Vintage Glass for the M240

[joshs]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey Guys -- I just bought an M240 and currently have no glass for it. Getting opinions on lenses is tough because its so subjective -- to be clear, I don't like the look of digital. I shoot 80 percent film. The reason I bought an M was because its the first digital camera I've seen that actually looks filmic and it intrigued me.

I like swirly, weird bokeh patterns. I like extreme shallow depth of field. I like funk and texture. Oh, and i LOVE flare. And want beautiful flares.

 

So what do I buy for a 35 and a 50 and maybe a 40 ?

 

I'm not opposed to the more expensive, new summilux stuff. I'm just not sure its even what I want. What would you guys recommend ?  Summicron ? Cannon 1.2 ? ??

[michaelwj]

Depending on how much time you have, may I direct you to the 151 pages of older glass stuck to the top of the forum. Have fun!

 

But depending on you budget, how about a pre-asph 35 summilux and for a 50, a 1.0 noctilux?

Edited December 2, 2016 by michaelwj

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest JMF]

Hey Guys -- I just bought an M240 and currently have no glass for it. Getting opinions on lenses is tough because its so subjective -- to be clear, I don't like the look of digital. I shoot 80 percent film. The reason I bought an M was because its the first digital camera I've seen that actually looks filmic and it intrigued me.

I like swirly, weird bokeh patterns. I like extreme shallow depth of field. I like funk and texture. Oh, and i LOVE flare. And want beautiful flares.

 

So what do I buy for a 35 and a 50 and maybe a 40 ?

 

I'm not opposed to the more expensive, new summilux stuff. I'm just not sure its even what I want. What would you guys recommend ?  Summicron ? Cannon 1.2 ? ??

 

I'd recommend a 35 summilux pre asph v2 (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Summilux_II)

or a pre FLE 35 Summilux asph (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_ASPH_Summilux-M)

and a 50 Summilux pre asph v3 (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/50mm_f/1.4_Summilux-M_III)

 

You'll find plenty of examples here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/186858-the-view-through-older-glass/page-151

 

Cheers, JM.

Edited December 3, 2016 by JMF

[joshs]

Thank you !!!

 

 

I'd recommend a 35 summilux pre asph v2 (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Summilux_II)

or a pre FLE 35 Summilux asph (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_ASPH_Summilux-M)

and a 50 Summilux pre asph v3 (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/50mm_f/1.4_Summilux-M_III)

 

You'll find plenty of examples here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/186858-the-view-through-older-glass/page-151

 

Cheers, JM.

[joshs]

Great, is the noctilux pretty big though ?

 

Depending on how much time you have, may I direct you to the 151 pages of older glass stuck to the top of the forum. Have fun!

But depending on you budget, how about a pre-asph 35 summilux and for a 50, a 1.0 noctilux?

[farnz]

Great, is the noctilux pretty big though ?

 

I use a 50/1 Noctilux v4 on my M240 most of the time (now that the nights have drawn in in the UK) and I don't find it particularly big or heavy compared to the Pentax 67 that I used to lug around.  Sure, it's the largest of Leica's M-mount lenses but I found that I got used to weight very quickly.  YMMV.

 

Pete.

[nocturnal1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I like swirly, weird bokeh patterns. I like extreme shallow depth of field. I like funk and texture. Oh, and i LOVE flare. And want beautiful flares.

 

 

I have and enjoy a 50mm f1.5 Summarit from 1956 that speaks to all of those qualities.  It is especially charming in black and white where its rendering approximates the look of film (especially the soft highlights).  Obtaining the oversized hood will give you the option of managing the flares a bit more.

[joshs]

I have and enjoy a 50mm f1.5 Summarit from 1956 that speaks to all of those qualities.  It is especially charming in black and white where its rendering approximates the look of film (especially the soft highlights).  Obtaining the oversized hood will give you the option of managing the flares a bit more.

awesome. thats super helpful. googling that lens now....

Curious, nobody seems to mention the canon ltm 1.2 or 1.4 but it seems nice

are voigtlanders no bueno ?

[david strachan]

Hi Josh

I have a few Canon lenses, inc the ones you mentioned.  They are beautifully built, and lovely to use.

Fantastic value, and an "old world" look, being lower contrast.  My 50mm f1.8 is most contrasty.

 

The 50mm f1.2 is glowey, and has a bit of CA when fully open...but I don't mind...can be improved in post...it's kind on older peoples skin...   

 

The 135mm canon is a must have.

 

all best and do let us know which lenses you buy.  We look forward to some posts.

[spydrxx]

I've been down this road over the years, including the Canon 50/0.95 (which I don't recommend) and the early Noctilux. Given your comments of what you really like in a lens, I'm surprised nobody has recommended the old 50/2.0 Summar or Summitar (you'd need a cheap Chinese adapter ring to mount a LTM lens on an M body). The Canon lenses, of which I have several, typically produce less flare and swirly bokeh than many of the early Leica ones.

[joshs]

you guys are the best. I just bought a summarit 1.5 as my "funky" lens though im still intrigued by that canon 1.2

I do still need :

 

a 35mm

and a sharper 50

and a 40

 

I was thinking the 40mm summicron 2 or the voigtlander 1.4

for 35mm I'm not sure at all--  summilux pre-asph? 

for sharp 50 -- summilux pre or current summilux

 

thank you !!!!!

[Ecar]

For the 40mm, I'd go for the Summicron or the Minolta Rokkor (essentially the same lens).

