Ralfi Posted January 25, 2014 Share #1 Posted January 25, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I will take my M240 to travel through india in march. I will go in big cities (Delhi, Mumbai) and also to the countryside in the south (kerala). Right now I have a 50/1.4 and a 21/3,4. I would like to add a 90 or 135mm lens, for several reasons: - being able to shoot people more discretely - being able to shoot objects in distance, e.g. animals I love travelling on low weight as well. What recommendations do you have for me, rather a 90mm or a 135mm. There is plenty of the 90mm out there, I want a lens that does a great job even in low light conditions. Looking forward getting some hints and experiences from you! Thanks 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 Hi Ralfi, Take a look here Which lenses for travelling?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Renatus Posted January 25, 2014 Share #2 Posted January 25, 2014 90mm Macro Elmar. Tiny, sharp, under-rated. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted January 25, 2014 Share #3 Posted January 25, 2014 Excellent answer. The 135 isn't long enough for "wildlife" but a 90 is a flexible and under-rated focal length and the macro gives you another dimension. Sent from another Galaxy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 25, 2014 Share #4 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) I often cite the 90 Macro-Elmar as a fine lens, one of the very best all-purpose 90's (and one of the best lenses period) according to folks like E. Puts. In this case, since the OP cites low light use, the slow speed may or may not be a limitation. Another consideration, if buying new, is that the macro adapter for the Macro-Elmar is no longer an option, so the cost is over $4000 US, slightly more than a new 90 APO Summicron, which is a terrific lens, but big and heavy. An alternative might be a late model of the discontinued 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M, which can be bought for about $1600. I just found one in fine condition and had it sent to DAG to be sure everything is as good as it looks before I commit to keeping it under the return guarantee. Jeff Edited January 25, 2014 by Jeff S Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 25, 2014 Share #5 Posted January 25, 2014 I had a 90mm Elmarit-M which I foolishly sold. After trying the Summicron I finally went back and re-bought the Elmarit-M which I realised is IMHO about as good a compromise as you can get - slower at f/2.8, but also lighter and beautifully matched to an M rangefinder both physically and in handling terms - it also takes E46 filters as I assume both your other 2 lenses do. Although I also recently bought a 90mm Tele-Elmarit (thin version) which I have to say is a very small and light travel lens if a somewhat older design, I thin that the Elmarit-M will compliment your existing lenses better. I'd consider the macro but at f/4 it IS a relatively slow lens. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted January 25, 2014 Share #6 Posted January 25, 2014 I often cite the 90 Macro-Elmar as a fine lens, one of the very best all-purpose 90's (and one of the best lenses period) according to folks like E. Puts. In this case, since the OP cites low light use, the slow speed may or may not be a limitation. Another consideration, if buying new, is that the macro adapter for the Macro-Elmar is no longer an option, so the cost is over $4000 US, slightly more than a new 90 APO Summicron, which is a terrific lens, but big and heavy. An alternative might be a late model of the discontinued 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M, which can be bought for about $1600. I just found one in fine condition and had it sent to DAG to be sure everything is as good as it looks before I commit to keeping it under the return guarantee. Jeff +1. While the Macro is an amazing lens, low light capabilities are not its strongest point. The Elmarit-M probably achieves the best balance overall. You may also want to consider the 90/2.8 "thin" Tele-Elmarit-M. Small and light. My favourite longish travel lens. Flare with this lens appears to be a frequently mentioned issue, although it hasn't bothered me more than with other lenses (but I always use the original, fairly large reversible hood). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted January 25, 2014 Share #7 Posted January 25, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I hesitate to mention a lens you do not list, viz. the 28-35-50 TriElmar plus a 90mm Elmarit would give you a well-balanced kit with just two lenses in the bag. Add a 21mm if you anticipate its use for architecture or interiors. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted January 25, 2014 Share #8 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) The 4.0/90 Macro-Elmar. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/228593-praise-4-0-90-macro-elmar.html To some extent what it loses in speed it more than makes up for in IQ and lack of weight & volume (which does make it easier to hold in lower light). If you really want a faster lens then I agree that there's the 2.8/90 Elmarit-M, or the much bigger and heavier 2.0/90, but it may be easier just to push the ISO one or two stops and travel with the lighter lens. I would consider 90 more versatile that 135 which is not a particularly easy lens to use on the run. The M240 has plenty enough resolution you could always crop a little. Edited January 25, 2014 by MarkP Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 25, 2014 Share #9 Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) I would like to travel light in your case too so I doubt I would take my 50 lux. I would go for my Elmar 50 there is enough light there, especially with your M240. The advice for the Macro-Elmar 90 that someone gave here is in itself appropriate, it's a pity that this lens is so expensive given its speed. So I do not think it is under-rated, it's the price in relation to what you get for it. Edited January 25, 2014 by otto.f Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Jones Posted January 25, 2014 Share #10 Posted January 25, 2014 Another vote for the 90 macro. I've travelled with mine and it's great for the times when you can't get close to the subject. As a daylight lens no problem. It's very small and light but I don't like the hood. The macro possibilities are a brilliant extension to the M system as well. I would try it before you try the larger lenses, you might get a 2nd hand one without the macro adaptor. I couldn't leave the 50 lux at home, the 50 elmar is the sensible choice but you can shoot indoors and at night with the 50 lux and the rendering is superb. