Buying a 007 and help choosing lenses

[Csacwp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been itching to get a medium format camera and sold my M240 and M lenses today with the intention of buying a used 007. Tonight I discovered all the posts about quality control issues with the bodies and lenses, although it seems like a fix is available for the lenses now. Is now a good time to buy into the S system? I do love the images it can produce.

 

As far as lenses go, I'm interested in either the 45mm, 70mm, or 100mm. How do they compare in color and light rendering, sharpness, and bokeh? I plan to do a lot of hand held photography- would the faster 70mm or 100mm lenses be a better choice than the 45mm?

[erlingmm]

It should be possible to get a good deal both on the body and lenses now, after all the bashing ;-) Despite some posts, I do not think there have been much problems with the 007 body, I certainly have good experiences.

For the lenses, as you say, the AF problem is being solved, but it might be an idea to plan for more than 1 lens. Of the 3 you mention, I only have experience with the standard 70 mm (which I very good), and the 100mm (again very good, optimised for portraits, still very light and can function as a walk-around like the 70). The 45 is like a 35mm on the M. So it really depends on what type of photography you do, optically they are all excellent.

[Advertisement]

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

[Vieri]

I think it is a very good time to buy into pre-owned S equipment; prices have never been better, and the optical quality of S lenses is superb. As far as the body goes, the S 007 never gave me any problem, and the files are spectacular. The only limitation for my work (I do landscape) is on long exposures, still limited to only 1 minute (!), but I hope this will be fixed in future FW upgrades.

 

As far as lens selection, all S lenses are fantastic, and faster than any MF lens out there; just factor in the 0.8x multiplier, and choose the focal length(s) you are most comfortable with for your kind of shooting. Personally, I use the 24mm, 35mm, 70mm and the 30-90mm, all excellent. Best,

 

Vieri

[jip]

All the lenses are fast and the difference between the 45 and 70 is negligible (speed wise), the 100 is the only 'faster' lens in the system at F2.

Edited February 14, 2017 by jip

[nunnzzzz]

The S system is awesome. Now that we have a fix for the lens auto focus issues there is no reason not to love the S

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John McMaster]

What did you use on the M(240)? Those are equivalent to 35mm, 56mm and 80mm on FF so quite a range. Also you will not be able to hold the S(007) steady (and get a sharp shot) at the slow speeds you may have used with the M....

 

john

[Csacwp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used a 50 APO on the M. Sometimes I wished for something a little wider and sometimes I wished for something closer. I do a mix of portraits, architecture, and landscapes.

 

Is the 100mm fast enough at f2 to justify it over the 70? It does seem like the 70 would be a better all around focal length. On the M I never liked hand holding at shutter speeds slower than 1/45 of a second. I imagine on the S I shouldn't expect to handhold anything less than 1/90th or so?

[erlingmm]

Sounds like you should look at the zoom. It is slower in terms of aperture, the good thing with the 007 is that you can bump up the ISO without being punished too hard, but you will miss a faster prime.

[mgrayson3]

The 70 is useful, and (relatively) small, light, and cheap. Its bokeh at f/2.5 is beautiful. If you want to go out in bad weather and not change lenses, it's a fine choice. I use it much more than I ever used that equivalent focal length before. If I had to have one lens, it would be the 70. My favorite is the 24, but it's not a well rounded choice

 

--Matt

[349A]

Go for it, its an amazing system and the 007 bodies are very reliable. The autofocus issue has a permanent fix should this ever be an issue for you and its at no cost. You'll get a few bashers chiming in that will claim end of the world scenarios with handy links to various posts. The forums attract problems, this is where people vent. And a few just like to repeat and repeat negativity. Ignore them.

 

All of the lenses are amazing, it really does depend on what FOV you favor. My personal favorites are the 45MM, 100MM and 120MM for its macro ability. All of the lenses are amazing. As said above, the 70mm is nice and light and is also the least expensive option. Its also a rather useful focal length. When I travel with the S, I take the 45MM and 100MM which covers most things. 

 

"I used a 50 APO on the M. Sometimes I wished for something a little wider and sometimes I wished for something closer. I do a mix of portraits, architecture, and landscapes."

 

 

I would think the 45MM and 100MM make perfect sense and use your feet for the middle ground. This is roughly 35mm and 80mm equivalents. 

[John McMaster]

On the M I never liked hand holding at shutter speeds slower than 1/45 of a second. I imagine on the S I shouldn't expect to handhold anything less than 1/90th or so?

 

I usually think of no less than 1/3xfocal length and preferable 1/4x, so 1/125th minimum for the 45mm and faster than 1/250th for the 100mm....

