M9 - new user: lens and camera questions

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Then look and assess the images you have taken with these lenses and you may find the sense of depth is better with one, the eye and face is sharper and more natural with one lens. If you buy one MTF's alone that would be a mistake IMO.

 

Why not take your M9 out to find a shop that has the Zeiss and Lieca and have a look, feel and take some shots ?

Or buy one secondhand, get to know it then test another, I have bought and sold several 35's to settle on the ones I have now, I really should sell on or two, I don't need 3 35's but I'd miss each for different and valid reasons

[uhoh7]

My point is: Let's assume I want to make a portrait with a 35mm lens at open aperture and the eye of the person which I want to be sharp is - like often - not in the center of the image but at around 12mm image circle radius. The sharpness I can expect can be seen in the MTF, can't it?

Enclosed a comparison of the current Leica M f1.4 and f2 versions and the Zeiss f1.4. 

 

Of course the quality of the photography at first hand depends on the capability of the photographer. But the photographer wants sharp images so he chooses sharp lenses.

Why are you asking for advice, get the ZM 35/1.4 (and live with the footprint). And ignore that some of the best shooters in the world are using the FLE or the ASPH cron, or something else.

 

If you really want to know, search the lenses on flickr and try to find that dip in some real images. And you might also notice the ZM 35/1.4 has it's own quirks. Follow the way it renders bright lights across the frame

Edited March 3, 2016 by uhoh7

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[colonel]

I am late to this party, but basically unless you are shooting architecture for magazines all the Leica and Zeiss 35mm are fab and some of the Voigtlander two

 

My 35mm summary is:

 

1. Zeiss 35mm f1.4 for technical excellence

2. Leica 35mm FLE for best 1.2/1.4 lens handling and etherial photos

3. Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 II for awesome value and unique people shots and lovely warm colours. A bit soft wide open but plays with the big boys by f5.6 with extreme corners lagging

4. Zeiss 35mm f2. Contrast lacking at f2 but awesome beyond

5. Last Summicron 35mm f2. Very good but would shoot for voigtlander or Zeiss alternatives

6. New Summicron 35m f2. No idea - see reviews. Handling looks lovely

7. Zeiss 35mm f2.8. If you can live with 2.8 great value, very sharp and compact

 

In general - Leica colours neutral and bluish, Zeiss colours warm and steel/yellowish, Voigtlander very warm and yellowish

[Gubs]

The 35mmm Lux Asph and FLE have a very different look.

 

I tried the FLE for some time and found it quite remarkable but somewhat brittle with regards to image. A similar feel I have seen lately is on the Leica Q, a camera who's look I certainly don't enjoy. Instead I bought the regular ASPH and have enjoyed using it. However it does offer up a somewhat confusing look occassionally which I cannot put down to focus but merely it's feel I think. It does produce stunning results if you really take time and learn to use this lens. It really depends on what you want.

 

If I was to buy again I'd probably opt for the FLE and live with it's slight harshness. Before this I was using a non ASPH 50 Cron which has a lovely warm feel on the face for portraits etc so I was biased when I hit the LUXes. I also shot with a 35mm Cron for a while and probably would have stuck with that hadn't it been for mechanical issues with the lens. They are very good tho despite not having the inescapable glow of the LUXes.

 

People say that the ASPH LUX 35mm should be pin sharp but I have not quite found that to be true. The truth is in the eyes on portraits I think. The Crons will offer something up slightly more user friendly in my experience.

[atournas]

 

I decided to join the Leica M rangefinder experience [...] - is the M 35f1.4 asph. FLE sharper at f2 and f2.8 than the M 35f2 asph.? [...] I don't need a fast lens for such very wide angle of view, so I consider the M 24f3.8 asph [...].

 

 

Some remarks:

1. From your introduction, I assume that the M9 is your very first M rangefinder. If so, any of the lenses you mention will be of great service to you--minute differences won't pay back immediately at this stage.

2. You undervalue the 35mm f2 ASP severely! For many, it is the best M body-lens combination.

3. The 24mm f2.8 ASP is a fantastic lens. I wish I had that instead of my 21mm f2.8 ASP.

4. In my opinion, we pay premium value for the Leica lenses' optical as well as mechanical excellence. If the latter counts for you too, I suggest that you reconsider the f3.8 option.

 

Paul

Edited March 10, 2016 by atournas