For the 35mm, you can't go wrong with the Summilux pre-ASPH, but make sure you are happy with its character (flare, softness) wide open.

For a fast, sharp (but not ultra-sharp) 50, the Summilux pre-ASPH should meet your requirements.

[Guest JMF]

you guys are the best. I just bought a summarit 1.5 as my "funky" lens though im still intrigued by that canon 1.2

I do still need :

 

a 35mm

and a sharper 50

and a 40

 

I was thinking the 40mm summicron 2 or the voigtlander 1.4

for 35mm I'm not sure at all--  summilux pre-asph? 

for sharp 50 -- summilux pre or current summilux

 

thank you !!!!!

 

Congrats on the 5cm Summarit, from your list of lenses, the only one I have never tried is the Voigtlander 40 1.4 .

They all are great lenses, you need to try them to decide which you enjoy most...

An underestimated affordable lens is the 5cm Nikkor 1.4 LTM (Sonnar) , RF coupled down to 1m, (RF coupling can be modified to 0.75m) and all the way to 1.5 foot with live view on the M240 .

 

Have fun, best , JM

[Ecar]

Also, out of curiosity, if you are starting to build a kit, why would you want a 40 alongside a 35 and a 50?

[Ecar]

Congrats on the 5cm Summarit, from your list of lenses, the only one I have never tried is the Voigtlander 40 1.4 .

They all are great lenses, you need to try them to decide which you enjoy most...

An underestimated affordable lens is the 5cm Nikkor 1.4 LTM (Sonnar) , RF coupled down to 1m, (RF coupling can be modified to 0.75m) and all the way to 1.5 foot with live view on the M240 .

 

Have fun, best , JM

+1.

I'd also add the Canon 50/1.5 LTM to the list.

[joshs]

+1.

I'd also add the Canon 50/1.5 LTM to the list.

Thanks for all the help guys.

I like the idea of a 40 because its the one lens i could go out and use without needing anything else but maybe im overbuying

 

Curious, why the canon 1.5 ltm vs 1.2 or 1.4 which are obviously a little faster ?

 

And, super curious about the pre-asph 35 and 50 summilux. do they still provide that leica "pop" and sharpness with a bit more flare and character  ? if so that sounds perfect

[TomB_tx]

The Canon 1.5 is an older sonnar design, while the others are double gauss design. I find the 1.4 a better lens for my tastes, and the 1.8 the best all around of the Canons.

[Ecar]

Curious, why the canon 1.5 ltm vs 1.2 or 1.4 which are obviously a little faster ?

 

And, super curious about the pre-asph 35 and 50 summilux. do they still provide that leica "pop" and sharpness with a bit more flare and character  ? if so that sounds perfect

Just a matter of rendering preference (see below re the Canon 1.5 vs 1.4 and 1.8).

A good 1.2 is hard to find and, even after a CLA, can be difficult to tame (hard to focus, sometimes weird bokeh). I went through a few and was never fully satisfied.

 

The Summilux 35/1.4 pre-ASPH is really two lenses in one - there have been many threads on the subject. Again, make sure that you like what you see at f/1.4-f/2. Once stopped down, its behaviour becomes more predictable.

The Summilux 50/1.4 pre-ASPH is very much what you describe: classic Leica, only somewhat less corrected than the ASPH (e.g. at least as sharp in the center, but softer in the corners in my experience).

 

The Canon 1.5 is an older sonnar design, while the others are double gauss design. I find the 1.4 a better lens for my tastes, and the 1.8 the best all around of the Canons.

 

Agree from a technical perspective. But I'm partial to the Sonnar rendering and am happy to live with some focus shift if that's what it takes...

To my eyes, the 50/1.4 is a bit flat, while the 50/1.8 is indeed an excellent performer, especially on the Monochrom, but kind of "middle of the road" in terms of rendering (btw, I prefer the older chrome version, if only because they don't develop haze as the more recent versions do).

[joshs]

awesome. super helpful. ill have to look up what you mean about the 35 pre-asph...

in general, with my tastes is there ANY good reason to get the aspherical versions ?

 

Just a matter of rendering preference (see below re the Canon 1.5 vs 1.4 and 1.8).

A good 1.2 is hard to find and, even after a CLA, can be difficult to tame (hard to focus, sometimes weird bokeh). I went through a few and was never fully satisfied.

 

The Summilux 35/1.4 pre-ASPH is really two lenses in one - there have been many threads on the subject. Again, make sure that you like what you see at f/1.4-f/2. Once stopped down, its behaviour becomes more predictable.

The Summilux 50/1.4 pre-ASPH is very much what you describe: classic Leica, only somewhat less corrected than the ASPH (e.g. at least as sharp in the center, but softer in the corners in my experience).

 

 

Agree from a technical perspective. But I'm partial to the Sonnar rendering and am happy to live with some focus shift if that's what it takes...

To my eyes, the 50/1.4 is a bit flat, while the 50/1.8 is indeed an excellent performer, especially on the Monochrom, but kind of "middle of the road" in terms of rendering (btw, I prefer the older chrome version, if only because they don't develop haze as the more recent versions do).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[farnz]

Josh,

 

Bear in mind that a 40 mm lens will bring up the 50 mm frame lines on your M240 unless you file down the mount to bring up 35 mm frame lines.  The M240 lacks a frame line lever that other M cameras have that allows you to manually select the frame lines so you'll be stuck with whatever the lens brings up in the viewfinder.

 

Pete.