Initial lens selection for my M8, a few questions.

[deltoid1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay, pretty sure I am going to spring for an M8 later this week. Lots of lenses available, hard to decide. I know alot depends on what I like to shoot, but I thought perhaps I might be missing something important. For instance, I read here that if I want to use a 1.25 magnifier, I will not be able to see 24mm frame lines. I wouldn't have known that without this forum. So, anything 'wrong' with the following plan.

 

I like to shoot wide open and wide apertures for limited DOF effects. So, I think I'd like the Leica 50 1.4 ASPH. Interestting 35mm equiv of about 65. Gives some standoff room, in waist level portraits, some people don't look so great, (big noses.) Also, if needed, for tighter portraits, I can always crop a bit of the frame. No problem for the high res sensor.

 

Second lens, 28 f2. Fast, nice natural perspective for many subjects.

 

For wider, maybe a 15mm VC or the Zeiss 18MM?

 

And a L 90mm later.

[LichMD]

Okay, pretty sure I am going to spring for an M8 later this week. Lots of lenses available, hard to decide. I know alot depends on what I like to shoot, but I thought perhaps I might be missing something important. For instance, I read here that if I want to use a 1.25 magnifier, I will not be able to see 24mm frame lines. I wouldn't have known that without this forum. So, anything 'wrong' with the following plan.

 

I like to shoot wide open and wide apertures for limited DOF effects. So, I think I'd like the Leica 50 1.4 ASPH. Interestting 35mm equiv of about 65. Gives some standoff room, in waist level portraits, some people don't look so great, (big noses.) Also, if needed, for tighter portraits, I can always crop a bit of the frame. No problem for the high res sensor.

 

Second lens, 28 f2. Fast, nice natural perspective for many subjects.

 

For wider, maybe a 15mm VC or the Zeiss 18MM?

 

And a L 90mm later.

 

My thought process was similar, but I do more candid and street than portraiture, so I opted for the 28/2.0 cron as a first lens. Very happy with it so far, love the effective FOV and it's sharpness.

Shot these wide open at 640 Friday night

I'll probably add either the 50 or 35 1.4 next. And then may go for he CV 15/4.

Cheers

 

BTW, get ready to shoot alot, this camera demands to be used.

Enjoy!

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!

[deltoid1]

That's a question I ought to have the answer to. Is accurate focus possible with the 50 at 1.4 without using a magnifier? Excuse me if this is stupid question...

 

Okay, pretty sure I am going to spring for an M8 later this week. Lots of lenses available, hard to decide. I know alot depends on what I like to shoot, but I thought perhaps I might be missing something important. For instance, I read here that if I want to use a 1.25 magnifier, I will not be able to see 24mm frame lines. I wouldn't have known that without this forum. So, anything 'wrong' with the following plan.

 

I like to shoot wide open and wide apertures for limited DOF effects. So, I think I'd like the Leica 50 1.4 ASPH. Interestting 35mm equiv of about 65. Gives some standoff room, in waist level portraits, some people don't look so great, (big noses.) Also, if needed, for tighter portraits, I can always crop a bit of the frame. No problem for the high res sensor.

 

Second lens, 28 f2. Fast, nice natural perspective for many subjects.

 

For wider, maybe a 15mm VC or the Zeiss 18MM?

 

And a L 90mm later.

[deltoid1]

Just took a look at the prices on these, added it all up, pretty expensive to jump in all at one time. I wonder how the resale is for the VC lenses? Might make sense for me to start with the 50 'Lux and add a VC 28 until I feel ready to spring for the 28 'Cron. The Zeiss 21 or 24 Biogons look like a pretty good value too. Kinda of makes me wonder though about that middle-market position. Maybe better to stay with the VC's until I can afford/justify filling out my kit with the Leica's.

 

My thought process was similar, but I do more candid and street than portraiture, so I opted for the 28/2.0 cron as a first lens. Very happy with it so far, love the effective FOV and it's sharpness.

Shot these wide open at 640 Friday night

I'll probably add either the 50 or 35 1.4 next. And then may go for he CV 15/4.

Cheers

 

BTW, get ready to shoot alot, this camera demands to be used.

Enjoy!

