My personal lens set for M8, finally . . .

Having two M8 bodies for just over a month, and having a long background with Leicas (http://www.waltodets.com/photo/), I’ve had little problem adapting to the camera itself—it is wonderful, which is just to say an M camera. I am so grateful for this camera.

I have, though, been oddly perplexed by the lens multiplication issue and the change in the design of Leica lenses since I last used them. Well, the solution has ended up being relatively simple, but I took the long way around to get there. I thought I’d just post this experience on the chance that it would be of interest to others. With the film cameras, I used a 35 and 50 Summicron (about 50/50 I’d say) and very occasionally a 90 or 28. It was surprisingly difficult for me to accept that a 35 had become a 50 and a 28 a 35 (I don’t know why, but habits die hard). But, of course, that’s it and the math is pretty simple. I do find that the actual crop factor is more like 1.25. For example, the 28 seems to cover almost exactly what a 35 would cover on a film camera, not the predicted 37 or so. This makes the 35 a 44 or so, and I actually prefer that to a 50. (At one point I had taken to using the 40 Summicron on M4’s and liked it.)

To explain my personal values about a camera and lenses: I shoot only black and white; do “street” photography and “environmental portraits”; value a very compact and maneuverable camera because I carry it almost everywhere; and don’t much like switching lenses (because this confuses the view of the world when the camera is not to the eye). In my film days, I valued a lens for not creating printing problems (e.g. flare, excessive softness in the corners or inadequate contrast). I’m not much interested in “prints” per se, but in photographs, so I like a print to be transparent to the viewer, not an object of attention. I also value an elegant, “legible” grayscale—you know, Leica-like. I think commercial media and advertising has influenced people to use too much contrast.

So what I’ve ended up with as a complete kit is pretty obvious: the Zeiss 21/2.8; both the 28 Summicron and 28 Elmarit ASPH; the 35/2 ASPH and a 35/2 M (IV); and a 90/4 collapsible. It’s working really well. I should say that in arriving at this simple kit of six lenses (really four, functionally), I went through about 12 lenses, unfortunately. My selections were made by just doing diverse, day-to-day photography with the lenses and looking at the results in 13 x 19 inch prints from an Epson 4800.

On the 21 (my M8 26), I tried both the 21 Elmarit and the Zeiss. Though the Elmarit had that Leica sharpness and grayscale on center, the Zeiss was more even corner to corner, more flare resistant and higher in contrast. Since I typically only use a 28 indoors (with window and artificial lights often in the frame), I preferred the Zeiss for the flare resistance and contrast . I also do a lot on the edges of the frame with such a wide lens, and the Zeiss is just better here. The Zeiss also seems more compact (longer but narrower) than the Elmarit, and feels to me to handle more easily and with less bulk. That incredibly stupid lens cap, though, has to go. I’d rather stuff a hard boiled egg in the shade than use the cap. I use a Voigtlander 28 finder (the little metal round one) with the lens and like it a lot.

On the 28 (my M8 35), my favorite lens was actually the older Elmarit for it’s really elegant, natural tonal scale. I went with the two ASPH lenses as a compromise because of the bulk vs. speed issue. I find the 28 Summicron nearly as elegant for grayscale as the old Elmarit and it’s a stop faster with exactly the same weight and bulk. The Summicron is also somewhat better wide open than the older lens. The Elmarit ASPH I got solely for size and on this score it’s hard to beat. I find it an O.K. lens. For me, it is too contrasty and not as sharp as either of the other lenses. It is very resistant to flare though. I find the tonal scale a little harsh and ugly—perhaps rough or aggressive would describe it for my taste. All around, the 28 Summicron is hard to beat given the speed, size, wide open performance, grayscale and reasonable contrast. I use a Voigtlander 35mm finder most of the time with the 28s (also the little round, metal one) because it is more accurate than the M8 lines.

On the 35 (my M8 44, which is a prime lens) I had the most trouble. I tried a Summicron ASPH uncoded, a Summicron ASPH coded, a Voigtlander 35/2.5, a Voigtlander 40/1.4 and the older (IV) Summicron-M. I find the Summicron ASPH too contrasty for general work and, if I had to guess, I’d say it’s a lens for color. It does have the great virtues of being really, really good wide open and of quite remarkably making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear in really flat, murky light and high flare situations, and I don’t dismiss those things lightly. So it definitely has a place for me and I went out and got a coded one for vignetting. I find the coding on the Summicron ASPH quite worthwhile for keeping the corners up, though I wouldn’t spend the money again for that. My answer to the drawbacks of ASPH lens is, of course, the older Summicron. It has that great Leica grayscale and, unlike the ASPH lens, it’s really excellent at F8 or 11. It’s acceptable at 2.0 off center and pretty good at 2.8 and just gets better from there. The ASPH lens deteriorates into a relatively ugly grayscale stopped down—it gets that rough look I don’t like in the 28 Elmarit ASPH. The older Summicron is also the king of compact for Leica lenses and I love that about it. On the two Voigtlanders, I got the 35/2.5 at Sean Reid’s suggestion (I was griping about the contrast of the ASPH Summicron) and like it. It is well-balanced, quite good wide open, nice to carry on the camera and has an elegant, old-fashioned grayscale. It’s not as good wide open as the ASPH. I didn’t like the roughness of the mount putting it on the camera and don’t use it for that reason alone. The 40/1.4 I found beautiful stopped down—the grayscale is just wonderful and it’s very sharp. But you don’t (usually) buy a 1.4 for that reason and wide open this lens can flare terribly in the right conditions—about the worst I recall except maybe the old 50 Summilux of many years ago. So, terrific for the money, and very good in certain ways, I’ve set the Voigtlanders aside for the sake of simplicity. Too many lenses is just too much trouble and distraction for me.

