Comparing Leica Zoom Lenses: The Leica 24-70mm f/2.8 vs the 24-90mm f2.8-4

In this video I take the opportunity to compare the only two standard zooms from Leica for their L System, specifically the SL series cameras. I'm comparing the Leica 24-90 which was released way back with the original SL (tip 601) and the 24-70 2.8 which was released with the most recent SL2-s. I bought the kit with the SL2-S and 24-70 and then later bought the 24-90 based on the hype, however in this video I talk about both lenses and how similar they really are.
Download a zip file of some Raw DNGs here: www.dropbox.com/s/j8skeo0uokj...
Or
See more at my website (in process) camcampbellphoto.com
Note:
Since the recording of this video I have sold my 24-90 in favor of the 24-70.
00:00 Intro
01:57 Why I Have Both
05:00 Physical Characteristics
09:20 Short Video Clips
10:06 Image Comparison

[@CryoftheProphet]

The 24-90 is the best zoom lens ever made in that range, the optical characteristics are out of this world, my greatest work was done with a leica.

[@northwestrctv5584]

Thank you for this very thoughtful and informing comparison. Well done, and personnaly helpful for me.

[@LifelessAl]

That is exactly what I looking for! Thank you so much for this video comparison! Now i finally made a decision - 24-70!

[@dirkziegler9580]

23:55 -> Not only a bit more sharpness! The 24-90mm is significantly sharper than the 24-70mm. I own the 24-70 and I am satisfied with it but the 24-90 seems to be another level.

[@BackFocus11]

Great analysis bro! I agree with you the SL system is great, AF could be better, but the bigger issue is weight...Too heavy

[@aiseurnae5976]

I had the Pana Sigma and SL (24-90mm), the Pana was sharper with the same microcontrast than the SL. The SL has nicer colors in my opinion. Never liked the Sigma.

[@iraklikordzaia]

Thank you for the interesting story. Can you please advise whether sigma lenses work well with a 47 megapixel sl 2? And if so, which ones would you recommend?

[@TL-vt8uk]

Hello, interesting video. Did you control the aperture given that the 24-90 is a variable aperture versus the 24-70? Maybe changes in sharpness (since you were not shooting at 24mm) are related to aperture. Thx.

[@paulf3353]

As Peter Karbe himself said, there is no such thing as fixed aperture zoom lens.

[@nickalot]

the difference in focal length sometimes comes with the lens correction. not sure if this is the case, but it's possible!

[@vaidasmiskunas2331]

So,24-90mm for what cameras it fits then? For gh6,gh5?

[@workingjoe898]

Has anybody noticed the bokeh of the light went through the leafs above the green board, the 24-70 has bubbles, very similar to my Canon 24-70 ii, however, the bokeh of 24-90 is more similar to my Leica 50mm f1.4 asph or 90mm f2.5. And I believe the last picture shows the 24-70 has more contrast, like any Japanese lenses, but 24-90 is just like any of my M lenses, less contrast, more natural, more Leica feel if they name it🤣 In terms of color, they are literally the same, I personally believe unless the lens is too bad or has distinctive color signature, the color of the photos taken with different lenses are nearly identical on my SL-2s, so no matter is Leica 24-70, or lumix or Sigma art, there won’t be any noticeable differences, because I can only distinguish the photos taken with canon 24-70 from Leica m lenses on sl-2s by contrast and bokeh😅

[@thomastuorto9929]

Depends on how important the image quality is to you. I vote image quality (sharpness) matters unless you're shooting with a Lens Baby lens. Might be different for vacation snap shots carrying the lens every & all day for 1-2 weeks.

[@MelonAMango]

The 24-90mm is sharper by a lot when it comes to pixel peeping as well as when you slow down the shutter. I've shot many 1s exposure that is like Olympus stable level! However, the SL2S and SL2 built in stabilisation is so good that with the 24-70, it isn't any trouble getting slow shutter shots either! The constant aperture is preferred for me so I no longer own the 24-90mm. I don't miss the weight for sure and the 24-70mm looks closest to the Leica M glass magical look!

[@workingjoe898]

The SL-2s is quite good for night time photography with low light. When I take photos after sunset with my M10, I can only use high iso and f1.4 to 2, but I can use 1/4 with 100 iso with my 90mm f2.5 at f4, it’s really blown my mind. My only concern is if I use 90mm on 24-90, even though it has image stabilization, my hands may shake much more since the lens is too heavy, so could you please tell me what it the lowest shutter speed for a sharp image even zoom in to 100% at 90mm with this lens?

