Lens Review: Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 ASPH.
Welcome to my review of the Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4 ASPH. I should save this for the end of the review, but you’ll likely realize this is more of a love letter to the Leica 24-90mm lens. This lens is fantastic, yet it’s not perfect, and there are sacrifices you'll need to make if you choose to purchase it. In this review, I will provide a real-world perspective on how I’ve used this lens, what has worked for me, and what hasn’t, in hopes of giving you insights that will help inform your decision on whether this lens is right for you.
I initially rented this lens in 2024 for use during the Memorial Day weekend on my Leica SL2-S. I had primarily only used M lenses and I wanted to try one of Leica’s autofocus SL lenses for a model shoots a local venue was hosting to promote their business. In October of that same year, I found an incredible deal on this lens and have used it since on my Leica SL3 for model shoots, street photography, and nature photography.
Captured on a Leica SL3 at 90mm f/9, 1/500 sec, ISO 12500
About this lens (Specs)
Captured on a Leica SL3 at 90mm f/5.6, 1/1000 sec, ISO 640
If you haven’t read any of my previous posts, I don’t enjoy deep dives into technical specifications and prefer to let those who do discuss them. I like to share my thoughts about the lens and how it feels to use it. However, I will provide an overview of the specs. Those who have used this lens often refer to it as “the beast.” Why? Because it’s big and heavy—there’s no sugarcoating it. Think of a college textbook, a bottle of wine, or a large bottle of water. It weighs approximately 1,140 g, which is about the same weight as the Sigma 100-400mm telephoto lens. The diameter of the lens is 88mm until you reach the mount, and the lens hood adds to this. For perspective, the average lens diameter is about 67mm.
The body is weather-sealed and primarily constructed from metal, which significantly adds to its weight. It features a variable aperture that ranges from f/2.8 at 28mm to f/4 at 90mm. The lens does extend as you zoom to 90mm; however, I haven’t encountered any issues with dust getting inside so far. It includes Optical Image Stabilization (O.I.S.) and has a minimum focusing distance of .3 meters, allowing you to get quite close to your subject.
This lens is known for its sharpness from corner to corner throughout its entire focal range. While researching, I’ve encountered numerous reviewers and users claiming that this lens offers prime lens quality in a zoom. From a sharpness perspective, I wouldn’t disagree. While you may not achieve the subject separation that a wide-aperture prime provides, the sharpness is excellent. I find the bokeh pleasing; objects out of focus blend smoothly and rarely, if ever, look nervous to me.
What role did I want this lens to play in my kit?
To provide context for my thought process, I primarily prefer using manual prime lenses, even with an SL camera. However, there are occasions when I opt for autofocus or wish to avoid changing lenses. At times, I felt I wasn’t fully leveraging the SL's capabilities without a lens specifically designed for it. My collection of manual lenses consists of primes with focal lengths of 21mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 100mm. I was looking for a lens that could cover most of these focal lengths, allowing me to use it for landscape photography and portraits. Essentially, it had to be a jack-of-all-trades.
Yeah, but the weight!
Yes, the weight is the price you pay for this flexibility, but first, let’s put things into perspective. A single Sigma Prime Art lens or one of Leica’s primes* weighs about half the weight, so if you plan to carry two or more of either brand’s lenses, you will be holding more weight than the 24-90mm and must switch lenses.
*(Leica ASPH 402g / APO 720g)
Captured on a Leica SL3 at 90mm f/5.6, 1/500 sec, ISO 125
There are ways to mitigate the weight
Camera Straps:
I have used this lens with a wrist strap during studio sessions, but I do not recommend it for extended periods. Instead, I suggest using a wide body strap; you don’t want one that is too thin, as it may dig into your shoulder or neck, causing discomfort. This will also allow your wrists to rest while you walk around and are not actively taking pictures. I’ve gone on some nature hikes, walking anywhere from 2 to 6 miles at a time, and this setup seems to work best for me. I would recommend something like the Peak Design Slide Lite Camera Strap.
L-Bracket:
I have found that adding an L-bracket to the SL3 makes the 24-90mm more comfortable for walking around. I currently use a Really Right Stuff L-bracket and attach a Peak Design anchor to one end. This way, I can attach one end of the camera strap to the camera and the other end to the L-bracket, allowing the camera and lens to hang down more comfortably. The bracket comes off very easily and takes up little space in the camera bag. For me, this bracket provides a little more space to grip the camera, which is a bonus; those with bigger hands may also appreciate this feature.
