Best 3 lens kit M6 film

[budrichard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not picking on you specifically Dick, but this is the sort of sweeping generalisation that should best be avoided when giving advice like this. There have been plenty of posts here over the years that show the split between 35mm and 50mm is pretty well equal in terms of taste - and that is what it is, taste. Personally, I see the world in 50mm terms and find a 35 pretty wide, but I certainly wouldn't say that a 50 is "best for a first lens". We are all different, eh?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

"I'm not picking on you specifically Dick"

You aren't? Certainly seems like you are. Its my advice and its my opinion and certainly shared by other Users. Don't give me advice on generalizations, sweeping or not, because its only your opinion.

So Post your advice and your opinion to the original query and leave me out of it.

 

Frankly the 24mm f2.8 Nikkor when it first came out, became my choice of standard lens for newspaper photography when I was a photographer for the Wisconsin State Journal. It also was my primary choice for weddings.

Now the 35mm Lux ASPH as I Posted is my standard on the M's and I have been using the 21mm

f2.8 ASPH for about two years now but it presents some problems the 35mm Lux doesn't. Frankly other than the optics supposedly being better, the 21mm on the M is a much more difficult lens to use than the 24mm on my Nikons so the jury is still out.

EOT-Dick

[Advertisement]

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

[stunsworth]

"I'm not picking on you specifically Dick"

You aren't? Certainly seems like you are.

 

Well no he isn't. The question of which lens someone should buy crops up again and again and again in the forum. And every time it falls into a choice of either a 35mm or 50mm lens as someone 'standard' lens. Which of those an _individual_ prefers is there _individual_ choice. There's no right or wrong answer, there's no right or wrong lens. I happen to prefer a 35mm lens, Bill prefers a 50mm lens. Only the person who is buying the lens can know what's best for them, all we can do is say what's best for _us_.

 

That was the point I believe Bill was making, he happened to make it in the context of your post. He could just as easily have chosen someone being dogmatic about a 50mm lens.

[yanidel]

35mm is probably more versatile but 50mm is IMO a much easier lens to start with. The extra two steps backwards it provides allows you to get shots without getting too much in your subject's face.

Personally it often comes down to my mood (and willingness to interact with others) in selecting the 35mm or 50mm (60mm in my case) as my standard lens on a given day.

Apart from my mood, I usually use the following rule : tight streets = 35mm, open places = 50mm.

Both 35mm and 50mm are great choices but one can only discover what is best by experimenting. And it does take some time to find out.

[!Nomad64]

The choice you suggest is already excellent, anyway IMHO, if money no matter you may want (keeping the same focal lenghts you proposed):

 

28/2 Summicron

50/1.4 Summilux ASPH

90/2 Summicron ASPH

 

If money matter and compactness is a welcome plus:

 

28/2.8 Elmarit ASPH

50/2 Summicron or Zeiss Planar

90/2.8 Elmarit M

 

If, and only if, you realized you happen to prefer a 35 over a 28, you may want respectively a 35/2 Summicron ASPH or a Biogon 35/2.8C.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[think]

My preference for travel is 25/35/75 on either a .72 or .85 body. Using a 35 Summicron at present, but still saving for a lux asph.

[de-JTC]

I agree with batmobile that you should find an "anchor" lens for your set.

Wich one this is only you can tell - can be 50, 15, or even 90 - who knows.

What I find important is a constant factor between the other lenses. For example I shoot 50mm most of them time - It just feels most natural to me and I its versatility.

At the moment I don't have another lens, but if I would buy some more the first would be a 90 because it's the best tele-lens on a Leica. So the factor between 50 and 90 is 1.8. If I were to choose a wide-angle it would be 28 because the factor is 1.8 again. I worked like this with my SLR and the system is great!

One could also choose to use two bodies with two entirely different lenses or you could create two sets. My dream combo would be 28, 50, 90 all 'cron in chrome on my M6TTL and 35 and 75 'cron or 'lux black on a black M7. But that'll never come true - at the moment it's me and my 50.

Just try and find out yourself.

[Guest AgXlove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi All,

 

 

 

I want to take an M6 and shot some film and wanted to see what the views are to the best 3 lens kit for film on the M6. I was thinking:

 

1. Leica 28mm 2.8 ASPH

2. 50mm 1.4 (pre-ASPH)

3. 90mm 2.0 cron

 

I have the 28/2 ASPH, 50/1.4 pre-ASPH and the 90/2 ASPH and have no complaints; you could do alot worse than a 28/50/90 kit.

 

28mm and 50mm cover about 90% or more of my shooting, but the 90 is nice to have for closeup and portrait work.

 

28mm and 35mm focal lengths are very close in terms of field of view - they are almost interchangable (IMHO). Either would work quite well for a "normal" wide angle lens.

 

YMMV, but the 28/50/90 combo covers all the bases for me. Still, I wouldn't mind adding a 21/2.8 ASPH to the mix some day...

[Guest AgXlove]

My preference for travel is 25/35/75 on either a .72 or .85 body. Using a 35 Summicron at present, but still saving for a lux asph.

 

I like the 75/2 ASPH also - in some ways, it seems to be a more versatile focal length than the 90mm.

[bill]

"I'm not picking on you specifically Dick"

You aren't? Certainly seems like you are. Its my advice and its my opinion and certainly shared by other Users. Don't give me advice on generalizations, sweeping or not, because its only your opinion.

So Post your advice and your opinion to the original query and leave me out of it.

 

Sheesh... let me know when you achieve balance with a chip on the other shoulder, eh? You were simply the last to repeat the canard.

