Advice to Newbies on lenses

[spydrxx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Moderators – not sure where to properly place this, please feel free to move to the appropriate forum if appropriate.

 

Disclaimer – grumpy old man here….I've been laid up for a while with a series of ailments, so haven't been as active a photographer recently as in the past...plus the temperature and humidity are insufferably high.

 

Anyway, to get to the point, I'm wondering if we're inadvertantly doing a disservice to some of the new Leica users who request Leica lens advice. With the tons of experience of forum contibutors, technical and practical knowledge, memorized MTF charts and the ability to quote Puts chapter and verse, we seem to frequently fall into the trap of routinely dogpiling expensive and complex answers to new users seeking elementary advice. A made up scenario, which you will all recognize illustrates my point. “Hi- Newbie here who has been using my Iphone to take shots and found I love photography, so decided to buy a real camera, and picked up a Leica. I like to shoot portrait, flowers, landscapes, street, racecars and astrophotography, so what lenses should I get, I'm anxious to start building a collection”. Sound vaguely familiar, at least in part? The collective response, while warm and inviting, often quickly moves to suggesting expensive, frequently our favorite lenses, without consideration of the skill level or financial resources of the OP.

 

OK I'm nagging, but yesterday had an epiphany. I went out for the first time in weeks to do some close up nature work (not with Leica gear). After reviewing the results last night, I decided to repeat the experience today in a different location, with an old inexpensive Leica lens... 2^nd hand gear which a newbie could pick up for a song. Instead of using an expensive 50 macro as I did yesterday, I used a LTM 90 Elmar f/4 – which I picked up last year for $71 – handheld on a very dated Olympus E-Pl2. Oh, yes, old technology, not great wide open, not sharp across the field. subject to flare, poor bokeh, etc., etc. wouldn't a nice modern APO be much better? Of course it would….but would the newbie have the technical skills to produce a significantly better result of the same subject? I think not...and personally, I think 90% of most results are due to an understanding of the technical issuess, not the lens. We tend to talk a lot about what is wrong with lenses, giving the impression that if you don't begin with the latest and greatest (and usually quite expensive), the plethora of old dogs (defined as anything which once was really good, but because of its age has fallen from grace) out there will give you unacceptable results – a new lens will solve all your problems. Well, I take issue with that, and think we should be more measured/helpful in our responses, especially to newbies. Enough of the rant. Here's a sample shot of ordinary clover to my point.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[lct]

Hairy leg? Just kidding  

[Advertisement]

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

[NB23]

Yes, people recomend what they own, regardless of the question.

[Belle123]

Moderators – not sure where to properly place this, please feel free to move to the appropriate forum if appropriate.

 

Disclaimer – grumpy old man here….I've been laid up for a while with a series of ailments, so haven't been as active a photographer recently as in the past...plus the temperature and humidity are insufferably high.

 

Anyway, to get to the point, I'm wondering if we're inadvertantly doing a disservice to some of the new Leica users who request Leica lens advice. With the tons of experience of forum contibutors, technical and practical knowledge, memorized MTF charts and the ability to quote Puts chapter and verse, we seem to frequently fall into the trap of routinely dogpiling expensive and complex answers to new users seeking elementary advice. A made up scenario, which you will all recognize illustrates my point. “Hi- Newbie here who has been using my Iphone to take shots and found I love photography, so decided to buy a real camera, and picked up a Leica. I like to shoot portrait, flowers, landscapes, street, racecars and astrophotography, so what lenses should I get, I'm anxious to start building a collection”. Sound vaguely familiar, at least in part? The collective response, while warm and inviting, often quickly moves to suggesting expensive, frequently our favorite lenses, without consideration of the skill level or financial resources of the OP.

 

OK I'm nagging, but yesterday had an epiphany. I went out for the first time in weeks to do some close up nature work (not with Leica gear). After reviewing the results last night, I decided to repeat the experience today in a different location, with an old inexpensive Leica lens... 2^nd hand gear which a newbie could pick up for a song. Instead of using an expensive 50 macro as I did yesterday, I used a LTM 90 Elmar f/4 – which I picked up last year for $71 – handheld on a very dated Olympus E-Pl2. Oh, yes, old technology, not great wide open, not sharp across the field. subject to flare, poor bokeh, etc., etc. wouldn't a nice modern APO be much better? Of course it would….but would the newbie have the technical skills to produce a significantly better result of the same subject? I think not...and personally, I think 90% of most results are due to an understanding of the technical issuess, not the lens. We tend to talk a lot about what is wrong with lenses, giving the impression that if you don't begin with the latest and greatest (and usually quite expensive), the plethora of old dogs (defined as anything which once was really good, but because of its age has fallen from grace) out there will give you unacceptable results – a new lens will solve all your problems. Well, I take issue with that, and think we should be more measured/helpful in our responses, especially to newbies. Enough of the rant. Here's a sample shot of ordinary clover to my point.

I tend to agree. And in many cases, unless you are into pixel peeping, the older lenses give more pleasing results....at least to my eyes. Although, have to say, the one in the Q is fantastic! But for the M, particularly the monochrome, my choice is the older lenses. Think also many of us justify our purchases by convincing ourselves we are not just a fool with money. But in reality, better lens doesn't make for better photos. It's the photographer. A good photographer can take good photos with just about anything. Don't need a Summilux or the Apo 50.

[Rus]

OP has made a valid point, I think. 

