macusque Posted January 23, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm deciding between these lenses. Â At present I use the 35-70/4 and I have the option to get either the 19 ROM or the 21-35 at the same price. I also got a good offer for a 28-90, which is said to be probably better than the 35-70/4. I mainly use the DMR for landscape and I have also the 100 Apo-Macro (stunning lens) plus a couple of longer lenses. I have also an M8 with some great wides. Â What combo would you choose ? Â 1. 19, 28-90 Â 2. 19, 35-70 Â 3. 21-35, 35-70 Â I found the 21-35 range not so necessary, having the 35-70, but sometimes it would be nice to go out only with the 21-35 and 100 macro. Â Too many choices... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 23, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I would get the 19 in every case, as that is not really covered by your M8 (well, the WATE, but that lens does not appeal to everybody, including me) and you say you like to use the 35-70, which I agree with as it is one of the better zooms out there, so I guess you answered your own question in your own post Option 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhsimmonds Posted January 23, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I have used the 19 and it is a great lens and I would think for landscape work it would be invaluable. Â I actually own the 21-35 which I think is a more flexible tool for my sort of street photography type work. I use this in conjunction with a 35-70 as my usual "bag". I will probably get the 28-90 next and compare it with the 35-70 and then let the "loser" go! Â But for now I will wait to ensure that the DMR continues to receive support from Leica firstly by updating it's firmware, before continueing to invest in anything Leica! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macusque Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share #4 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Thank you guys, it seems I can't go wrong with the 19... I had one when shooting Canon but I sold it to finance the M8 buy... then I got also the DMR and I now miss it!! Â But for now I will wait to ensure that the DMR continues to receive support from Leica firstly by updating it's firmware, before continueing to invest in anything Leica! Â mmm... even if Leica won't support the DMR anymore, it will still make amazing pictures... and I think with stopping DMR support they intended that they are starting to develop a new completely digital R-body, instead of a new digital-back. Anyway Leica lenses are stunningly good also on Canon... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_h Posted January 23, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Marco, Â I don't have the 19mm but I do have the 21-35 & the 28-90... Â So I would say option 1 - 19mm & 28-90. It really is a lovely lens and works very well on the DMR.... Â Dave raises a good point because lack of support means new replacement and undoubtedly must mean full frame on an R10.... which means a 21-35 might make more sense for landscape? Â I agree with Dave, wait for more firmware before committing yourself. Â Â regards Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted January 23, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I would go number 1 the 19 is a stellar lens and the 28-90 is extremely hard to beat by anyone. Been thinking of selling my 28,50 and 80 and get the 28-90 for my DMR since i have all primes on the M side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted January 23, 2007 Share #7  Posted January 23, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I own the 19 and the 21-35 and since I have the 21-35 I simply do not take the 19 any longer with me. It is a great lens, but the 21-35 is equal optical quality (although a bit slower, which does not really matter for landscape photography) but it is far more flexible than the 19.  I also owned the 4/35-70, but sold it because I want get a good used 28-90, which is no doubt far superior to the 35-70, not only in range, but also in optical quality and speed.  So my preferred lenses are now  21-35 28-90 100APO 2.8/180APO  I gave back the 105-280, because it was far too heavy to carry around. Here the 2.8/180 APO is definitely one of the best solutions.  I would like to see a kind of new 4/70-300 APO, which should be in the same weight and size as the current 80-200. Not sure if this is going to happen?  I also agree it is a bit hard in the moment to invest more money in Leica R as long as a clear strategy for the future of this system cannot be seen. I recently reactivated my D2X with a bunch of nice lenses and I manage meanwhile to get similar quality results from this system, but with of course far more flexibility.  So we will see what future brings....  Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted January 23, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I own both the 21-35 and the 28-90 and the 28-90 is the hands down winner. I say this because the 21-35 at 21-24mm is good but not great. From 25-35 it is wonderful. The 28-90, on the other hand, is great across its range. The 19 is hands down one of Leica's very very best. So my choice is also number 1....19 + 28-90. Â Woody Spedden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted January 23, 2007 Share #9  Posted January 23, 2007 Hi, I have 15,19,28-90,60 + Teles and the combo I use most is 19 +28-90.  I find this combo great and I see several advantages: 1) with the 28-90 range you have to change lenses less often compared to 21-35 and 35-70. 2) I find the 19 allready hard to focus so I would think the 21-35 is reallynot easy to focus.  3) For the same reason I often focus at 70mm and then zoom out with the 28-90. I think you can achieve much better focus accurancy this way compared to using a 28prime or the 21-35.  4) sometimes 90mm is usefull compared to 70mm  Personally I dont miss the zoom range of the 21-35. I find the 19 just right for many things so the step 19-28 is not a problem for me.  I have to say that my DMR has not seen much light after I have received my M8 though.  