Which Leica lens to start with for M8

[intex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I need to get one beginning lens for a new M8, If in fact lens sizes (focal lengths) must be multiplied by 1.33 to obtain the Leica digital equivalent, then a 28mm would equal a regular 37mm, 35=46mm, and 50=66mm. Why does Leica then list the 50mm as their standard lens, which would be equivalent to a 66mm, when a 46mm would be closer to a true "normal size" lens?

 

Which lens would be a good starter for a "One-Lens" starter set. I am amiacable to purchasing a used one as well, and then having it encoded.

 

If $ were no object, would the Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 be a good choice, or are the focal lengths to close together (37-46-66mm) ? A telephoto of 75mm would probably be better as the top range though.

[Advertisement]

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

[stunsworth]

Hi Robert. 28mm or 35mm would be my personal recommendation for the M8 - certainly they're the two focal lengths I'm using most at the moment. Which one I'm afraid would have to be your call :-)

 

The 28-35-50 of the Tri-Elmar aren't really as close as you may think, at least not in my experience. Personally if I were buying a single lens I wouldn't go for the TE. You may find it a bit slow in certain circumstances. Coupled with a fast lens for low light shots it's fine, but for a first lens I'd go for the 28mm Summicron or 35mm Summicron/Summilux.

[lightpainter]

I would go for a 28asph for general purpose or 50lux asph if you are after portraits

[AlanJW]

I need to get one beginning lens for a new M8, If in fact lens sizes (focal lengths) must be multiplied by 1.33 to obtain the Leica digital equivalent, then a 28mm would equal a regular 37mm, 35=46mm, and 50=66mm. Why does Leica then list the 50mm as their standard lens, which would be equivalent to a 66mm, when a 46mm would be closer to a true "normal size" lens?

 

Which lens would be a good starter for a "One-Lens" starter set. I am amiacable to purchasing a used one as well, and then having it encoded.

 

If $ were no object, would the Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 be a good choice, or are the focal lengths to close together (37-46-66mm) ? A telephoto of 75mm would probably be better as the top range though.

I have the Tri Elmar, and a 50 Summicron. the 50 was too long for everday work. I have now settled on a 35mm f/2 ASPH and it seems it stays on the camer more than anything else at this point,

 

After I get the WATE, we'll see.

[intex]

Since Leica really does not explain this, are the lens grouped into 4 categories based on aperature size:

Elmarit : smallest aperature, least expensive?

Summicron: Next larger aperature

Summilux: Next larger aperature

Noctilux: Largest aperature ?

 

Is this correct?

Also what is the benefit of ASPH lenses?

[robsteve]

The ASPH lenses give better sharpness on the edges of the pictures when shooting at wider apertures.

 

I would suggest the 35mm Summicron ASPH as the starter lens. It is a bit wider than a 50mm was on film. Nice standard lens and it is also very small and light.

 

I used the 35mm summicron for this picture. I think this was shot at f2. It is plenty sharp with the subject on the edge of the frame.

 

[xjr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

28mm f2.0

[marco_rol]

My personal choice: 35mm as my first Leica lens (either the Summicron or the Summilux). I went with the 'lux, but will probably pick up the Summicron when I don't need the extra speed (which will be most times) because it's a lighter, smaller package but wanted the faster lens since it was going to be my only 35mm.

[LichMD]

28mm f2.0

 

 

I agree with Angelos.

I did quite a bit of due dillegence as I researched this very issue a few months ago.

For the kind of shooting I want to do the 28/2.0 made the most sense.

I'd consider this lens, as well as the 35/1.4.

Good luck!

[cometsoft]

I vote the 35mm. I finally got my 3 lenses 24-35-75 (I'm not buying any more) and I love the 35mm the most. It is inconspicuous, small and sharp and the cheapest of the 3 It will be on the camera 95% of the time.

[mitchell]

Most people, as you see, say 35, or 28. I have a 35, 50, and 90 all brought for my film M.

 

Now that I have an M8, the 50 is what I use most often. I almost always shoot outside. Usually, landscapes, often making them abstract. For me photography involves, among other things, selection, and simplification. I think it is easier to make an image from a narrower field. I think a 50 sees closer to the angle the eye sees. So more skill needs to be aquired to make the wider lenses work well.

 

Of course it's all up to the individual.

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

[lars_bergquist]

Since Leica really does not explain this, are the lens grouped into 4 categories based on aperature size:

Elmarit : smallest aperature, least expensive?

Summicron: Next larger aperature

Summilux: Next larger aperature

Noctilux: Largest aperature ?

 

Is this correct?

Also what is the benefit of ASPH lenses?

 

That's right.

 

Elmar: 3.5 -- 4

Elmarit: 2.8

Summicron: 2.0

Summilux: 1.4

Noctilux: even faster ...

 

This has been so since the late 1950's. The present collapsible 50 mm Elmar (soon to be discontinued I guess because it is incompatible with the M8) was called an Elmar, not an Elmarit, because it is a genuine Elmar DESIGN; since 1925 that was a classical four element optical layout.

 

Aspherical lens surfaces bend light in ways different from spherical ones, affording designers more degrees of freedom, i.e either better correction of spherical aberration and coma, or a more compact design -- or even both! But it's all in how they know how to exploit the new possibilities; 'aspherical' is not in itself a mark of quality.

 

The old man from the Age of Anastigmats

[sparkie]

Its a classification system for cost and stratifying the market based on lens speed.. translated as

 

Elmar: "Most affordable" 2.8 - 4.0

Elmarit: "A little more expensive" or Best compromise if you don't need speed 2.8

Summicron: "Expensive" and traditionally regarded as the best high speed lens category 2.0

Summilux: "Really expensive" or ultra hi-speed 1.4

Noctilux: "Really, REALLY expensive" ultimate hi-speed lens for people who do real low light photography or for bokeh nuts who like shooting at f1.0 for kicks

[sparkie]

sorry, to answer your question..

 

if money is not a constraint: go for the 28/2.0 ASPH, 35/1.4 ASPH or 50/1.4 ASPH

if compactness and cost is an issue: go for the 35/2.0 ASPH or pre-ASPH, 28/2.8 ASPH or 50/2.8 collapsible

if youre on a tight budget: go for the voitlander lenses or 2nd hand leica lenses pre-ASPH range

[johnbuckley]

Robert - tastes are personal, but you cannot go wrong getting the 35 f/1.4 Summilux. It is a sharp, fast lens, and with the crop, is effectively the equivalent of a 50 mm "normal" lens. You won't regret it. Except, of course, for the fact that once you have it, you will start needing other Summiluxes!

[wparsonsgisnet]

If you need speed, the 35mm f1.4 asph. Do NOT buy a 35mm in the non-asph version as it is highly prone to flare.

 

If you want wider (and speed) the 28 f2.0 asph.

 

I have the 35, so opted for the 24mm f2.8 asph. The images from Sean's review site led me to choose this lens over the 21 or 28 lengths. Also, Puts raves about this lens, calling it the single must-have lens for an M user.

 

I find its 32mm effective length excellent for me. The images are superb. It's SLOW! Sorry, I use most f1.4 lenses and really feel pain at having to give up 2 STOPS!

 

Yes, I know, I should try to express my feelings.

 

G'luck.