Your favourite lenses for 2024 - and why

[Pete_W]

Well you have nice weather all year . Yeah I feel lucky to get this position. Not really planned yet.

Yes, the weather here is generally quite good.

I get 20 days of annual leave per year which is the standard for most people, but I often can't take more than 2 weeks at a time due to work commitments. Finding time for photography on the weekends can be difficult due to family commitments, so I have to plan ahead if I want a whole day out.

 

[dirk]

You see my lens line up in the link in my signature

To pick a favourite lens is really difficult. There are too many LMount lenses that I like. There is almost none that I do not like.

The most impressive lens in 2024 was for me the (Panasonic?)/Leica Apo 43/2.0 lens in the Leica Q3 43. Sharp like hell, but not clinical sharp. Very nice rendering.

Then there is the Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN Art. Very impressive. But it has a very high competition with the Sigma 90/2.8 DG DN, which might be in some circumstances better for portraits. Not so bitingly sharp as the 85/1.4. But this might be also because of the F1.4 vs. F2.8.

The Sigma 35/1.4 DG DN Art is on a similar level. I do not use it that often, because I prefer the 28mm and 43mm focal length.

From the perspective of optical image quality I also like a lot the Sigma 50/2.0 DG DN. But I prefer 43mm vs. 50mm, so I am more biased towards the Leica Q3 43. If I would like the 50mm FL more, I would like to test the new Sigma 50/1.2 DG DN. I could imagine that this is on par with the Leica Q3 43 lens. Especially the rendering.

But favourite does not mean by default best optical image quality only.

It is also convenience with very good or good enough image quality. The Sigma 28-70/2.8 stands out for me in this category. Very, very good image quality, small & light. Perfect, if you only want to take one lens with you.

The Sigma 65/2.0 DG DN is an impressive lens optically, but we do not become friends. I just do not like to take it with me. The size/weight factor turns me off. I can not explain why. I like even bigger lenses more (i.e. the 85/1.4). Really strange.

Oh boy, there are so many great LMount lenses which I like/love, I have to stop here. But except for the Lumix 70-300 telezoom, all are from Sigma. Especially Sigma i series lenses.

Addendum: All lenses used on a 24 MP sensor, except for the Leica Q3 43.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

@dirk How much of a difference would 90/2.8 be vs 24-105@105/4 with subject even sized framed both wide open?

When I was researching ff cameras in 2023 it was a tough choice between Nikon and Panasonic. My original plan was 20-60, 70-300 and sigma 35/2 and 90/2.8
Partly between a huge cashback.

But at that point of time 35/2 was not available new or 2nd hand. Nor the 90. While there still was cashback for 35/1.8 and got a good deal on a 2nd hand 85/1.8

Since getting the 24-105 I didn’t care at all for the 85 or the 20-60, and 1.8 is a much bigger difference with F4.0. And 85 was really good wide open.

But because the 90 is small I think 16-35 + 90 is a nice two lens combo. Or the 65/2 maybe even more….

Damn it. My own thread is gassing me.

 

[dirk]

@RuleOfThirds

It depends on what you are planning to use the lens for. For portraits it depends on whether you do full size or half size portraits (more than head and shoulder) or only heads.

For head and shoulders, the DOF @F2.8 is very shallow. The ears will not be in focus anymore, although not as strong as @F1.8 or @F1.4.

As a result, I use almost always F4.0 with the Sigma 90/2.8 for my portraits.

If you shoot full size body, F2.8 is very good with enough background separation.

The 24-105 has a longer tele @105. My guess is, that this will have at least the same DOF @f4.0 like the 90mm @F2.8.

I never used the 24-105. I can not say anything about image quality for portraits compared to the 90/2.8. As far as I remember Paul mentioned, that the 24-105 is not good at the long end at open aperture.

Therefore even if the zooms gives you comparable DOF, the better image quality might justify the buy of the 90mm FFL.

Did you compare the image quality of the Lunix 85/1.8 vs. the zoom already. If that difference does not bother you, I think the zoom is just fine for you.

 

[dirk]

Or the 65/2 maybe even more….

The 65 is no replacement for a 85 or 90mm. The 65 has an excellent image quality, but it is no portraits lens at all. Neither from the FL, nor from the sharpness. It is too sharp.