Cheers, Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macusque Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share #10 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Thank you all! Â I'll get the 19 Elmarit, but I'm still not sure about the 28-90. I love my 100 Apo and I guess it will see less use if I buy the 28-90. I tend to force myself to use my lenses as much as I can, hence I prefer less and well spaced lenses, so that I don't have to think twice between two similar focal lenghts. Â Having said that, I'm thinking to get the 180 Apo-Summicron (anyone willing to part with their ? ) and the option of 19, 28-90 and 180 plus 1.4x is definitely tempting... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted January 23, 2007 Share #11 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Marco: Â It really depends on what type of scenics you shoot. It you don't do a lot with the wide end, your cheapest solution would be to keep your 35-70mm and get a 21-35mm. Â I remember reading some of Brian Bowers Leica photo books and on the film M and R, the majority of his shots were done with a 35mm or 50mm lens. He had the occasional 21mm shot, but the bread and butter of landscape can be shot with 35-70mm. Â My 19mm tends to be used more for people in close or where focus is critical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted January 23, 2007 Share #12  Posted January 23, 2007 Thank you all! I'll get the 19 Elmarit, but I'm still not sure about the 28-90. I love my 100 Apo and I guess it will see less use if I buy the 28-90. I tend to force myself to use my lenses as much as I can, hence I prefer less and well spaced lenses, so that I don't have to think twice between two similar focal lenghts.  Having said that, I'm thinking to get the 180 Apo-Summicron (anyone willing to part with their ? ) and the option of 19, 28-90 and 180 plus 1.4x is definitely tempting...  Marco you read my mind for sure with the DMR 19, 28-90 and the 180 with the 1.4. I sold my 19mm though becuase of the M8 but the 28-90 is what i want to get and i have the 180mm and 1.4 now plus a Oly 24mm shift lens converted to the R mount Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted January 23, 2007 Share #13 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I agree with Guy ... you could go for the M for wides and normals, anything beyond 80 is R territory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted January 23, 2007 Share #14  Posted January 23, 2007 Hi,I have 15,19,28-90,60 + Teles and the combo I use most is 19 +28-90.  I find this combo great and I see several advantages: 1) with the 28-90 range you have to change lenses less often compared to 21-35 and 35-70. 2) I find the 19 allready hard to focus so I would think the 21-35 is reallynot easy to focus.  3) For the same reason I often focus at 70mm and then zoom out with the 28-90. I think you can achieve much better focus accurancy this way compared to using a 28prime or the 21-35.  4) sometimes 90mm is usefull compared to 70mm  Personally I dont miss the zoom range of the 21-35. I find the 19 just right for many things so the step 19-28 is not a problem for me.  I have to say that my DMR has not seen much light after I have received my M8 though.  Cheers, Tom  I am using the 21-35 since a year now and had never any probelm to focus. Also of course not with the 19 !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macusque Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share #15 Â Posted January 23, 2007 Rob, Â I agree on the choice of focal lenghts for landscape. Indeed on film/full frame I rarely shot with anything wider than 24mm. Â But on the DMR the 21-35 is a 29-48, while the 19 is a 26mm. The 21-35 @ 21mm is also probably worse than the 19, hence I won't have anything really wide and really great (as it should be with Leica) with the zoom. Â Now the 28-90 is maybe more tempting to use along with the 19. Â As for the DMR support / R10 developmnent... who knows?... we don't even know if it will be full frame. And it won't be available before the end of 2008 - early 2009, so I really don't get why we should be thinking twice about building a nice R- setup now. The M8 is great, I love mine, it's IQ is maybe even better than the DMR's (colors apart), but I can't see myself using that camera for all my purposes. It just has its limits, like the DMR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted January 23, 2007 Share #16 Â Posted January 23, 2007 What i really want to get to is get my 280 f4 back , 180 F2 and the 28-90 , my Oly 24mm shift for the DMR and than on the M side my 15,21,28,35,50,75 and 90 covers all the primes and wide stuff. That to me is a nice overall setup and probaly more than I truly need butI have everything covered Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted January 23, 2007 Share #17 Â Posted January 23, 2007 How much did you sell the 280/4 for, Guy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted January 23, 2007 Share #18  Posted January 23, 2007 Marco you read my mind for sure with the DMR 19, 28-90 and the 180 with the 1.4. I sold my 19mm though becuase of the M8 but the 28-90 is what i want to get and i have the 180mm and 1.4 now plus a Oly 24mm shift lens converted to the R mount  This is what I also feel. I am about to sell my 19 and get the 28-90 in addition to my 21-35. And I also found I do not use the 100APO, because if I really need Tele I am using the 2.8/180APO. So adding the 1.4 Converter is definitely a great choice.  Most disturbing in the 21-35 and 35-70 combination is the amount you have to change lenses. This is why I prefer the 28-90 as my bread and butter solution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted January 23, 2007 Share #19  Posted January 23, 2007 What i really want to get to is get my 280 f4 back , 180 F2 and the 28-90 , my Oly 24mm shift for the DMR and than on the M side my 15,21,28,35,50,75 and 90 covers all the primes and wide stuff. That to me is a nice overall setup and probaly more than I truly need butI have everything covered  The 2/180 is a really marvellous lens, but for me it is far too heavy and so I prefer the 2.8180 which gives you almost the same freedom but much easier to handle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted January 23, 2007 Share #20 Â Posted January 23, 2007 I agree Peter the F2 is not the travel lens of choice for sure and the 2.8 version is very very good. i just don't have the heart to sell that one and i just love the look of it so i will suffer the back ache for it. Â I sold the 280 mm f4 to cheap, needed money for the M8 at the time but I think i got 3200 for it. This is really one killer lens and if can get one , do it. Can't recommend this lens enough Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.