So, that’s my story and, yes, I know that there are a thousand other opinions and observations and ways of doing photography. I would like to thank forum members, Sean Reid and Erwin Puts for much valuable input and direction on all this. It would have cost me even more time and, unfortunately, more money without this help. It’s back to making photographs and spending less money for me.

Good wishes,
Walt

P.S. The first shot below (the portrait) is the 28 Summicron and the second the old 28 Elmarit. These are typical of what I do with cameras. I don’t know about “printing” them for the Internet. I normally view them at Gamma 2.2, 5K and 50 cd/m2 for printing preparation.

[glenerrolrd]

Walt I enjoyed reading your post. One thing I really like about my M8 is my ability to see the differences in the many Leica lens I have used over the years . I have always thought that Leica lenses really excel in their ability to seperate the tones..and this comes out in your preferences. Thanks for posting your findings. Roger

I agree about flare on the Nokton 40/1.4. It keeps me from using it a lot (along with the 'grating' feel it gives when mounting it).

[LichMD]

Thanks Walt for sharing your experiences with us.
Your thought process and analysis is instructive.
Don't forget to post in the photo forum.

[drhvp]

Hi,
I like the tonal range of the older Elmarits 28, too.
Which version (serial nr) of the Elmarit 28 did you use for the second shot?
Thank You,
Dr. HVP

[martinb]

Interesting what you're saying about the crop factor being more like 1.25x. Someone with a 5D maybe could do a comparison with a 35mm lens and a M8 with a 28mm. Both set to infinity.

[palmskov]

Great post regarding a consideration which most of us m8 owners must have been through. I have ended up with a 35- and 50mm cron which do the job for me right now but will properly add a 24mm. I also have a cron 40mm which I use rarely however it gives a nice soft look.

Starting from scratch the M8 adventure has been a little expensive so far but wouldn't miss it. Great camera, lenses and extreme versatile results. I'm satisfied))

[Iron Flatline]

Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences with us.

I like the 28mm Elmarit for the size, as do you. I also like the 35mm Summilux 1.4 because it is very sharp, very fast, and has a nice focal length.

Don't deny yourself a 50mm Noctilux. I know the lens can be a little gimmicky, but that's what makes it so much fun :-)

[sean_reid]

Hi Walt,

That's a very interesting post and I enjoyed it. I also like your work, as you know. Some thoughts:

1. I've been complaining about those miserable Zeiss lens caps in articles for a few years now; I hope they re-design them.

2. I find the best version of the 35/2.5, for M8 use, to be the Skopar. It's a thread mount and so I couple it with a Milich adapter for self-coding. The Milich adapter moves smoothly in the M8 mount.

3. Before they disappear all together (this model is discontinued), try the CV 28/3.5 Skopar. It is a high contrast lens (for better or worse) but its performance is really remarkable on the M8 and its tiny.

4. At some point, consider trying a Leica 35/1.4 Asph. I think you might really like it.

Cheers,

Sean

[lars_bergquist]

Walt, I agree with you about the dear old 'spherical' 35 Summicron. It is a great lens and should not be underrated. It has become my 'walkabout lens' because of its combination of good performance and compactness. On the whole, older Leica lenses should not be underrated; Leitz/Leica has released few optical 'dogs' on the public. (I could name those few, but abstain.)

My second 35 however is the Summilux ASPH. Did you never consider that? I do also disagree a bit about your verdict on the old 50 mm Summilux. I have owned it, and I found it far more resistant to flare and internal reflexes than the Summicron; I got rid of the 'cron and bought a Summilux ASPH instead, which is just fabulous.

I do also agree that lenses on the M8 do feel a bit wider than one might expect. A 35 e.g. should be the equivalent of 47 mm, which is of course less than the 52 of the '50 mm' lenses, but still it does feel closer to 40. The 28 Summicron too feels a bit wider over the shoulders than its expected 37 mm. I have never run any formal tests, and I don't know why it should be so, but the feeling is there.

The old man from the Age of Standard Lenses

[roccoriley]

Interesting analysis but it seems to me that a kit containing six different lenses defeats the best attributes of the Leica M8.

I have found that with Leicas, especially the M8, less is more.

