jigesh wrote:
75mm APO SL is the only reason I still have an SL body (SL2). Wonderful lens.
[Also remember reading, as Gorden noted above, 35mm APO SL being Karbe's favorite SL lens.]
Curious how you find the responsiveness of the 75 APO.
I could see myself using the 75 APO on the SL body (SL3 / SL3-P) as a mainstay (vs. the current Panny 85/1.8 on SL2-S).
old-gregg wrote:
It's like saying "McDonald's makes steakhouses redundant. If you don't mind diarrhea it's just brilliant". Context matters, I suppose, so let me clarify: if you want a rational person to carry a 400g+ lens, not only it needs to be $0, he also must be paid for pain and suffering. The only two things that matter about a lens manufactured in 2026 is its weight and the presence of a real aperture ring.
If you carry a single lens usually, then the zoom is big, expensive and heavy.
If you carry a set of primes then this one lens can replace most of them. 28, 35, 50 and 70(5)). It’ll be cheaper, lighter and more convenient. Plus you’ll avoid changing lenses in less than good conditions. You can’t put together a set of M Summicrons for this weight. I don’t think you’d get there with any set of f2 lenses. Maybe the Sigmas? But I doubt it.
I don’t know of a zoom lens close to this that weighs 400g. Not even at f2.8. The 28-70 is actually very light for what it is (I’m looking at you Canon). And no, not every 2026 zoom is great or spectacular. Most are decent but not all are excellent. This one is.
flash wrote:
If you carry a single lens usually, then the zoom is big, expensive and heavy.
If you carry a set of primes then this one lens can replace most of them. 28, 35, 50 and 70(5)). It’ll be cheaper, lighter and more convenient. Plus you’ll avoid changing lenses in less than good conditions. You can’t put together a set of M Summicrons for this weight. I don’t think you’d get there with any set of f2 lenses. Maybe the Sigmas? But I doubt it.
I don’t know of a zoom lens close to this that weighs 400g. Not even at f2.8. The 28-70 is actually very light for what it is (I’m looking at you Canon). And no, not every 2026 zoom is great or spectacular. Most are decent but not all are excellent. This one is. ...Show more →
Gordon, I am never 100% serious online. That's not what Internet is for. :-) The second I saw your thoughtful response I experienced the biggest regret of the last hour of my life.
RustyBug wrote:
Curious how you find the responsiveness of the 75 APO.
I could see myself using the 75 APO on the SL body (SL3 / SL3-P) as a mainstay (vs. the current Panny 85/1.8 on SL2-S).
I also had an SL3 (prior to FW 4.0) for few months (sold since wanted to fund an M lens then), and had used 75mm SL APO on it, but longer use with an SL2 body. 75mm APO SL and 90mm APO SL (I had both, kept 75mm) have the same "signature," so either can be fine for portraits, perhaps 90mm is more suitable than 75mm if portrait is the main intent. My reasoning for 75mm was that it can be more "general purpose" than the 90mm focal length. I am mostly a 50mm person, so "75mm can serve dual purpose when need be" was my logic for keeping it over 90mm.
It's quite responsive, may be much better now with FW 4.0 on an SL3 (speculating). Never felt it was sluggish on either SL3 or SL2. Some say 50mm f1.4 Summilux SL is a bit slow to focus (no personal experience). Not as responsive as my Sony A1ii + 85mm GM II, but that's not the system SL aspires to be. Interestingly (to me), I found results from Sony's 50mm GM f1.2 and SL 75mm f2 quite close (with some color profile editing in LR, it was hard for me to distinguish between the two in a blind test). I think that's Leica APO design to give perception of depth (or a faster fall-off whatever it is) at f2 that one would expect from an f1.4 or so.
I loved its output since my very first picture with it, and it shines whether portrait or nature. Of course, this is all subjective so what appeals to me may not appeal to others as much.
jigesh wrote:
I also had an SL3 (prior to FW 4.0) for few months (sold since wanted to fund an M lens then), and had used 75mm SL APO on it, but longer use with an SL2 body. 75mm APO SL and 90mm APO SL (I had both, kept 75mm) have the same "signature," so either can be fine for portraits, perhaps 90mm is more suitable than 75mm if portrait is the main intent. My reasoning for 75mm was that it can be more "general purpose" than the 90mm focal length. I am mostly a 50mm person, so "75mm can serve dual purpose when need be" was my logic for keeping it over 90mm.
It's quite responsive, may be much better now with FW 4.0 on an SL3 (speculating). Never felt it was sluggish on either SL3 or SL2. Some say 50mm f1.4 Summilux SL is a bit slow to focus (no personal experience). Not as responsive as my Sony A1ii + 85mm GM II, but that's not the system SL aspires to be. Interestingly (to me), I found results from Sony's 50mm GM f1.2 and SL 75mm f2 quite close (with some color profile editing in LR, it was hard for me to distinguish between the two in a blind test). I think that's Leica APO design to give perception of depth (or a faster fall-off whatever it is) at f2 that one would expect from an f1.4 or so.
I loved its output since my very first picture with it, and it shines whether portrait or nature. Of course, this is all subjective so what appeals to me may not appeal to others as much....Show more →
Thanks for the insights. Yeah, no ... I don't expect it to be Sony-ish responsive. I demo'd an SL3 (pre-FW 4.0) and compared it to Sony (Sigma glass on both) and the difference was distinct. Imo, the SL3 was a modest improvement in response over my SL2-S. Hoping of course that with the FW 4.0 improvements of the SL3 series are even better than I demo'd, yet.
That said, I do recognize the the body / lens function as a system, so one can be a limiting factor, moreover than the other in certain situations. Just wondering if the 75 APO was such a case to be mindful of.