Really Right Stuff L-bracket and Peak Design Slide Lite strap are recommended accessories to help with the weight.
Captured on a Leica SL3 at 50mm f/3.6, 1/160 sec, ISO 800
Leica 24-90mm vs other L-mount zoom lenses
So, how does the 24-90mm stack up against other lenses with a similar focal length? I’m not going to discuss MFT charts; frankly, I don’t understand them well enough, and I’m not sure I want to. I know they contain valuable information, but the purpose of this review is to focus on real-world usage and my thought process on how I chose this lens over others.
The closest matches to this lens that comes to mind in the L-mount alliance are the 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses by Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma. Then there is the Sigma 28-105mm f/2.8, the Panasonic LUMIX S 24-105mm f/4, and we could even throw in the LUMIX 28-200mm. Arguments can be made for any of these lenses. If weight alone is a deciding factor, any of these options are viable, or if you feel you need a constant aperture, you could also argue that any of those lenses are better.
However, I would argue that the Leica 24-90mm is the best choice. Every time I've used a 24-70mm lens, I've felt that I wanted a bit more reach than 70mm; 90mm seems to be that sweet spot for me. Yes, I could zoom with my feet to cover that missing 20mm, but you still can’t compensate for that additional compression, and sometimes you can’t move in closer. Now, I have read some feedback on forums and seen a few reviews that claim the Leica 24-70mm can be sharper at specific focal lengths. If it’s true, I am still willing to trade that sharpness for the extra 20mm reach; sharpness isn’t everything.
The next thing most people may have a problem with is the variable aperture. I have found that it hasn’t been a significant issue; in low light, the SL3 handles noise very well, and Lightroom provides additional support if the noise becomes too much. For me, the difference in the background blur between f/2.8 and f/4 isn’t a big deal. Not enough for me to give up that extra 20mm reach. Maybe if it were f/1.4 or even f/2, then I might be tempted...
Among the lenses mentioned earlier, the only other lenses with image stabilization are the LUMIX 24-105mm and the LUMIX 28-200mm. Both are lighter and provide a longer reach, but have drawbacks. In my experience with the LUMIX 24-105mm lens, I found it to be a solid lens that offered the reach I wanted, was pretty sharp, and had some macro capabilities. However, the build quality was lacking, and it didn’t match the sharpness or color detail of the Leica 24-90mm.
The LUMIX 28-200mm was the closest competition to the 24-90mm for me. I owned both lenses for a while until I finally gave up on the LUMIX and sold it. I have a post about this lens, but to summarize its key strengths, it's incredibly compact with great reach. Where it came up short for me was that its variable aperture was f/4-f/7.1; not a deal breaker, but 24mm is more useful on a zoom than 28mm to me. When you zoom into the 200mm range, the barrel has two segments, which creates an extra point of dust entry. Finally, I found that the weight of the lens had some negative aspects for me; it felt somewhat cheap, and while filming video, it was more challenging to keep the camera steady. In contrast, with the 24-90mm, the extra weight helped me maintain stability.
Captured on a Leica SL3 at 85mm f/4, 1/80 sec, ISO 5000
Is it worth the price?
The last factor to consider is the price of the lenses; the Leica 24-90mm is the most expensive, often by a significant margin. Initially, I only rented the lens as a birthday gift for myself. Its price, when new, was out of my range, and I wasn’t sure I would enjoy it enough to spend the money on buying it used. But I got lucky and came across a heavily discounted listing. The listing claimed that the lens had significant barrel play, the rubber grips were loose, and there was some dust in the front element. I took a chance and figured that, worst-case scenario, I could wait and save up some money to send it to Leica for repair. The universe was kind to me. It turns out the company had a duplicate listing for that lens, and it had already been sold. They offered me a mint-condition used version for the same price, essentially, this made the cost equivalent to getting a used Leica 24-70mm.
So, do I love the lens enough to recommend paying full price? It's an incredible lens, but should you go into debt for it? No, my recommendation would be to look for it used. However, if you insist on buying it brand new and have the money for it, you won’t be disappointed.
Conclusion
At this point in the review, it is clear that this is a lens I would recommend. As I mentioned earlier, the other lenses mentioned are also good options. However, what sets the 24-90mm apart from the other lenses is its build quality and fantastic image quality. Don’t let the weight scare you off from trying it. Initially, I thought the LUMIX 28-200mm would be the only zoom lens I would ever want for the SL3, but in the end, the beast won.
Sample Images