[Shootist]

That's a question I ought to have the answer to. Is accurate focus possible with the 50 at 1.4 without using a magnifier? Excuse me if this is stupid question...

 

The MAX aperture of the lens and what aperture you are using has nothing to do with how well it focuses. It's all about the rangefinder and how well both the lens and the rangefinder are adjusted. I have not problem focusing successfully with all lenses up to the 90mm without the 1.25 magnifier (although I do have one on order and will like having it), and I use a +1 diopter to correct for not being able to see close up.

[deltoid1]

The MAX aperture of the lens and what aperture you are using has nothing to do with how well it focuses. It's all about the rangefinder and how well both the lens and the rangefinder are adjusted. I have not problem focusing successfully with all lenses up to the 90mm without the 1.25 magnifier (although I do have one on order and will like having it), and I use a +1 diopter to correct for not being able to see close up.

 

Okay, learn something new every day, I did read something about a magnifier increasing the effective base.

 

What utility will the magnifier have for you then, simply a larger frame line to compose with?

[LJL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay, learn something new every day, I did read something about a magnifier increasing the effective base.

 

What utility will the magnifier have for you then, simply a larger frame line to compose with?

 

It does not increase the effective base, as I understand things. What it does is increase the size (magnifies) of the viewfinder focus patch, thus allowing you to better see the two images you are laying over each other to determine focus.

 

LJ

[colorflow]

Just took a look at the prices on these, added it all up, pretty expensive to jump in all at one time. I wonder how the resale is for the VC lenses? Might make sense for me to start with the 50 'Lux and add a VC 28 until I feel ready to spring for the 28 'Cron. The Zeiss 21 or 24 Biogons look like a pretty good value too. Kinda of makes me wonder though about that middle-market position. Maybe better to stay with the VC's until I can afford/justify filling out my kit with the Leica's.

 

The major motive for most of us buying an M8 is Leica glass. Don't forget you can get used Leica lenses for about 60% to 70% of new prices. I bought many of mine from eBay, all in mint/like new conditions. Have not had a problem yet. The pre-ASPH ones are even less. If you like wide, the Elmarit 21 pre-ASPH is worth considering.

 

Welcome to Leica,

Alan

[LichMD]

That's a question I ought to have the answer to. Is accurate focus possible with the 50 at 1.4 without using a magnifier? Excuse me if this is stupid question...

 

You might want to get one lens at a time and take your time learning the M8.

I'm an amateur, most of my shooting is in my spare time so 600 pics in I'm still learning how to play with this combo.

[Shootist]

Okay, learn something new every day, I did read something about a magnifier increasing the effective base.

 

What utility will the magnifier have for you then, simply a larger frame line to compose with?

 

Well when using a 90mm lens at distances greater then 10-20 feet it is hard to get a proper focus fast. Not that you can't focus at far objects it just take a little time and experience. The magnifier will help in those cases. Since at this time my shortest lens is the 35mm I'll probably leave it on all the time. I'm really use to my M3 and switching to the M8 makes it hard to focus. Once I use the M8 for a period of time focusiing becomes easier and when I go back to the M3 the rangefinder patch looks huge.

[doug_m]

The 50 1.4 ASPH will be a great first and only lens to start with. I have the 35 F2, 28 F2 and 75 F2 (all ASPH) as well and must say the 50 1.4 is my favorite with the M8. Its great for portraits but not limited to this use and the 66.5 mm effective length is really sort of fun. Good luck.

[davidmires]

...Might make sense for me to start with the 50 'Lux and add a VC 28 until I feel ready to spring for the 28 'Cron...

This sounds like a good plan. The VC 28/1.9 is a very good lens.

[lars_bergquist]

It does not increase the effective base, as I understand things. What it does is increase the size (magnifies) of the viewfinder focus patch, thus allowing you to better see the two images you are laying over each other to determine focus.

 

LJ

 

That is not correct. The effective (optical) base is the physical base x viewfinder magnification. Modern M cameras have a physical rangefinder base of 69.25 mm. The finder magnification of the M8 is .68, as against the previous standard of .72 :

 

No finder magnifier: 69.25 mm x .68 = 47 mm

With magnifier: 69.25 mm x .68 x 1.25 = 58 mm

 

So, the magnifier does increase focusing accuracy. That said, I never had any problems focusing goggle-less 135 mm lenses with the plain M4 .72 x finder:

 

69.25 mm x .72 = c. 50 mm.

