Can't wait much longer for add to the kit!!

[Edward77]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am only 2 weeks in owning a Leica M9-P with a 35Lux and I think I want another lens.

 

Not sure if I should go 75 or 21 (28 or 24 instead even).

 

I am really happy with the 35 and I can capture most things but for intimate people scenes you need to get too close with the 35 and it's too long for architecture.

 

Which way should I go first? Is a 75 lux very hard to find?

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Not too difficult to find, but not cheap. Are you sure you need the Summilux? It is a bit of a heavy lump...

[01af]

Wait—my crystal ball is vibrating. There is something building up inside .... I can't see it clearly yet, it's so cloudy ... ah, now it becomes visible: I see Edward77 buying his third M lens.

[pico]

Not too difficult to find, but not cheap. Are you sure you need the Summilux? It is a bit of a heavy lump...

 

Indeed it is.

 

While I am very happy with the 75mm Summilux, I find that most of the time I could have used a slower lens, possibly a Summarit. I suggest that anyone who gets the 75mm Summilux should also get the Leica Goodies Steer.

[bpalme]

It seems prices are stabilizing...maybe even coming down for most lenses(used)

Except for the 75 Summilux. There is plenty out there used but expensive.

[Edward77]

I read some good write ups on the 75lux. I haven't seen it in the flesh. Perhaps I'll go a play with a cron and rit and see how a I feel about those.

 

Why as the 75lux discontinued?

[bpalme]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Check out Prosophos' photos:

Leica 75mm Summilux f/1.4

[jneilt]

i own a 21 and a 35 and a couple other lenses...generally I would only pack one of those two lenses.

 

Go for a 50, 75 or 90. Personally, I would go 50 and 90. 75 is a good lens, but it is too much almost 50 and not enough 90 for me.

[marknorton]

On an M9, I prefer the 90mm Summicron to the 75mm Summilux. It's an old design related to the old Noctilux and as Jaap says, it's a bit of a lump and possibly the most difficult to focus of any Leica M lens having shallower depth of field even than the Noctilux. At one time, the 75mm Summilux was unloved, I got mine when Leica were giving a 30% discount on any lens as a "mea culpa" to the M8 recall.

 

With a 35mm Summilux, the obvious choices are a 21mm Super-Elmar and a 75mm Summicron.

[IkarusJohn]

I struggled with the focus on the 75 Summicron, so I switched to the 75 Summilux.

 

Olaf has some good advice on the 75 Summilux thread.

 

I don't buy the 35-50-75 too close argument. These lenses are different enough to get a place in my bag. As a start, I'd suggest either 75 or 21 as an addition to your 35.

[jaapv]

I quite agree, Mark. The reason one sees them sold quite regularly is just because they are not the easiest lens to use. A bit of a specialists’ tool I would say. Otoh, if used expertly it can really sing and make one forget its drawbacks. Th OP should consider an Elmarit-M 2.8/90 as well I would say.

[tobey bilek]

I read some good write ups on the 75lux. I haven't seen it in the flesh. Perhaps I'll go a play with a cron and rit and see how a I feel about those.

 

Why as the 75lux discontinued?

 

Because they either ran out of the special noctilux glass and/or the european EPA has banned manufacture of products with high lead content and that special glass is like lead heavy. It was made only by the Leica glass lab which closed in early 90`s. So there will be no more of either lens ever.

[Paul J]

When I got my first M9 I got a 35 and 50. It was a great start and I wouldn't have done it differently.

 

I agree with John 35-50-75 is near perfect combo for me. I don't understand talk of it being too close, personally. They have totally different look and need. I have since bought a 90 and it doesn't get used much. It's a little long for my liking but wouldn't want to be without it.

 

It comes down to what focal length you will use most. If you want wide architecture shots and closer portraits you're in for a bit of a compromise. I used to shoot architecture a bit with the equivalent of a 35mm lens and found it not as limiting as I'd imagined.

 

I dug through the metadata of my existing library of Canon shots to make my mind up based on what I normally used. It seems the most common used focal length for me was between 43-47mm on a 24-70mm. So I went for the 50 and 35. The 50 is on almost permanently and I wouldn't personally hesitate to recommend it as an only lens to start off with.

