In praise of small lenses

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not comparing M lenses to DSLR lenses (particularly zooms). The 50 lux is a bigger and more obvious lens for the camera body than the 50 cron and offers f1.4 instead of f2. At smaller apertures there is no practical difference in quality between the two. It is the size difference that I notice when taking photographs, particularly street which is my main interest and of course what the Leica M was designed for.

 

Jeff

 

Is there really so much difference?

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest fuzzy logic]

... particularly street which is ... of course what the Leica M was designed for.

 

Jeff

 

PHOG!!

[adan]

The Leica M was, of course, NOT "designed for" street photography. It (and the previous Leicas) were designed for PORTABLE photography (inspired by Oskar Barnack's sore back). When the M was designed 1950-53, it (and the other rangefinders) WERE 35mm photography - SLRs were as rare as hens teeth - not just for a niche market or genre.

 

Long afterwards, it may have been found to be a preferable tool for street photography compared with other camera styles. But that is not what it was "designed for" - any more than lasers was "designed for" reading DVDs.

 

On the original question, I mostly buy small lenses because the big ones have big price tags or push the limits of the RF focusing (fast 75/90/135s). I wish Leica had stayed with the original barrel design of the 21 f/2.8 (E49 instead of E60 or E55). I don't really have a problem with the size of the 28 f/2 or 35/50 f/1.4 ASPHs.

[adli]

Is there really so much difference?

 

[ATTACH]236062[/ATTACH]

 

This is the reason why I sold my 50 cron after I bought the lux. In practice there is not much difference in size/weight between these two.

 

One the other hand, one lens I will never sell is the 35 cron version IV. The new 35 lux is a great lens, but the cron turns my M9 into a pocket camera and still takes great pictures.

[lct]

When can i have as small a 21 as the Super-Angulons of my youth?

Here Elmarit-M 21/2.8 asph & CV Skopar 21/4.

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]

Is there really so much difference?...

Not that much because the current 50/2 is bigger than the previous one.

Here Summicron-M 50/2 # 11819 (1978), Summilux-M 50/1.4 # 11868 (1996) & Summilux-M 50/1.4 asph # 11891 (2005).

Looks like most current lenses are bigger than earlier ones, at the exception of 28/2.8 though.

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!

[delander †]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is there really so much difference?

 

[ATTACH]236062[/ATTACH]

 

 

To me there is a difference, on camera a 50 summilux ASPH looks serious - a big piece of glass at the front, whereas the summicron is inconspicuous.

 

Jeff

[delander †]

The Leica M was, of course, NOT "designed for" street photography. It (and the previous Leicas) were designed for PORTABLE photography (inspired by Oskar Barnack's sore back). When the M was designed 1950-53, it (and the other rangefinders) WERE 35mm photography - SLRs were as rare as hens teeth - not just for a niche market or genre.

 

Long afterwards, it may have been found to be a preferable tool for street photography compared with other camera styles. But that is not what it was "designed for" - any more than lasers was "designed for" reading DVDs.

 

On the original question, I mostly buy small lenses because the big ones have big price tags or push the limits of the RF focusing (fast 75/90/135s). I wish Leica had stayed with the original barrel design of the 21 f/2.8 (E49 instead of E60 or E55). I don't really have a problem with the size of the 28 f/2 or 35/50 f/1.4 ASPHs.

 

When I wrote that the Leica M was 'designed for street photography' I knew someone would pick up on it.

 

Jeff

[wattsy]

I understand that fully, Jeff. But I don't think you can look at this in isolation.

 

Why not? I have both 50 Summarit and 50 ASPH Summilux. When I choose which lens to use, the fact that a Nikon or Hasselblad lens might be larger is irrelevant to me. I had thought I was in a tiny minority here in that I will almost always choose the smaller (better balanced and ergonomically superior) Summarit but it seems there are others who are similarly not obsessed by lens speed and wide-open DOF.