 

At the same time, my main concern while recommending an expensive lens to a "newbie" is not so much his/her lack of skill or experience, but that he/she is not as committed to photography as he/she thinks. For those who simply want to "try it out and see how it goes", an entry-level lens might usually be the better advice.

 

On the other hand, I've personally found that one of the best ways to cure the recurring GAS is to save up hard and go for one's own No.1 lens choice in the first go, rather than moving from 3rd choice to 2nd to 1st in the course of god knows how long (sometimes quite short  ) a period of time~

Edited August 4, 2016 by Rus

[ramarren]

It's been my opinion for many years that nearly any lens made by Leica in the past 60 years is of more than satisfactory quality to do 99% of anyone's work. That's why I'm perfectly happy using my 1959 Hektor 135, 1964 Summicron-R 50, etc, for even some of the most demanding work I do. No one has ever suggested that the quality of my photos was lacking due to the quality of the lens ... 

 

It's wonderful that the ultra-high performance lenses exist nowadays, and they have their own interesting rendering character. I see nothing wrong with that.

 

For newcomers to the cameras, particularly those buying a new digital M, I tend to recommend a new or recent series lens, however, because of the six-bit coding. Particularly with sub-50mm lenses, the lens profiles that these lenses trigger in the body automatically do a good job of improving the image as well as make the practice of using the camera more seamless ... No need to remember to set a lens code, reasonable information in the EXIF, and all that. It's those things that get in the way of a positive experience with older lenses more than whether the lenses perform well. 

 

That said, it's unnecessary to alway recommend the fastest, highest-end, most expensive lens .. which is the issue I get a little annoyed at when I see all the on-line chatter. Even the "lowly" Summarit-M lenses are fine performers, and f/2.4 is fast enough for a tremendous lot of situations—the majority in fact. So yes: a Summilux-M 50mm is a wonderful thing, but for less than half the price a Summarit-M 50/2.5 does a superb job. Not everyone MUST HAVE an APO-Summicron 50mm ... 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

IMO, my advice to a newbie would be - and usually is- very simple. You cannot go wrong. There are no bad Leica, Zeiss or (mostly) Voigtlander lenses. decide what you want to use the lens for, what focal length and aperture you really need and what your budget allows; go buy and use that lens. Leave resolution, contrast, rendering and such to the geeks.

[pgk]

“Hi- Newbie here who has been using my Iphone to take shots and found I love photography, so decided to buy a real camera, and picked up a Leica. I like to shoot portrait, flowers, landscapes, street, racecars and astrophotography, so what lenses should I get, I'm anxious to start building a collection”

 

In this scenario (which I do recognise) there is far more than image 'quality' involved. As has been pointed out, most current and even decades old Leica/Zeiss/others lenses will be more than adequate, but anyone who goes from iPhone to Leica has a different addenda than simply image quality now don't they?

[jaapv]

Yes- but what advice can you give in such a scenario? Probably: Go get all Summiluxes and APOs and an SL with the long zoom....  Oh- if you don't have one already- a cat too...

[Peter H]

Rather than try to put yourself in the shoes of the person asking the question, why not just say what your personal favourites are, giving a brief reason that a new user can understand?

 

Then, if enough people reply, it will give quite a good base of information for the new user to help them make an informed decision.  Wouldn't that be better than trying to guess what will be best for someone you don't know?

[jaapv]

The point is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating - and how can a description of a pudding tell you whether you like it?

For instance - I've never tasted Haggis - but from the description and its look it appears like something I would rather avoid - and I'm sure you are going to tell me that it is wonderful

[JonPB]

A cat. And a brick wall. :-)

 

I'd say that an iPhone is a real camera, and ask which limitations of the phone's camera the newbie wants to overcome. But, in my experience, most newbies don't have enough understanding of what they're trying to accomplish to answer that query, so they gravitate toward affirmations that the latest and most expensive are the greatest, and toward suggestions that spending lots of money is entirely justified. So, I respond with the best wisdom available at my disposal, and others do the same. Which responses the newbie follows is up to them.

 

This is the internet. The newbie will be able to find any advice that they want to find. All I can do is offer my best response with honesty and integrity, and not judge too harshly when I'm ignored and my mistakes are repeated.

 

Cheers,

Jon

[Jeff S]

I typically suggest that new Leica users first determine if they bond with RF photography....some do, some don't.  Toward this end, they can pick up a used M camera (best with a frame line preview lever) and any compatible 35 or 50 lens within their budget, from a reliable Leica dealer, to start and experiment.  If it doesn't suit, little will be sacrificed economically.   Less reading, more trying....at least to start.  They'll learn that there's little chance of a dud Leica (or other quality manufacturer) lens.

 

Jeff

[cirke]

I don't get your point , what can be wrong with the last lenses ?

Edited August 4, 2016 by erick

[earleygallery]

The point is that the proof of the pudding is in the eating - and how can a description of a pudding tell you whether you like it?

For instance - I've never tasted Haggis - but from the description and its look it appears like something I would rather avoid - and I'm sure you are going to tell me that it is wonderful

It's like a coarse herby sausage. Try it wi' neeps n tatties!

[Peter Kilmister]

Don't be concerned, jappv, haggis is a matter of taste. Not to my taste but I hate andouillette with a passion, can't stomach tripe, and love most offal if cooked correctly (quickly).

You are not alone. Now, a good piece of lamb's liver with a fine claret is something else.