 

Well no he isn't. The question of which lens someone should buy crops up again and again and again in the forum. And every time it falls into a choice of either a 35mm or 50mm lens as someone 'standard' lens. Which of those an _individual_ prefers is there _individual_ choice. There's no right or wrong answer, there's no right or wrong lens. I happen to prefer a 35mm lens, Bill prefers a 50mm lens. Only the person who is buying the lens can know what's best for them, all we can do is say what's best for _us_.

 

That was the point I believe Bill was making, he happened to make it in the context of your post. He could just as easily have chosen someone being dogmatic about a 50mm lens.

 

What Steve said.

 

I am vehemently opposed to sweeping generalisations (often lazily) regurgitated as "fact". Because 35 works for you doesn't mean it works for everyone.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[bill]

I think we are concurring I prefer a .85x finder for 5cm, so If I only used 5cm, it would need to be a 0.85 finder, similarly for a 35mm the .72x is necessary if you have glasses, probably optimal without glasses.

 

So the OP needs to (first) decide what his dominant lens is (will be) as it controls the finder magnification choice?

 

Hi Noel, yes I think we are. I decided long ago that 50mm was my "dominant" lens (I like that term) and therefore when the choice arose I went for a .85 viewfinder magnification as my main body. The M2 was a much later addition and I feel that the lower magnification is compensated for by the lack of frameline clutter.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[kivis]

35 cron

50 CV Nokton 1.1

90 soon

[Chiefey]

Heck, I always treated my 50mm lenses as "wide angle" and 90/100 mm lenses as normal. Now, after reading all these replies, I'm beginning to wonder.

[Stealth3kpl]

Ignore all of the above. You MUST buy a 35 cron asph, a 50 3.5 Elmar and a 90 Elmar.

 

That's the only answer you need, all others are frankly irrelevant

Unless you get the 24/2.8, 50/2 and 90/2, with a 35/2 for a one lens option:D

Pete

[!Nomad64]

Heck, I always treated my 50mm lenses as "wide angle" and 90/100 mm lenses as normal. Now, after reading all these replies, I'm beginning to wonder.

 

Nay... you probably tend to concentrate on particulars and to isolate them out of their context rather than depicting the whole view. I know because I do exactly the same, i.e. 90 is my dominant lens, 50 is a moderate wide angle and 25 is an extreme wideangle...

 

Bruno

[gberger]

We went all over New Zealand with an M6, 35 Chron, 50 Chron and 90 TE. Thirty days of shooting on both North and South Islands - - outdoors, indoors, close-ups, scenics, churches, buildings, gardens, streets, rivers, and people. Over 80 rolls of ISO 100, 36 exposures.

 

35 Chron = 85%

 

50 Chron = 5%

 

90 TE = 10%

 

YMMV

[Etruscello]

When I want to be different,i.e., not use 28-50-90, I find that 21-35-75 is most useful. I sometimes add a 135, if I'm not also carrying an SLR for longer shots. Go for the fastest versions you can afford. I'm fortunate to have held on to my 75 Summilux -- it performs beautifully on my M8 and was always exceptional on the M6. Also, I would not part with my 35 Summilux pre-ASPH. Stopped down, it is as good as the 35 Summicron; and at f1.4, it has that magical Leica glow with a clear 3-D image of the subject coming through. The new 21 Summilux would round things out nicely for a full de-Lux set. Tom

[gwelland]

Rodney,

 

I'd stick with your original plan of 28/50/90 if that suits you but personally I'd ditch the 90/2 'cron and go with the 90/2.8 Elmarit-M. It's a much smaller & lighter lens and I'd wager that you'd carry it and use it more than the 'cron too.

[JLV]

As Posted use one lens for a while, a year or so until you gain some sense of what works for you. A 35mm is best for a first lens and may be all you ever need.

I never use a 50mm anymore but use the 35 Lux ASPH and the 75mm ASPH gets most of the work my 90mm ASPH used to do. Lastly is my 21mm ASPH which is a little harder to use because it requires an external finder. Good luck.-Dick

 

Exact same combination with an M9.

I feel that 35 is the best 1 lens kit, 35, 75 2lenses kit, 21,35,75 bets 3lenses kit.

I added recently a recent Elmar 50 which has a really special signature.

 

All the best,

Jean-Luc

[holmes]

Howdy All,

When I was dating a woman living in Munich and I was in southern New Mexico(USA) I did a lot of traveling. After my first visit I learned to pair down my bag. I had started with a Billingham 445. I dropped down in scale and weight. We were all over Southern Bavaria, Austria, Northern Italy. I was driving her BMW. I gave a lot of thought as to what I was photographing; street, classic buildings, Venice from a fast moving water taxi (lot'sa spray) for motion. The dark twisting passages of Mozart's city in Austria; Trieste Italy (fascinating) and great seafood. Maxmillian's castle. If you wish to take photos in the castle be prepared to pay. He gave that up to go to Mexico City and got shot by a firing squad. The battle between East and West over who would control Trieste. Moscow wanted it as the only ice free port for it's navy. The west did not want to see any Soviet flag warships with easy access to the Med. So much for history. I finally settled on a 2 lens set; my 28mm f 2 asph and my 75 f 1.4. The 28 is fast and so light, handholding a breeze. The 75 f 1.4 for bringing in detail and closeups. Using Fuji films of 100, 200,400 ISO provided plenty of adjustable speed. I carried 2 M7s.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[JonK]

How about getting the Tri-Elmar and then you'll see what lengths you use most if you feel the need for a faster prime.

 

As many have suggested, the longer 75 or 90 choices are going to be very much on which viewfinder you have as well as the considerable size and weight penalties of the larger aperture lenses.

 

Irrelevant what I have, of course, but I love my 90 tele-elmarit and often wish I DID have the tri-elmar!