[a.g]

I own 2 lenses for my M9 - the 35 Summicron ASPH & the 50 Noctilux f/0.95. I use the 35 Summicron 90% of the time because it's small size makes the M9 a pleasure to carry for extended periods and the quality is fantastic. I bought the Noctilux for it's special qualities but when I use it I feel that I am using my Nikon D700. In the future if I were to add additional lenses I would always opt for the more compact alternative.

 

A.G

galleryag.blogspot.com

[UliWer]

Not that much because the current 50/2 is bigger than the previous one.

Here Summicron-M 50/2 # 11819 (1978), Summilux-M 50/1.4 # 11868 (1996) & Summilux-M 50/1.4 asph # 11891 (2005).

Looks like most current lenses are bigger than earlier ones, at the exception of 28/2.8 though.

 

If you compare the 2nd version of the 50cron (the "rigid" one), you'll find out that it's slimmer than the last one, but as long, so longer than the 3rd. version. As the rigid Cron had no built in hood, it would be considerably larger in practice. This is even true for the collapsible 1. version of the cron, if you use it's original "barndoor" sunshed.

 

I was sure that the M-mount version of the 3.5 or 2.8/50 Elmar was smaller than the last version: it isn't, it's a little bit longer.

[lct]

Fair enough but not everybody needs a hood actually and the built-in ones are so little anyway that they're bordering the useless to be honest. Anyway i like much using the Summilux asph but when i need a small 50 i take an Elmar or the Summicron 11819 below. YMMV.

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!

[IkarusJohn]

I use the summilux 50 Asph most of the time. Nothing would induce me to think of it as large, unbalanced, obtrusive or anything but discrete ... except perhaps to those with a label fixation.

[fiftyfive]

Are the 21/2.8 and 25/2.8 Biogons supposed to be smaller than their M Elmarit 21 and 24 counterparts?

[maurometallo]

There seems to be a great interest, almost to the point of a religious cult, with regard to using large aperture lenses. Although I understand the fascination of large out of focus areas in an image, such lenses are often physically large.

 

Influenced by the opinions expressed on this and other forums I have ended up with duplication of focal length in several areas.

 

In general I prefer small lenses because they are more balanced on an M camera, less obtrusive, look less 'professional' and are easier to handle. The image quality is generally the equal of a stopped-down summilux.

 

Thus I will nearly always use my 50 summicron instead of my 50 Summilux, or my 28 elmarit instead of the 28 summicron. My 90 elmarit-M is quite big but being light makes up for its size. My 24 elmarit is enormous so I often use my 25 f4 voigtlaender.

 

So although tempted I have avoided noctiluxes, 35 and 75 summiluxes and 90 summicrons. I cant see myself ever being tempted by a 21 or 24 summilux because they are so large. Being able to work in a non-threatening manner is also a concern.

 

Jeff

 

Tell me about it!

I have a 50mm Summicron as my ONLY lens!

[sm23221]

Tell me about it!

I have a 50mm Summicron as my ONLY lens!

 

I commend you for the lens buying restraint! I'm curious as to why you use just 1 lens. Thanks.

[maurometallo]

I believe the 50mm Summicron to be the perfect companion for my M4-P, and a splendid match for its broad 50mm framelines.The lens fits the camera ideally and even with the hood on it doesn't intrude in the rangefinder's field of vision. It is light, fast enough (for me...) and discrete.

I have had it on my camera since 1985 and I am now extremely used to it: After so many years I can anticipate the shot even before I rise the viewfinder to my eye to frame: I can "see" what it "sees" ahead of time, with great benefit for my concentration on the subject. Maybe I'm just a creature of habit, but I wouldn't change this for the world...

[sm23221]

Judging from your portfolio it seems to work great. Nice work, very impressive and makes me want to sell my other lenses and keep just one;).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

I just got a Summicron C 40 mm from a forum member :). to offset my Summilux 50 asph, which is indeed a bit unbalanced.

[danlindberg]

I also like small lenses. Optical performance aside, the 50 cron is wonderful on the camera in terms of compactness and balance. Waiting for (3 months now) a 75 cron and thinking if I shouldn't order a 35 cron as well