Jump to content

Lenses for M3


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A couple of years I sold my M5 (still on my avatar) and 6 lenses to move into large format. I miss the convenience of 35mm film so lured back by the fond memories of shooting with an ever reliable Leica I bought an M3 today. Previously my lens collection was 35 & 50mm lux, 50mm cron rigid and collapsible, 90mm elmar, 135mm hektor and 90mm tele elmarit. Too many but most of them came in a lot sale with the camera.

 

With the advantage of hindsight but a reduced budget I'm thinking of an Summar & a Summarit in my kit until I can save more cash to get a Summicron. I realise the Summar & Summarit are screw mount, give soft(er) images, are likely to have scratches, are prone to haze and are collapsible. Not worried about those things so much, but is there a model/year/serial number I should look for, or certain important differences/characteristics I should be aware of when choosing them. I'll shoot b&w and C-41.

 

I'm excited abut being back and part of the Leica club and looking forward to shooting with the M3.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, why do you want a Summar and a Summarit? The key thing with these lenses is finding optically perfect examples. I've got 3 Summars, 2 are perfect and produce nice 'sharp' results. People think it's a soft focus lens because there's not many decent ones about.

 

My advice would be to go for a 5cm Elmar, ideally the M version. It's a superb lens and will be similar in price.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is the golden age of M mount lenses. If you don't mind off brands, consider the Zeiss ZM and Voigtlander labels -- 50mm Sonnar, 50mm Planar and the new 50mm Nokton. In many respects, I like their output (as seen on flickr) better then the 50mm Summilux ASPH I once owned. I might be a heretic in saying this here, but I see little reason to buy Leica M lenses these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Colin,

 

If you are doing mostly still lifes & portaits you might consider one of the 90mm lenses or even one of the 135's.

 

If you look thru the range/viewfinder of your M3 & activate the frame selector you can see that an M3 was designed to be used with a 90mm lens as its primary lens. While at the same time being very usable with a 50 or 135.

 

A 90mm lens is often quite useful because it can sometimes allow a person to eliminate unwanted foreground while at the same time establishing a more pleasing perspective. It does this by photographing a narrower angle of coverage from a bit of distance.

 

A 135mm lens (Very useful & do-able with an M3.) also does the above with a slightly smaller angle of coverage at a somewhat greater distance. This can sometimes produce a slightly more noticable compressive effect.

 

Given the wider & wider coverage of M range/viewfinders over the last Half Century, people have sometimes overlooked the advantages of the 0.91X magnification of the M3.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Michael, I had an Elmar 90mm f4 a few years ago and while it was awkward on the M5 is gave reasonable results. I'm wondering if an f2 or f3.5 would be better.

 

I was lucky enough to buy on fleabay a coated 10 blade iris Summarit attached to a 111f, that will be my starter lens anyway until I can save up again for something else.

 

 

Cheers

 

Colin

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Colin, I have never disagreed with Michael but I do think his advice regarding focal length primacy is flawed. I have an M3, bought new years ago. It is optimized for the 50mm focal length and is superior in viewing this focal length to most other models. If you press the pre-selector lever inwards, you will see the smaller frame for the 90mm; pull the lever in the opposite direction and you will see the even smaller frame for the 135mm lens. Both of these tele-frames are easy to use, but the 50mm makes use of the whole viewfinder.

 

Find a good 50mm Elmar-M if you can. If you could extend the budget, almost any Summicron would give you excellent results, with younger specimens having the edge. Another alternative is a used 50mm Summarit-M which would be my first choice in your situation. It is slightly faster than the Elmar and almost matches the Summicron lens, certainly at working apertures. My M3 kit comprises 28 Elmarit; 50 Summicron and 90 Elmarit-M, the latter replacing my old Tele-Elmarit. Later I added the 135mm Elmar which is one of the real bargains and goes well with the M3.

 

So my advice is to search for a good 50mm first, the best you can afford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Summicron is your best bet. Costwise probably the V3 but it you can not afford it get the Summitar w/adapter then if you eventually get the Summicron you will have 2 different image producing lenses. In my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everybody,

 

I agree with David that the frameline for the 50mm lens in an M3 works very well. It is a nice, BIG, rounded (remember Kodachrome?) frameline that shows off the 50mm field of view very well.