[@MelonAMango]

@@workingjoe898 For every 10 shots, i get about 2 sharp and usable at 0.5-1s. It is heavy so it can help to a certain degree in being a little more stable but holding it for too long, I do start shaking. Most of the time I max out at 1/8 for sharp slow shutter(excluding human subjects where they will move)

[@workingjoe898]

@@MelonAMango Thanks for the reference! I think it would be a challenge for me to get useable images under 1/4 second, because I only have skinny arms😅 I’ll go to the Leica store in my city to try it for myself, to see how long can I hold it without serious shaking🤣🤣🤣

[@MelonAMango]

@@workingjoe898 I've got skinny arms too, for the SL2S, i think you can hit 0.5s and still nail sharpness most of the time. Perhaps tucked in and seconds after you go to shooting posture. I shake usually one hand if it is more than 10 seconds before taking the shot

[@CryoftheProphet]

The greatest regret of my life is selling my leica sl2s and my full suite of L mount leica lenses.. Literally the dumbest thing Ive ever done.

[@HAlariousInc]

Smart move. Lot of objectively better cameras and sharper lenses out there. Sl2s is simply a repackaged Sl2 with a panasonic S1 (originally sony) sensor. Saw this on sale for black friday to see if it was worth buying or uphold to vintage Leica standards. Doesn’t seem to quite be worth it based on sharpness alone

[@BlackSeries_]

@@HAlariousInc which lenses you think of in particular?

[@rolandrickphotography]

There’s something totally different interesting, the diner is abandoned, but the lights still work 17:33 😅

[@martyn4501]

~14:10 It appears to me that the 24-70's shot is crisper in the background (wires) and foreground (grass) as well, not just on the depository box. Could the 24-980's image have been softened by camera shake?

[@CamCampbellphoto]

I do feel like something isn’t right there, but they were on tripod locked down, 2 second delay to minimize eliminate camera shake

[@martyn4501]

@@CamCampbellphoto I can't explain it. I did notice that in the still life shot there appears no meaningful difference in the apparent focal length at 50mm between the shots and the dried bouquet on the left is much, much less crisp in the L1010456 shot while the sanitizer bottle on the right is slightly crisper in that L1010456 shot. The pencil with eraser looks good in both shots while the green background looks a bit crisper in that L1010456 shot. The text in the window of the petrol station looks slightly crisper in the L1010359 shot (the 24-90, bit wider), while the sides of the image appear to me virtually the same. Perhaps this is autofocus variation where different areas in the image at different distances respond to difference in focus with resulting variation in depth of field responses. Perhaps more testing, also with manual focus would be in order. I can't come up with another explanation.

[@thomastuorto9929]

@@martyn4501 It is called FOCUS BREATHING. Better/high quality lenses have less of it. EG. If the 24-90mm lens looked a little closer, it has less focus breathing wich is a good thing. Is the perspective (angle of view, eg. 85*) the same at the same focal length?

[@martyn4501]

@@thomastuorto9929 Focus breathing is apparent change of focal length during focusing, why do you think this would affect a focused image? Perspective and angle of view are not the same thing, I don't understand why you bring these terms into it, could you elaborate?

[@thomastuorto9929]

@@martyn4501 The perspective & angle of view for each lens & focus breathing, (eg., like 90 mm only really being say 80mm). I bring it up because you mention it in the beginning photos of the abandoned bank showing the difference in the photos. I was wondering if the if the angle of view was different, would pull the object in closer or move it out farther. I’m sure the mm focal length would. Have to ask Peter Kareem.

[@christianjforbes]

To me, holding f2.8 is important. The fact it’s smaller is bonus, 20mm in my world doesn’t make that big a deal in reach

[@sc1]

24-70 was just too heavy. Needed to sell it.

[@RANDassociatesinc]

In my conversation with the team at LEICA Los Angeles thry made it clear that the 24-70 is actually the sharper of the two lenses. So you are not imagining things.

[@paulf3353]

There are few things really: 1. 24-70 is not true 24mm 2. Is not true constant 2.8 3. 24-90 is sharp at all distances, where 24-70 is not.

[@JJ_Photo]

So if not 24mm, what then? 25?

[@paulf3353]

@@JJ_Photo There are tests somewhere, it is closer to 26mm

[@JJ_Photo]

@@paulf3353 thanks. But that is the 28mm on the Leica also said to be. But my Q is not as wide as the 24-70 on 24mm. So at least it is noticeable wider than the Q.

[@paulf3353]

@@user-xw2qn6ys7k Google will help you to find answers.

[@user-oh3xe3yc6k]

Thank you for your evaluation, just bought Q2, ready to sell Z9, study sl2 or sl2s🫡

[@drbubble33]

SL2 for the win there. Same sensor as the Q2.