That said ... my mind turns a bit to the 75 APO, in that maybe my next move on my kit is the 75 APO (still on SL2-S), in preparation for either the SL3 or SL3-P down the road. The little Panny 85/1.8 has been a surprisingly good little lens, but I'd hope that the 75 APO would be in a different league ... ideally, both for AF performance and optical IQ ... at the expense of some $$$, size and weight. However, when I think about the Hassy 80/1.9 I used to have, the size / weight of the 75 APO seems a bit more petite. . Hopefully, it handles well. When I had the X1D (sold) and the 80/1.9 ... that was a chunk / chore to carry. Adding in the lack of IBIS in that combo, it was a real effort to work with ... (just as a reference point for size / weight / etc.) ... the 75 APO + SL3 / SL3-P I'm expecting will be a bit more pleasant to work with.
I was in your shoes exactly. I upgraded the SL2 to SL3 first. I wasn't sure I would keep it until firmware version 4.0 hit. What a difference. Really nice work by Leica to pull that much more out of the camera and improve the autofocus so much.
Moved to the M11-p much more recently, so work through the change. That said, so far I really like the lighter weight of the body and other changes. The user experience, like with all M cameras, is largely the same except for things like easier access to change the ISO (thumbwheel), etc.
I'd suggest your first upgrade might be whichever camera you use the most.
RustyBug wrote:
Thanks for the insights. Yeah, no ... I don't expect it to be Sony-ish responsive. I demo'd an SL3 (pre-FW 4.0) and compared it to Sony (Sigma glass on both) and the difference was distinct. Imo, the SL3 was a modest improvement in response over my SL2-S. Hoping of course that with the FW 4.0 improvements of the SL3 series are even better than I demo'd, yet.
That said, I do recognize the the body / lens function as a system, so one can be a limiting factor, moreover than the other in certain situations. Just wondering if the 75 APO was such a case to be mindful of.
That said ... my mind turns a bit to the 75 APO, in that maybe my next move on my kit is the 75 APO (still on SL2-S), in preparation for either the SL3 or SL3-P down the road. The little Panny 85/1.8 has been a surprisingly good little lens, but I'd hope that the 75 APO would be in a different league ... ideally, both for AF performance and optical IQ ... at the expense of some $$$, size and weight. However, when I think about the Hassy 80/1.9 I used to have, the size / weight of the 75 APO seems a bit more petite. . Hopefully, it handles well. When I had the X1D (sold) and the 80/1.9 ... that was a chunk / chore to carry. Adding in the lack of IBIS in that combo, it was a real effort to work with ... (just as a reference point for size / weight / etc.) ... the 75 APO + SL3 / SL3-P I'm expecting will be a bit more pleasant to work with.
The Panasonic lens will always focus faster than the APOs. They certainly did improve with 4.0 but so did the Panasonics. The APOs are not sports lenses by any means. They're absolutely fine for AFC with portraits etc.
flash wrote:
The Panasonic lens will always focus faster than the APOs. They certainly did improve with 4.0 but so did the Panasonics. The APOs are not sports lenses by any means. They're absolutely fine for AFC with portraits etc.
Gordon
Understood ...
Curious your thoughts for the amount of IQ diff vs. AF diff ... and where the Siggy's sit vs. IQ vs. AF of the APO vs. Panny's.
I think the limiting factor on AF is not the lens but the camera. I have the Sigma 500mm f5.6 which has a linear AF motor and when I compare it to the leica 90-280mm at f4 - they don't feel much different in terms of speed or hit rate on the SL3-S.
For my APO SL lenses, I do not see any noticeable AF issues where I would think moving to a Sigma or Panasonic lens would solve. For me, if AF is a determining criteria - moving off of Leica would be the right decision and back to Sony.
tzhang4284 wrote:
I think the limiting factor on AF is not the lens but the camera. I have the Sigma 500mm f5.6 which has a linear AF motor and when I compare it to the leica 90-280mm at f4 - they don't feel much different in terms of speed or hit rate on the SL3-S.
For my APO SL lenses, I do not see any noticeable AF issues where I would think moving to a Sigma or Panasonic lens would solve. For me, if AF is a determining criteria - moving off of Leica would be the right decision and back to Sony.
I wouldn't say it is the limiting factor ... just that when making decisions that involve both AF performance and IQ performance ... some due diligence to understand the relationships for the correlation between them. Everyone has their own temperament for each, and that can be a sliding scale, as well.
Sure but sounds like you're overthinking this a bit though. I was quite worried about AF performance that my original plan was to use either all Panasonic or Sigma lenses with the SL3-S but I tried out an SL APO and the AF performance it and the Leica vario-elmarits (non Sigma rebadged ones) are just fine unless you're a sports photography or something.
tzhang4284 wrote:
Sure but sounds like you're overthinking this a bit though. I was quite worried about AF performance that my original plan was to use either all Panasonic or Sigma lenses with the SL3-S but I tried out an SL APO and the AF performance it and the Leica vario-elmarits (non Sigma rebadged ones) are just fine unless you're a sports photography or something.
Understood. If your previous comment about the 500/5.6 and 90-280 being reasonably close in AF terms, then that's sufficient for me, in that regard. I just put some test shots of the 500/5.6 on an S1R II as an approximation of what the SL3-P might be.
If the 75 SL APO is still on par with the 90-280 (500/5.6), then that should be fine for most things.
. Hopefully, it handles well. When I had the X1D (sold) and the 80/1.9 ... that was a chunk / chore to carry. Adding in the lack of IBIS in that combo, it was a real effort to work with ... (just as a reference point for size / weight / etc.) ... the 75 APO + SL3 / SL3-P I'm expecting will be a bit more pleasant to work with.