[rwfreund]

My kit turns out to be one lens, the 35mm chron asph.
I have struggled, at looking at many websites daily for lenses in stock,
I have called and pleaded.
Not knowing any longshoremen at the New Jersey ports, I am forced to consider the CVs.
a 75mm heliar is on order.
The lens supply situation settled the issue for me
-bob

[sean_reid]

Originally Posted by roccoriley

Interesting analysis but it seems to me that a kit containing six different lenses defeats the best attributes of the Leica M8.

I have found that with Leicas, especially the M8, less is more.

And yet Walt's pictures don't seem to defeat the best attributes of the Leica M8 <G> so perhaps the lens set works well for him.

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by roccoriley

Interesting analysis but it seems to me that a kit containing six different lenses defeats the best attributes of the Leica M8.

I have found that with Leicas, especially the M8, less is more.

Hell I'm working on ten so what is the issue. LOL

let's dispell the rumor that a M is just a reportage camera. Far from it, it's a tool like any other tool that gets used to collect images if I need a 16mm i need a 16mm if I need a 135 than that is what i use. A 50 will never be a 135 in terms of look and vise versa. Folks need to get off this merry go round of what it is not suppossed to be. I debunk that theory every day doing commercial work with it.

[wlaidlaw]

Originally Posted by sean_reid

Hi Walt,

That's a very interesting post and I enjoyed it. I also like your work, as you know. Some thoughts:

1. I've been complaining about those miserable Zeiss lens caps in articles for a few years now; I hope they re-design them.


Cheers,

Sean

I emailed Zeiss about the lens caps some months ago. They said they were unaware of any problem, didn't see what I was complaining about and that nobody else had contacted them about it. I have little crescents of double sided thick sticky tape over mine. It works OK but you have to cut out new little tape crescents every 6 weeks or so, as the outside sticky wears off.

Wilson

[sean_reid]

Various people in Zeiss USA management read the reviews so they've aware of my concerns with this design. It actually can be a big deal when one is working quickly, hands are sweaty, etc.

Cheers,

Sean

[Chuck Hatcher]

I think the crop factor/angle of view is only half the equation, and switching to shorter focal length lenses to try to duplicate the results from a full-frame M may not be the best answer for everyone. The M8 has a character all its own and will probably end up being used a little differently than a film M.

Personally I am smitten with the older Summicrons. I have 1993 versions of the 35, 50 and 90 and think they are all superb. If I could have only one lens for my M8 it would be the 35 pre-ASPH Summicron.

(I chose an unusual method to obtain my lenses. I bought an unused LHSA 25th anniversary set with chrome M6 and three Summicrons. Considering the high prices of new Leica lenses, and the rising prices of used lenses of unknown condition, it made sense to me to "de-collectorize" the set.)

[lars_bergquist]

Originally Posted by Chuck Hatcher

I think the crop factor/angle of view is only half the equation, and switching to shorter focal length lenses to try to duplicate the results from a full-frame M may not be the best answer for everyone. The M8 has a character all its own and will probably end up being used a little differently than a film M.

Personally I am smitten with the older Summicrons. I have 1993 versions of the 35, 50 and 90 and think they are all superb. If I could have only one lens for my M8 it would be the 35 pre-ASPH Summicron.

--------------)

Hear, hear, on both counts. I'm glad to hear that you agree with me on the old 35 mm Summicron. Mine is from 1983, with jubilee engraving (came with a ditto Tele-Elmarit and an M4-P). The weakest point of the old Summicron warhorse was corner and edge performance when wide open. Now those corners and edges are gone! What remains is a very useful little lens.

The old man from the Age of Spherics

[wlaidlaw]

I too have 6 lenses for my M8 - 16mm f2.8 fish eye Zenitar, 21mm f2.8 CZ Biogon, 35mm f2.0 CZ Biogon, 50mm collapsible f2.8 Elmar-M, 50mm f1.0 Noctilux and 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M. However, I very rarely take out more than two extra lenses with me and often just one in a pocket. The only thing you can guarantee is that you will never have the right lens with you for that "perfect" shot.

Wilson

[carstenw]

My lineup (as soon as the remaining two are delivered) is the following, and I doubt I will change this for a while (I also have the CV15 until the WATE arrives at least):

WATE, 28/2A, 35/2A, 50/1.4A, 75/1.4, 90/4M

I carry four lenses now, in my Artisan&Artist ACAM7100 (cloth version of the Oskar's Day Bag; wonderful bag). One is on the camera, one stands alone (75 Lux), two are stacked. I don't know what I will do when I have all the lenses. I suspect that I will end up leaving one at home, maybe even two, and only pull them out when the need arises. The 75 Lux is lovely, but it is also pretty special, being for me more or less my wonder-portrait lens, and given its size, this is likely to be the first to be left at home when I go out, but I would never sell it. I also doubt I will walk around with 28, 35, and 50, but I am not sure which to leave out. If I carry the 90, I will likely hang on to the 50 and leave the 35 at home. Then again, 35 corresponds to my favorite focal length. Maybe I will just find a way to carry 5 lenses. Maybe I will leave the WATE at home when I don't expect to shoot architecture.