 

john

[mgrayson3]

To elaborate, I got the 35 after the 70 because ether 28 cron was my favorite lens ever, and I love that FoV. The 35 kept me quite happy. I next found a good deal on a 120, which is a great portrait lens, and macro, and sharp at infinity for architecture/landscape. Really an amazing piece of glass. 

 

I then made the mistake of borrowing a 24 and then couldn't live without one - but in the city, you often can't back up and need the very wide FoV.

 

Although I NEVER used the 35mm FoV on FF, I'm beginning to wish for something between the S70 and S35 for street/park candids. Everyone raves about the 45, so that may be my next one. The 120 is so good at shallow DoF portraits that I haven't felt the need for the 100. I'll probably make the mistake of trying it one day . 

 

If I had the 007 instead of 006, the zoom would be compelling. Maybe it's even better for street/park candids. Heavy, though.

 

Here's the 120 wide open. I don't need shallower DoF than that:

 

Best,

 

Matt

[albertknappmd]

You will not regret your decision. The three lenses you sited are all technically superb (resolution, bokeh, tonality etc..) and it is just a function of what you want or need.. Also, remember that the lenses are actually 0.8 x Focal length of a 35mm system so that the 100mm S lens f/2 is the equivalent of an 80mm M lens..

The AF issue is over.. If your lens is second hand, ask if it has been fixed. If not, send it in and Leica should replace    the plastic part with a metal part... I did that prophylactically with all of my S lenses....

Albert   

[Csacwp]

Thanks for all the advice- I think I'll be going with the 45 and the 100. What prices should I be looking for? One of the Leica stores is offering a new 45 for $3995 which seems like less than most used ones I can find. The 100 seems to go for $4-5k used. Is that correct?

[Photoskeptic]

Both the 45 and 100 can be hard to find used. These are large and heavy lenses. If you're coming from an M series be prepared! IMO, save some money and get a 35, it's just about enough WA for anyone. The 100 is terrific and I can heartily recommend it. If you're looking for something lighter for carrying around the 70 fits the bill. All the S lenses are superb (there's that word again) and were intended to be shot wide open with little or no distortion. Good luck.

[Jeff S]

I demo-ed the 006 for a week last Summer and decided to wait for an 007....provided there was a formal announcement from Leica on the AF fix, and a streamlined process for proactively servicing any S lens.  Reports here are encouraging that a formal announcement/plan might be imminent.  

 

There have also been rumors of an update to the S and, if this were to materialize, I suspect that 007 prices might go down even further, even though there are some great deals out there already. (a search is worthwhile).  Personally, I wouldn't buy into the system without a Leica warranty (protection plan) on camera and lenses, regardless of free AF motor fixes.....but that's just me.  I carry personal insurance for everything the warranty doesn't cover.

 

In the meantime, I do plan to rent a GFX so I can compare it to my S experience.

 

Jeff

[LorenzoLandini]

The 70 is a nice all around lens, very sharp, beautiful bokeh and it offers a "natural" field of view being very close to a 50mm lens in 35mm terms, and it's among, if not the least, expensive of the bunch, a pity not to pick one up in my opinion. If you do landscape and architecture photography I'd strongly suggest something wider than the 45mm, either the 30mm or the 24mm. I can't do much in architecture photography without the 30mm to be honest and often I wish I had the 24mm. The 100/f2.0 and the 120/f2.5 are both great lenses, in my opinion the 120 is more versatile and more value for the money. Keep in mind that the depth of field of these lenses is in the ball park of a Noctilux and they require some skills to be mastered at full aperture (I am sure you have the skills, I am just kindly reminding you what you're dealing with). There are no bad lenses in the S range and you can't go wrong with any of them. It all comes down to your photography as the camera/lens is just a tool. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to consider is what actually means shooting with a medium format vs. an M. two very different animals. The S, more or less as any other medium format camera, is lower, heavier, bulkier, expensive, somewhat more limited at high ISO, not forgiving for casual photography and it offers its best on a tripod and with mirror lock-up. The S has a better "portability" than most the other medium format systems, but don't underestimate the shortcoming of a medium format system just because it looks like a DSLR. Sure the quality of the files are awesome, the lenses are superb and overall it's a killer, but it comes with a lot of shortcomings that often are underestimated by people coming from a 35mm camera, especially an M.

