Leica did it again: new 2.8/28-70

[pdk42]

It is said, Sigma, and Leica are in fact two different lenses.

For sure there are significant differences, but most observers contend that it's the same basic optical design. Maybe the Leica tolerances are better; and for sure the build quality looks superior - and it seems to work since most tests say the Leica performs better too !

 

[Miki]

For sure there are significant differences, but most observers contend that it's the same basic optical design. Maybe the Leica tolerances are better; and for sure the build quality looks superior - and it seems to work since most tests say the Leica performs better too !

Glass, and coating is superior, too.
Anyway, there's nothing like a Leica zoom on the market.
It's from someone, who shoots mostly prime lenses. All other zooms I had in the past, I sold them a long time, ago.

 

[Miker]

The 28-70 SL is made in Japan. Leica doesn’t have a plant in Japan. Therefore, a third party manufacturer makes this lens for them. Sigma manufacturers its lenses in Japan and it just so happens they make a lens with the identical optical design. It isn’t a huge leap in logic to suspect that Sigma makes the 28-70 SL. They are certainly capable of it. Glass would be the same, maybe stricter tolerances, coatings could be different, casing obviously different and to Leica specs.

 

[pdk42]

The 28-70 SL is made in Japan. Leica doesn’t have a plant in Japan. Therefore, a third party manufacturer makes this lens for them. Sigma manufacturers its lenses in Japan and it just so happens they make a lens with the identical optical design. It isn’t a huge leap in logic to suspect that Sigma makes the 28-70 SL. They are certainly capable of it. Glass would be the same, maybe stricter tolerances, coatings could be different, casing obviously different and to Leica specs.

That sounds very plausible.

 

[Miki]

The 28-70 SL is made in Japan. Leica doesn’t have a plant in Japan. Therefore, a third party manufacturer makes this lens for them. Sigma manufacturers its lenses in Japan and it just so happens they make a lens with the identical optical design. It isn’t a huge leap in logic to suspect that Sigma makes the 28-70 SL. They are certainly capable of it. Glass would be the same, maybe stricter tolerances, coatings could be different, casing obviously different and to Leica specs.

That's possible, and doesn't matter, who makes it, for as long as it doesn't cost a kidney, and the quality is right on the money.
Just wait, and see, how it performs in real life.
IQ, solid make, light & compact, affordable,.. is what I'm after in standard zoom.
It seems, there no another zoom, like this. I'm quite exited.

Diagram of Leica lens on the left, Sigma lens on the right.
It shows different spacing, size, and curvature of elements.
We don't know, what glass was used. How, and where the glass was backed.
But, we know, the coating is of Leica. And, that alone matters a lot.
Build Q of Leica, we know, it's superior with tight sealing the whole lens.
The sealing helps to stop getting dust inside, when a zoom extends, and focuses.
All of this in light & compact solid package with price tag similar to Lumix S 24-70/2.8 Pro ... well, that sets a new standard.
If one doesn't really needs that extra 2mm at wide end ... it's no need to do heavy lifting all day long, and everyday.

 

[RBecker]

That's possible, and doesn't matter, who makes it, for as long as it doesn't cost a kidney, and the quality is right on the money.
Just wait, and see, how it performs in real life.
IQ, solid make, light & compact, affordable,.. is what I'm after in standard zoom.
It seems, there no another zoom, like this. I'm quite exited.

Diagram of Leica lens on the left, Sigma lens on the right.
It shows different spacing, size, and curvature of elements.
We don't know, what glass was used. How, and where the glass was backed.
But, we know, the coating is of Leica. And, that alone matters a lot.
Build Q of Leica, we know, it's superior with tight sealing the whole lens.
The sealing helps to stop getting dust inside, when a zoom extends, and focuses.
All of this in light & compact solid package with price tag similar to Lumix S 24-70/2.8 Pro ... well, that sets a new standard.
If one doesn't really needs that extra 2mm at wide end ... it's no need to do heavy lifting all day long, and everyday.

Sorry but the diagrams are nearly identlical. Some lenses have different edges, but that doesn‘t matter. The spacing of the middle elements is different because one diagram shows the zoom at the short and the other at the long end… Good marketing
But if the result is fine, I have no problems with it. I just wished, that we are getting more different options for l-mount, not the same content in a different housing…

 

[Miki]

Sorry but the diagrams are nearly identlical. Some lenses have different edges, but that doesn‘t matter. The spacing of the middle elements is different because one diagram shows the zoom at the short and the other at the long end… Good marketing
But if the result is fine, I have no problems with it. I just wished, that we are getting more different options for l-mount, not the same content in a different housing…

I see more, than different edges, and spacing. Also, a small difference in shape of lenses.
Those small differences in details, may matter a lot more, than it seems.
Marketing aside ...
What's left ... just wait for more info from the field of experience.
We know, it has Leica coating, aperture ring, and better, more esthetic build quality.
For that alone, I'm willing to pay the difference in price, for what I'm getting,.. and it's not that big, anyway.
I have much more confidence in Leica, than Sigma.

 

[pdk42]

I have much more confidence in Leica, than Sigma.

I have equal confidence in them both. They both make excellent products, just targeted at different market segments. I have two Sigma lenses - the 105mm macro and the 35mm f2 I-series. Both are excellent and leave nothing to be desired optically. In fact, the 105mm macro is probably the sharpest lens I’ve ever used. Build quality on both is exemplary.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

I have equal confidence in them both. They both make excellent products, just targeted at different market segments.

I had confidence in neither of them and went with the 24-60. Has the extra features and a better price. Check the dozens of reviews against the Lumix 24-70 Pro.

 

[Miki]

I had confidence in neither of them and went with the 24-60. Has the extra features and a better price. Check the dozens of reviews against the Lumix 24-70 Pro.

Yes, I know, it's an excellent lens. And, Panasonic is solid, and trusted.
Extra features are secondary to me.
My opinion about Leica is related to their lenses. Not digital cameras.

But, I really care much more for a longer end. I seldom use less, than 28mm.
In contrary to 24mm., I really like the look of images at 28mm.
I still have a very good 24mm prime lens, that's laying useless in the drawer for 10 years, already.
I'm too lazy to sell it

 

[pdk42]

I had confidence in neither of them and went with the 24-60. Has the extra features and a better price. Check the dozens of reviews against the Lumix 24-70 Pro.

I have confidence in Panasonic too. They have shown they are capable of some excellent designs. My favourite zoom is the LUMIX 24-105. But of course they are capable of producing dogs too - like the 28-200 !