 

Personally the long focus throw on the Lux is welcomed. I found the Summicrons quite twitchy to focus.

[Paul J]

Because they either ran out of the special noctilux glass and/or the european EPA has banned manufacture of products with high lead content and that special glass is like lead heavy. It was made only by the Leica glass lab which closed in early 90`s. So there will be no more of either lens ever.

 

I had read it was the due to the ever increasing expense of producing the exotic glass.

[IkarusJohn]

One thing to bear in mind is that you're not just choosing a different focal length, but also a different lens, with the potential for a different feel.

 

For example, my core lens selection is a 35 Lux ASPH (FLE), a 50 Noctilux 0.95, and a 75 Summilux.

 

The first two are Peter Karbe lenses, with a very different feel, and the third is a Walter Mandler lens. There are better exponents of the strengths of each lens, and you will find a lot of opinion here on them - much of it extremely informative. For me, the pleasure and challenge is exploring those strengths and finding a way of expressing myself using them.

 

So, I would add to the above - try to identify (or be honest about) your strengths as a photographer, and find complimentary lenses, rather than similar lenses of different focal lengths; the 75 Summicron f/2 was apparently based on the 50 Summilux f/1.4, whereas the 75 Summilux was based on the Noctilux f/1 - both Mandler lenses. So, for me, having two Karbe designed ASPH/FLE 50 mm lenses, getting a Mandler 75 with spherical elements was more interesting.

 

The Summilux 35 ASPH (FLE) stands on its own, for me.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Cheers

John

[Lord Fluff]

I have both the 75 Lux and the 75 Cron. I keep meaning to get rid of one, but am failing to work out which should go......

 

The Cron has stunning sharpness, smooth bokeh, is lighter, more compact and somehow 'makes more sense' with an M9, but the focussing is a little too frisky at times due to the short throw, and sometimes in bright light the results can seem just too 'hard'.

 

The Lux has stunning smoothness, smooth but often swirly bokeh, is huge and heavy (by RF standards) and the focussing, while accurate, takes multiple twists to go from one end of the range to the other - not a quick process.

 

The Lux actually isn't hard to focus provided it, and your M9, are well calibrated, which may involve a trip to Solms (my M9 was way off from new). It's an enjoyable lens to use, but not to carry. The Cron always impresses, and can do most of the shallow DOF stuff that the Lux can, but it lacks that dreamy quality that many fall in love with.

 

So in summary, to truly choose between them, you should own both, and then you may (or may not) come to know which suits you. I both love, and am annoyed by, both.

 

The bigger issue with both is the rubbish frame lines afforded by Leica for the 75mm shooter. Perhaps the next M will redress this with some kind of electronic frame lines, but until then, 50mm feels easier to use (and the fact that 50/75 was chosen as a combo really doesn’t help)

[Lord Fluff]

possibly the most difficult to focus of any Leica M lens having shallower depth of field even than the Noctilux.

 

Is this actually correct? I've read that it is, and also the reverse, depending on who did the maths I think......

[IkarusJohn]

i've found the 75 Summilux easier to focus than the 75 Summicron, but I'm no expert.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lars_bergquist]

My impression is that the OP suffers more from GAS than from a real need. If he really needed a different focal length, he would know at least approximately which one. Especially, he would not hesitate between a longer and a shorter lens!

 

So my advice to him would be that old classic: Just continue to use your 35 until your needs or at least wants become more precise. To help in that process, he should use that funny little frame pre-selector lever in the front of the camera to see what kind of compositions other lenses from 28 to 135mm would give him. There is a reality out there, and this is kind of a check on it.

 

The old man from the Kodachrome Age

[rramesh]

I assume money's no objection.

 

In my case what I did was to budget for a combination of lenses. A primary lens which I would use 70% of the time, a longer lens for 20% of the time and a wider lens for 10% of the time.

 

After considerable tests I narrowed the focal lengths to 21, 35 and 90 and I purchased a 35 summicron, a 90 elmarit-m and now a 21 CV skopar.

 

Maybe I rushed through it too fast but I am quite pleased with my choice.