Im finally doing my bucket list trip to Iceland in like three weeks and Im honestly panicking about my kit for the SL2. Ive been looking at the 16-35mm Vario-Elmar but man its so heavy and expensive for a zoom and I really want to keep the total weight down since Ill be hiking to waterfalls all day.
I read online that the Panasonic 16-35mm or even the 18mm prime are great alternatives for L-mount but then I see people on the forums saying they arent sharp enough for the 47mp sensor. My budget is capped at $3000 tops which rules out some of the crazy expensive glass. Is the native Leica glass really worth the extra weight and cost or should I just get the Sigma or Lumix stuff?
I've tried many wide zooms on this mount and the Panasonic Lumix S PRO 16-35mm f/4 definitely holds its own. Its way lighter for hiking than the bulky Leica Super-Vario-Elmar-SL 16-35mm f/3.5-4.5 ASPH. If you want pure optical perfection tho, the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art for L-Mount is technically superior and way cheaper. Dont worry about sharpness, the Sigma is a beast.
Honestly it drives me crazy how much they charge for glass these days just because of a mount name. You spend a fortune on a body like the SL2 and then every decent wide angle feels like carrying a literal brick around your neck. Its a total scam that we have to choose between breaking our backs or settling for soft corners on a high res sensor. I had high hopes for some of the newer releases but the weight to performance ratio just isnt there for people who actually hike.
- Prices keep climbing for prestige branding
- Glass is getting heavier instead of smarter
- Marketing hype ignores real world usability in the field Its so frustrating because you want that Iceland trip to be perfect but the industry just keeps pushing these bulky monsters that ruin the experience of actually being out there. I really feel for you because it feels like a lose-lose situation lately... seriously hope you can make it work tho!
Saved for later, ty!