 

Anything you hang onto an M camera does introduce ergonomical drawbacks.

 

The old man from the Age of the M2

[andit]

I'm in a very much similar situation. I sold my Canon gear and ordered an M8 at the beginning of January. Since I don't have any Leica glass, I was also faced with the decision as to what lens. Originally I thought I would go for the 50mm cron, but then changed my order and have now ordered the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit (I do mainly landscape and architectural work - 28mm is roughly 35mm on full frame), and as a second lens I ordered (don't laugh) the 90mm f/4.0 Elmar with marco adaptor and angle finder. I know that the M8 is not a macro camera, but the 1:3 size is fine for me, plus the 90mm doubles up as a really nice portrait lens (a bit slow but I'll live with it for now).

 

Andreas

[bill vann]

while the leica glass is superb, do not underestimate the VC glass. It does not meet the levels of the new Asph Leicas, but i sold my pre asph elmarit in favor of a VC. in fact have 15, 21, 28, 35 50 and 90 in CV, cheap enough to play with and if you buy used you won't loose much.

 

i also have leica 21 asph, 35 cron asph, and tri elmar, sold my 50mm elmar and 90 elmarit.

 

looking to sell one of the one of the 21s (preferably the CV)and one of the 35s (preferably the cron)

 

i am impressed with the CV glass especially at the price.

 

you can get into the M8 quite reasonably and change out lenses as $$ permit.

 

bill

[Guest Olof]

With the 50/1.4 as your first lens and a 28/2.0 as your second you will be able to make 80% of all the pics you want to make.

[Jager]

In addition to the magnifier increasing the effective base length (as Lars pointed out), the maximum aperture does come into play to the degree that shooting faster lenses wide open places greater demands on focusing accuracy. There's less depth of field to bail you out if you're ever so slightly off with focus.

 

Lenses like the Noctilux and 75 Lux have historically most needed the help of the magnifier because of their extremely limited depth of field, wide open.

 

Best,

 

Jeff

[Skippy Sanchez]

....Maybe better to stay with the VC's until I can afford/justify filling out my kit with the Leica's.

 

That's what I thought. The CV lenses are very, very nice. I bought the 90mm f/4, 21mm f/4 and 15mm f/4.5, as 'entry-level' lenses and I soon learned I simply need faster glass. I also have the 40mm f/1.4 nokton, & it is a jewel and a keeper. I shoot in low, indoor light a lot in my work for a newspaper, and the difference in 1 - 1 1/2 fstops is MIGHTY important.

 

So, I have a CV 90mm f/4 and a CV 21mm f/4 that will be finding a new home. The 15mm f4.5, while slow, is the widest you'll find in an M mount lens and I'm hanging on to it.

 

Just consider, realistically, whether you'll be shooting in low light very much. Is an extra f-stop or two worth $1,500 - $1,800? If not, I've got some nice CV lenses for you.

[Skippy Sanchez]

.....I read here that if I want to use a 1.25 magnifier, I will not be able to see 24mm frame lines.

 

One more thought: It's really no big deal to unscrew or screw in the magnifier when necessary. I sure like having it when shooting longer than 50mm, but if i need to slap on anything wider, i unmount it & slip it in its cute little handy dandy pouch, conveniently attatched to the strap. It even has a snazzy little lanyard to keep it from falling in the dirt. Sometimes I just let it dangle there if I know I'm going to re-attatch it in soon.

 

It's worth the $$. The Japanese ones are cheaper, but either the thread depth is pretty short or the threads are machined differently. I bought a Hong Kong .85 eyepiece to use on my .72 MP finder when shooting wide 'cause I wear specs, but because it doesn't thread all the way into the eyepiece, my eyeball is is even FURTHER away from the finder and makes it a moot point anyway. It would have been less frustraiting to have just used the $$ to light my cigars with.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[carstenw]

Skippy: the 15mm f/4.5 is not an M-mount lens, but an M39 screw-mount. Additionally, there is the Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 (M-mount) and the CV 12mm f/5.6 (M39 mount). None of these are rangefinder coupled. I am sure you knew of these and just forgot though