 

cheers,

lorenzo  

[djmay]

The 70 is a nice all around lens, very sharp, beautiful bokeh and it offers a "natural" field of view being very close to a 50mm lens in 35mm terms, and it's among, if not the least, expensive of the bunch, a pity not to pick one up in my opinion. If you do landscape and architecture photography I'd strongly suggest something wider than the 45mm, either the 30mm or the 24mm. I can't do much in architecture photography without the 30mm to be honest and often I wish I had the 24mm. The 100/f2.0 and the 120/f2.5 are both great lenses, in my opinion the 120 is more versatile and more value for the money. Keep in mind that the depth of field of these lenses is in the ball park of a Noctilux and they require some skills to be mastered at full aperture (I am sure you have the skills, I am just kindly reminding you what you're dealing with). There are no bad lenses in the S range and you can't go wrong with any of them. It all comes down to your photography as the camera/lens is just a tool. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to consider is what actually means shooting with a medium format vs. an M. two very different animals. The S, more or less as any other medium format camera, is lower, heavier, bulkier, expensive, somewhat more limited at high ISO, not forgiving for casual photography and it offers its best on a tripod and with mirror lock-up. The S has a better "portability" than most the other medium format systems, but don't underestimate the shortcoming of a medium format system just because it looks like a DSLR. Sure the quality of the files are awesome, the lenses are superb and overall it's a killer, but it comes with a lot of shortcomings that often are underestimated by people coming from a 35mm camera, especially an M.

 

cheers,

lorenzo  

 

Excellent summary. The 30 is my most used lens. Indoors or lower light, where tripod is not  possible, I have shot handheld with 2-second delay and 1/30 second (see attached image). The mass of the S makes this possible, but the mirror must be up, hence the delay. On tripod I also use the 2-second delay.

 

I currently use 30, 70 and 180.

 

Jesse

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!

[Vieri]

The 70 is a nice all around lens, very sharp, beautiful bokeh and it offers a "natural" field of view being very close to a 50mm lens in 35mm terms, and it's among, if not the least, expensive of the bunch, a pity not to pick one up in my opinion. If you do landscape and architecture photography I'd strongly suggest something wider than the 45mm, either the 30mm or the 24mm. I can't do much in architecture photography without the 30mm to be honest and often I wish I had the 24mm. The 100/f2.0 and the 120/f2.5 are both great lenses, in my opinion the 120 is more versatile and more value for the money. Keep in mind that the depth of field of these lenses is in the ball park of a Noctilux and they require some skills to be mastered at full aperture (I am sure you have the skills, I am just kindly reminding you what you're dealing with). There are no bad lenses in the S range and you can't go wrong with any of them. It all comes down to your photography as the camera/lens is just a tool. 

 

Perhaps the most important thing to consider is what actually means shooting with a medium format vs. an M. two very different animals. The S, more or less as any other medium format camera, is lower, heavier, bulkier, expensive, somewhat more limited at high ISO, not forgiving for casual photography and it offers its best on a tripod and with mirror lock-up. The S has a better "portability" than most the other medium format systems, but don't underestimate the shortcoming of a medium format system just because it looks like a DSLR. Sure the quality of the files are awesome, the lenses are superb and overall it's a killer, but it comes with a lot of shortcomings that often are underestimated by people coming from a 35mm camera, especially an M.

 

cheers,

lorenzo  

 

Very good advice, well said!

 

Though, if I may, I wouldn't call the differences between the S and the M (or in general between any Medium Format and any 35mm system) "shortcomings"... There are advantages and disadvantages to the S (and medium format in general), things that the S does better and others that 35mm does better, and so on. It all boils down to knowing one's tools, and what they are good / not good for. Calling the differences between S and M shortcomings would be like saying that, say, a Land Rover has shortcomings compared to a Fiat 500 just because the latter is nimbler and lighter...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Csacwp]

Thanks again for all the advice.  I do realize that I'll be using a tripod more often and this doesn't bother me.  My photography has been gravitating away from spontaneous street shots to portraits and landscapes.  I am aware that a new S might be released sometime soon, but for now I think 37.5MP is more than enough for my purposes.  

 

As far as lenses go, I'm afraid that the 30mm will be too wide for my tastes.  The 45mm, 70mm, and 100mm lenses are all within my comfort zone.  There is definitely a strong argument to just get the 70 for now... I'll have to keep thinking about it.

 

I've never used a tripod designed for a larger camera like the 007.  From what I've been reading I will need a ball head and possibly a leveling plate (depending on the design of the ball) in addition to the tripod itself.  Could somebody please recommend me a tripod and ball head that would be tall enough for someone who is six feet tall?  I'd be great if the tripod could collapse to be small enough to fit into a backpack or carry-on bag for flights and easy transport.  I also don't want to spend too much on one, but I do appreciate the need for something stable with this camera.