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted January 25, 2014 Share #11 Posted January 25, 2014 There are plenty of 85mm f1.4 lenses available for use with adapters. Zeiss makes many versions of the lens including the current ZF2 that adapts easily with the Novoflex adapter. The lens renders beautifully with the M240. Price wise it is well under $2000.00 for an optic made to last a lifetime, perhaps a bit heavy for travel depending on your comfort level and shooting style. For light weight and medium fast the 90mm Summarit would be an excellent traveling lens, these lenses don't get the love they deserve, relegated to 2nd class citizenship however once the pictures are viewed this is quickly forgotten and the light weight and lower price can be appreciated. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 26, 2014 Share #12 Posted January 26, 2014 Since you already own two E46 lenses, I would get the 90 Elmarit-M (E46) which is excellent. I am sure Andreas at the Leica Store Munich can you locate one at a decent price. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted January 26, 2014 Share #13 Posted January 26, 2014 +1. Elmarit-M would be a great addition. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 26, 2014 Share #14 Posted January 26, 2014 90 Elmarit-M is excellent. Great for details or portraits. Lovely bokeh. For wildlife, 90 or 135 won't be enough. How about checking out a V-Lux 4? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted January 26, 2014 Share #15 Posted January 26, 2014 My ideal (dream) lens selection for that trip would be: - The 21/3.4 Super-Elmar you already own - The 35/1.4 Summilux FLE - The 50/2.8 Elmar-M - The 90/4.0 Macro-Elmar I own and use all of these lenses, except the 21/3.4 Super-Elmar. Guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted January 26, 2014 Share #16 Posted January 26, 2014 I recenlty made a last lens purchase, and compleated the traveling, and everything else kit. It consists of: 21SEM 35FLE 75Cron 135APO I couldn't be happier. The only "dissadvantage" was I switched from Hadley Small to Hadley Pro. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 26, 2014 Share #17 Posted January 26, 2014 Disadvantages are self made in this case. Enjoy the new kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik_nik9 Posted January 26, 2014 Share #18 Posted January 26, 2014 I will take my M240 to travel through india in march. I will go in big cities (Delhi, Mumbai) and also to the countryside in the south (kerala). Right now I have a 50/1.4 and a 21/3,4. I would like to add a 90 or 135mm lens, for several reasons: - being able to shoot people more discretely - being able to shoot objects in distance, e.g. animals I love travelling on low weight as well. What recommendations do you have for me, rather a 90mm or a 135mm. There is plenty of the 90mm out there, I want a lens that does a great job even in low light conditions. Looking forward getting some hints and experiences from you! Thanks Hi Ralfi I was in India 2011 with 21/3.4, 35/1.4 and 75/2.5. 2012 I left 75/2.5 at home in favor of 50/1.4, which I do now on all trips. If you shoot people with lenses longer than 50 mm it's rather challenging to get focus sharp unless you close the aperture very much. It's easier with 50 and you get the bonus of the fast lens - you will be lucky for that in the dark alleys of the cities in India. I don't mind to crop my pictures if necessary! Just be sure you have the 21/3.4 with you always, nothing better to shoot with in the crowds Enjoy your time - I'll be there most probably end of April … Nik http://www.blurb.com/books/3428416-india Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 26, 2014 Share #19 Posted January 26, 2014 Disadvantages are self made in this case. Enjoy the new kit. In a way. You can also look at it from another point of view. The fact that the question of the OP arises is quite typical for the recent evolution of Leica's actual lens department. In the period from 30's to 80's there was no such question: almost every M lens was compact and any M equipment fitted well in a Hadley Small. The storm of Summiluxes that came over us in the recent ten years puts the original idea of Barnack over its limits IMO. An average M equipment has become very heavy and bulky these days. I hope the newest 50 Summicron AA sets the trend back to what Barnack proposed. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted January 26, 2014 Share #20 Posted January 26, 2014 Ralfi I suspect you're going to have a fantastic time in India. I think the 21 & 50 will cover most of you're needs. I would say to get a second camera, some thing pocketable with a longer reach instead of a 90 or 135, something similar to the Panasonic LF1 (Leica Type-C). It's got the reach something like 200mm (though I'm not sure of the exact specs) in a tiny package. This way you'll have something easy to carry, in fact something that adds almost no bulk to your kit, some thing you can use more discreetly (if the need arises), saves time in decision making with the M, and can act as backup should something unforeseen happen with the M. All that being said, I own the latest 90mm f/2.8. It's a fantastic lens, good contrast, incredibly sharp, and feels like it's built like tank. It's not difficult to focus (on a M9), and is relatively fast. I suspect with the ISO advantages the M240 has over the M9, the 90 f/2.8 can be used successfully in low light more if the time. There are many here who quite like the 90mm Summarits and they cost roughly the same new as a used Elmarit-M in good condition. I've not used anything longer on an M and can not comment on the 135mm lens, except that many report needing VF magnification to consistently get good focus with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.