 

When I said the range/viewfinder of the M3 was optimized for the 90mm lens I was talking about something else.

 

The viewfinder of an M3 range/viewfinder has a magnification of .91X life size. All other range/viewfinders in all other M cameras are .91X or less. Unless they have some kind of add-on's.

 

.91X magnification means: If someone uses a lens with a field of view which is less than the approximately 45 degrees diagonally covered by the viewfinder: The projected frameline for this other lens will still appear at .91X magnification. This reduced angle of coverage within the larger field of view can sometimes be used advantageously when trying to accurately compose & focus. Because of the reasonably large image magnification.

 

Example: A 90mm lens has a 27 degree diagonal angle of coverage. Its viewfinder flamelines are centered inside of the viewfinder field for the 50mm lens. This area inside the 90mm framelines is often sufficient for composing & focussing in many situations. The area outside of the framelines can sometimes be used to help.

 

This "free" area within the viewfinder BUT not within the framelines: Can sometimes be used to advantage to help anticipate when a nearby something may come into or block the subject within the framelines with a moving subject, etc. This area outside of the framelines can also be used to tell where/when something partially within the framelines & partially outside the framelines will end, etc.

 

There are a number of advantages to knowing what is happening outside of the framelines of the lens being used. Especially at reasonably high magnification.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it not follow that any finder frame other than the widest can be called "the ideal"? I might say here that from 1985 to 2002 I used two kits -- based around an M3 and a Canon SLR -- pretty much interchangeably except for close-up and copying work. I was not troubled by the fact that the SLR's finder did not show anything outside the area to be recorded. I could move the camera this way or that, I could step forward or back, or I could change the lens. While I concede that in this matter the finder of a RFDR camera is inherently better, the SLR's finder has the advantage of magnification -- showing the image to be captured across the frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all good insights to take into account. When I had the two Summicrons they never saw a lot of action because I was fascinated with the Lux's which were the hot thing but now all the buzz seems to be with the Crons.

 

Something else I have noticed is how much the prices for Leica lenses have escalated since I sold mine only a couple of years ago :eek:, just astounding but probably recognition to their quality and the growing interest in rangefinders.

 

Once the Summarit arrives I'll have some fun playing around with it and get a nice feel for it, they seem to be a reasonable general purpose lens and I'm excited by trying something different to what I previously had.

 

Also, having some Large Format experience has taught me a lot about understanding the science of lens design and performance and optimizing them in particular environments or knowing if they are suited for certain purposes.

 

The rigid Cron is probably my next choice, although the Elmar is also interesting.

 

Regards

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So many choices! Which 50? Collapsble or rigid, new or really old, LTM with adapter or bayonet? Leica, Voightlander, Zeiss or something made for a LTM knockoff for cheap? My only question is, after moving from large format will you have to hold the M3 upside down to get the propper effect? Have fun with the new lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it not follow that any finder frame other than the widest can be called "the ideal"? I might say here that from 1985 to 2002 I used two kits -- based around an M3 and a Canon SLR -- pretty much interchangeably except for close-up and copying work. I was not troubled by the fact that the SLR's finder did not show anything outside the area to be recorded. I could move the camera this way or that, I could step forward or back, or I could change the lens. While I concede that in this matter the finder of a RFDR camera is inherently better, the SLR's finder has the advantage of magnification -- showing the image to be captured across the frame.

 

A zoom lens on a SLR/DSLR pretty much gives you the view outside of the frame if you start at the wide end, then compose and zoom to the desired image.

 

But good fixed aperture zooms are big. And heavy. Really heavy. The 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom mounted on my 5D2 sticks out a foot, and together weigh at least 5 lbs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many choices! Which 50? Collapsble or rigid, new or really old, LTM with adapter or bayonet? Leica, Voightlander, Zeiss or something made for a LTM knockoff for cheap? My only question is, after moving from large format will you have to hold the M3 upside down to get the propper effect? Have fun with the new lens.

 

Still shoot LF, it won't be hard to hold a Leica again though :D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Colin,

Once you have a lens that can focus to 0.7m (last summicron with detachable hood, in my case), you may want to consider enabling this "close-focus" on your M3. There's a little lever to be bent (close to the RF-roller) that's limiting the run of the focus cam. It made a difference for me.

Enjoy your new M3!

Alexander

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...