Short telephoto lens (R) recommendation

[dent]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello!

 

Since this is one of thousand "Which lens to take"-topics I hope You nice folks will still find some time for helping me with Your thoughts.

 

Next year I´ll go on a eight months trekking and mounaineering trip through the Indian, Tibetan and Nepalese Himalaya.

For photography I´ll take my trusted M7 or M6TTL with three lenses and a recently bought R8 to cover a second film flavour and the longer focal lengths mainly for landscape and portrait. Since I already own an Elmarit 135mm the second lens should be a shorter lens. My budget will allow only used lenses.

 

Now my choice is between the

Apo Macro Elmarit 100 (plus 180/4)

Summilux 80

Macro Elmarit 60

 

Especially I know next to nothing about the Macro Elmarit 60/2.8. The price on the used market is attractive. Did anyone use it for portrait?

 

How does portrait work with the 100 Apo (+/- Softar?)

 

How well does the 80 perform with landscapes? Can it be contrasty enough at smaller apaertures?

 

The choice is less about widest aperture but more about image charakteristics.

 

Thanks from Cologne

 

Jochen

[Advertisement]

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

[darkness30]

Jochen, 60mm will be my choice. Its a versatile lens. you can go macro with it and can use it as a portrait lens but if you dont like tacksharp portraits you should avoid it and take 80mm since 100mm apo has thesame tacksharp character.

 

Mehmet

[earleygallery]

I'd drop the Elmarit and buy a 135 for the R & maybe get a 75mm for the M.

[topoxforddoc]

If you're trekking on a one lens R combo, why not look at a used zoom. Ok the current 28/90 asph may be way out of your price range even used, but the 35-70/4 ROM vario-elmar won't be. That's a pretty decent lens, ok not as good as a prime, but good nevertheless and much better than the 28-70/3.5 that preceded it. The 35-70 is compact and light and would allow you to do landscapes as well as having a short tele for porttraits. If you can afford it the 28-90 is fab.

 

Enjoy your trip

 

 

Charlie

[timbedsted1234]

Hello,

 

Why not consider a 90mm/f:2.0 the previous version. It is extremely compact, tha same size as a 60mm lux, and it takes very nice portraits etc.

 

Best,

Tim

[gvaliquette]

Jochen:

 

Look at the 90mm/f2.8 Elmarit-R. It is VERY sharp, lightweight and reasonnably compact. I have both the 80mm/f1.4 Summilux and the 90mm/f2.8 Elmarit. Although I love the 80/1.4 Summilux, if I have to take ony one of the two, it will be the Elmarit.

 

Enjoy your trip. I have been in Nepal and in Bhutan and loved both countries. Enjoy!

 

Guy

[gvaliquette]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jochen:

 

Come to think of it again, since you already have an M and the 135/2.8 Elmarit-R for your R8, do look at the 180/4 Elmar-R. And think about the 2X Extender (or 2X APO-Extender) ! All light weight solutions for someone on foot for several months!

 

Guy

[rob_x2004]

How come you dont just travel with two Ms? Would save the lens change film change sagas. That would help a lot for travel. I lugged a nine through Loas and Mongolia and found it wasnt really up to it.

[ijporter]

Hi Jochen,

 

I've trekked in Nepal twice. 1st time I took 2 R4 cameras, with 19 f2.8, 28 f2.8, 50 f2, 90 f2, 180 f3.4 lenses. 2nd time I took the same, except I replaced the 2 R4s with an R6 and had replaced the 19 with a 21SA. You will need a lens longer than 135 if you are to give any impression at all of the size of the mountains. I also took my 7x42BA binoculars and I still remember the shock I received when I first looked at the mountains through them and realised the true size of the features I had just looked at through my camera lenses. I was staggered to see that what I had thought was small cliff was really hundreds of feet high, and that rocks I had seen were really huge boulders. I have to say that my best shots of the mountains (on K64 - still unscanned) were all taken with the 180, because only it allowed me to show them to their best advantage. If I had an R9 and was looking for a used telephoto lens to take, I'd try to get hold of a 80-200 or, as suggested, a 180 f4. However, the old 180 Apo will give you (effectively) an extra stop and better performance at full aperture.

 

I hope this has been helpful.

 

With best wishes,

 

Ian

[dent]

Thanks to all for Your expert input!

 

Up to now I travelled with the two Ms and earlier with an OM and 1v outfit. Since I worked in Nepal for some time I already hiked a lot through the Himalaya and -yes- You are right: The really majestetic shots showing the vastness of the Himalaya were taken with 135mm and longer. Therefor the SLR on this trip. I´ll consider packing an additional 180.

The short R tele lens I asked for is mainly for the portraits. For some portrait shots I prefer the SLR over the M. I almost exclusively shoot bw, mainly bw slides.

[troyfreund]

I vote for the 60 Macro. I've got that lens and love it for short distance portraits. Very sharp lens and the ability to go macro is a definite plus.

Troy

[thrid]

Speed is king in such locations and so I highly recommend the 1.4/80 Summilux-R.

 

In my experience the extra stop you get from the Summilux lenses makes it possible to continue to shoot with 400 asa film in situations, where with an f2 or slower lens you would have to push process or go to a faster film. There's not a lot you can't shoot with a roll of 400asa film and f1.4@1/30th of a sec.

 

In my opinion the 2.8/100 Macro can at times be too sharp for portrait work. It is a stunning lens, but I think it will be too slow for interiors. Physically it's a little on the long side.

 

I don't think the 60 offers enough reach as a short tele. It's not long enough to crop landscapes and you're just about as close to a person with a 60 as you are with a 50, when you are doing portrait work. Of course it has the advantage of being a macro lens, but how often will you use that feature? It's also a f2.8 lens.

 

I have the 4/180 and while it is very compact and light, I've been disapointed with it's performance. The negs that my clean example produces look 'flat' and muddy. They lack the sparkle of the newer Leica glass and the glow of the older models. For some reason it's fingerprint reminded me of some old Japanese glass I owned many years back and I'm not talking about the good stuff like the Nikkor 2.5/105.

 

Another choice may be the 2/90 Summicron APO ASPH. Performance is stellar, it's fast and relatively compact. This is a killer lens, on par with the 2.8/100 Macro.

 

And speaking of 90's the pre-ASPH 90 Summicron may not be as sharp as the ASPH model, but that didn't stop shooters like Salgado from creating masterpieces with it.

 

The second generation 2.8/90 Elmarit is also extremely good and very light, but obviously it's rather slow.

 

A lot of people are voting for the 180, but here's my take on it. It's great for shooting mountains, but can produce cookie cutter looking stock footage shots of people, because everyone and his cousin is out there shooting with a 80-200 zoom. Remember Capa's mantra: "If you're pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough" ;-). Obviously you have been abroad a lot, but I think you know what I am getting at. Even a 90 forces you to get close to people. ;-)

 

 

Read this for all the technical information:

 

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/ebooks/llcforweb.pdf