. Be amazing and b. Cost a fortune.

How about some Summicrons
manual focus glass for the SL 😀😁
In addition to the Summilux-SL 50mm f/1.4 ASPH, Leica announced the following new SL lenses at Photokina:

  • Super-Vario-Elmar-SL 16-35mm f/3.5-4.5 ASPH
  • Summicron-SL 35mm f/2 ASPH
  • APO-Summicron-SL 75mm f/2 ASPH
  • APO-Summicron-SL 90mm f/2 ASPH

They're due to be released through 2017 and 2018.

Manual focus only? No, not in SL mount.
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Thanks Godfrey
To bad it will take a few years to see the Summicrons. Hopefully by then I will have won the lottery :)

Do you agree with Petes assessment that all M glass handles well on the SL?
I just got my M-T adaptor today and I get my R-L adaptor tomorrow.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Thanks Godfrey
To bad it will take a few years to see the Summicrons. Hopefully by then I will have won the lottery :)

Do you agree with Petes assessment that all M glass handles well on the SL?
I just got my M-T adaptor today and I get my R-L adaptor tomorrow.
"All" is a big word: I haven't got so many Leica M lenses that I can offer such an inclusive judgement. Also, I've already said that I feel R lenses "handle" better on the SL than M lenses ... Their shape, control locations, etc, feel better to my hands in use.

I presume what you mean is really "Do all Leica M lenses perform well on the SL body?"

Of the M lenses I've used, the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm (WATE), the Elmar-M 24mm, the Summilux 35mm (v2), the Summarit-M 75mm, and the Hektor 135mm all perform well, when used in conjunction with their lens profile. The lens profile is particularly needed for the shorter focal lengths to achieve good performance, and Leica has provided profiles for a fairly wide range of current and recent lenses. I think one can assume that most M lenses perform well, but particularly recent lenses and particularly those that are six-bit coded. There are a few outliers that don't perform quite as well on the SL as they do on Leica M bodies, and vice-versa.

That said, I find that R lenses of similar focal length (and design era), particularly wides, perform as well or better than the M lenses; they need less massaging from the lens profile to perform as they were designed to.

And there are some lenses for which the performance is mixed... for instance, I much prefer shooting with the Super-Elmar-R 15mm on the SL over using the Tri-Elmar-R 16-18-21mm. They both produce outstanding photographs; the ergonomics of the SER15 make it easier to focus and shoot with while the optical performance of the WATE is superior at corners and edges. They have a different feel to their image renderings. So which one you use has to depend upon what qualities you value more for your photographs, if you have the choice.
 

jrp

Member
Once you have the 24-90, as has been pointed out above, there is little point in getting M or R lenses in that focal range unless they are of significantly higher speed (for indoor shooting, or subject isolation), given that it has OIS. So we are talking the Summiluxes or the Noctilux or lenses from Voigtlander or Zeiss (the ZM 35mm f1.4 is great).

The 90-280 is great if you need reach, and is nearly as good as the 24-90mm.

Beyond that, you are looking at sub-24mm or more special purpose lenses such as the R macros.

So I would focus more on what you want to shoot, and factors such as weight, and not just performance.
 

kuau

Workshop Member
Once you have the 24-90, as has been pointed out above, there is little point in getting M or R lenses in that focal range unless they are of significantly higher speed (for indoor shooting, or subject isolation), given that it has OIS. So we are talking the Summiluxes or the Noctilux or lenses from Voigtlander or Zeiss (the ZM 35mm f1.4 is great).

The 90-280 is great if you need reach, and is nearly as good as the 24-90mm.

Beyond that, you are looking at sub-24mm or more special purpose lenses such as the R macros.

So I would focus more on what you want to shoot, and factors such as weight, and not just performance.
Point well taken. As great a performer as the 24-90 is, it's still a pretty big lens and I was looking for a all around lens I can use when I don't want to lug around the 24-90. I don't shoot low light stuff so faster lenses I.e Summilux, etc. I don't need.
My concern with the M lenses at least the ones I would be interested in dont handle to well on the SL I.e the lens I wanted to get originally was the newer version of the 28 elmarit which I have been told doesnt handle well on the SL because it is so small. So I was thinking the R version of the 28 yet the later model is hard to find and I have no idea what the IQ is when used with the SL

As of today I have picked up both adaptors for the SL and I purchased a used Voigtander 15 the latest model.

At this point the odds of me going back to the M is not to probable. Even with the soon to be release M10 or whatever they call it, there will be no EVF on it.

I wish there was a Leica dealer where I live but there is not so I have to depend on you guys on what to get. For handling issues it would seem that R lenses are the way to go.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
There are at least four Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 II available on Ebay at present. BIN prices are currently from $1650 to $2900. I'm sure it will perform well.

Myself, I would try the Elmarit-R 24mm f/2.8. You can find them for $650-750 in near mint shape and it's a delightful performer. Tamarkin.com has an early one (1974 vintage by the serial number) with hood for $495.

G
 
Top