dogberry Posted March 17, 2007 Share #1 Posted March 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I recently took delivery of my M8 and it is really everything I hoped it would be and more. I don't know how this compares with the experience of anybody out there, but I've been using mostly my old 28/2.8 Elmarit (pre asph.) on the M8 and with the 1.33 crop factor, I find that it's effective 37mm field of view makes a 28mm a pretty ideal "standard lens" for the M8, in much the same way that the 35mm was a standard lens for a lot of Leica film shooters. My trusty Summilux 50/1.4 is actually a mild portrait lens on the M8 which is also kind of nice, but I find myself using the 28mm more now. I don't have a 35mm lens at present, but I imagine that its effective 47mm field of view would also make it very useful as a standard lens on the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Hi dogberry, Take a look here 28mm as a "standard lens on the M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Bob Ross Posted March 17, 2007 Share #2 Posted March 17, 2007 I'm in the process of learning my new 28/2.8 Asph and am finding it a very good general photo lens. It is easy to estimate the field of view without the camera to the eye, since the long side of the field of view is 1:1 with the subject distance. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_tanaka Posted March 17, 2007 Share #3 Posted March 17, 2007 Sounds fine to me, Gordon. The 35mm focal length was long considered by many to be the "standard" focal length for the earlier M cameras. So the 28mm would be a good approximation of that same field of view on the M8. In my opinion and experience the best focal length for YOUR M really depends on the type of photography you practice most often. There's great long-term advantage to selecting a single normal to moderately wide-angle lens, 50mm - 24mm, and just welding it to your M. Using your M with mostly the same lens really will make the camera and lens nearly a prosthetic extension to your eyes. You'll soon have a reflexive intuition for what angles and lighting the lens handles best and worst. In our times of relative affluence and easy credit people tend to become lens collectors. But, in fact, there are far greater skill advantages to be gained by having only one or two lenses, particularly for an M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 17, 2007 Share #4 Posted March 17, 2007 I agree with you, just wish there was that extra stop of speed available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted March 17, 2007 Share #5 Posted March 17, 2007 Gordon, The Summicron 28 is my standard lens on the M8 - and a delight to use it is! There have been some musings here on the subject of a faster 28 or 24mm lens, since so many of us just leave a 28 on the M8. It seems that we are doomed to dream, at least for now, as such a lens would be heavy, large and very expensive. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guywalder Posted March 17, 2007 Share #6 Posted March 17, 2007 I had settled on the 28/1.4 as my 'standard' lens on the D2X, although the field of view was a little bit tight (42mm equiv FOV). So I am very happy with the 28mm focal length on the M8. I was thinking about the difference in max aperture and, without having checked in detail, I suspect that the Leica at f2 is much better than the Nikkor at f2. And adding in the lack of mirror flap I estimate the 2 systems to be pretty comparable for low light use, with the Leica probably better despite the slower lens. But the Leica is Much smaller and lighter! Of course a faster Leica 28 would be even better! Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmarbach Posted March 17, 2007 Share #7 Posted March 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Would someone like to comment on exactly why they want a faster lens? Shorten DOF? Better low light? How many of us use ISO 320 or 640, with very little extra noise at 640? This is two stops right there. Slower lenses can be lighter, cheaper and optically easier to design. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted March 17, 2007 Share #8 Posted March 17, 2007 Agreed, the 28 makes perfect sense for those of us who are enamored of the 35 on film. Back when the M8 was announced I originally had planned on buying the new 28 elmarit, but its lack of availability prompted me to start looking at the 28 Summicron. Since my 35 is the Lux, dropping two full stops on the 28 - a lens which would spend an inordinate amount of time on my camera - made less and less sense. I purchased the 28 Cron and couldn't be happier. It makes a perfect standard lens on the M8. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andit Posted March 17, 2007 Share #9 Posted March 17, 2007 The 28 Elmarit seems to be very, very popular. There is a tremendous shortage of these lenses at the moment. That must say something about this focal length on the M8. My M8 is coming in next week. I ordered it with the 28 Elmarit and the 90 Elmar with Macro adaptor and angle finder. Leica told me the M8 and the 90 have come in and are with customs at the moment. But no sign of a 28 and they don't know when they'll get one either. Andreas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted March 17, 2007 Share #10 Posted March 17, 2007 I am using the 28 Elmarit most happily, after manyyears of shooting with the 35 summicron on an M2. Its like old times again. The Elmarit has a couple of advantages - weight and size for one, and the exra depth of field at 2.8 gives a bit more lattitude on the focus, so key with digital backs. Able to adjust ISO on the flymeans that the extra stop isn't that much of a penalty. At least that was my rationale, and so far, I'm quite happy. Its a heck of a lens. I dickered with getting either a 35 or 50 'lux for low light, but don't like changing lenses that much, and they aren't too small, plus with the expense for a minor use lens, didn't seem like a good choice. However, the CV 40 1.4 is kind of small, fast, and focuses to .7 meters, so it works to fill that void if you can deal with the frame line issue. Its only for those moments, say in a museum, when you want to capture something and the two stops less than the Elmarit make the difference. But by and large, the 28 is just the ticket. I got mine from Harry's Pro Shop in Toronto - he had some. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/19013-28mm-as-a-standard-lens-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=203809'>More sharing options...
dogberry Posted March 17, 2007 Author Share #11 Posted March 17, 2007 Thanks everybody for your interesting replies. I agree in a way, that it would be nice to have a brighter Leica 28mm, but as some of you pointed out, it would be larger, heavier and a LOT more expensive. I guess it would inevitably fill a lot more of the VF as well. As somebody also pointd out, the ability to switch ISO settings definitely makes this less of an issue. Very nice shots Geoffrey - wonderful tonality and detail. Were they taken in Toronto? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted March 17, 2007 Share #12 Posted March 17, 2007 For those nocturnal types, a fast lens might qualify as a necessity, but I'm perfectly happy with the slower, lighter, less costly and less obtrusive Summicrons and Elmarits. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronJ Posted March 17, 2007 Share #13 Posted March 17, 2007 My 28mm Summicron ASPH is amazing on my M8. The images are TACK sharp and I find the framing to be pretty similar to a 35mm on full-frame. Here's a shot taken at 1/11th of a second at f/2 and ISO1250. I used NoiseNinja on it but am nonetheless pretty amazed by the results all things considered... 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/19013-28mm-as-a-standard-lens-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=204032'>More sharing options...
intex Posted March 17, 2007 Share #14 Posted March 17, 2007 For someone that would only have one lens for the foreseeable future on an M8, and would be used mostly for travel photography, which would be a better choice: Summicron 35mm 2.0 Elimart 28mm 2.8 If the pricing was not a factor at all. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted March 17, 2007 Share #15 Posted March 17, 2007 28mm Summicron ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbfilm Posted March 17, 2007 Share #16 Posted March 17, 2007 If can put my two pixels' worth... ;-) The character of the lens is a lot more than just the angle of view. if we agree on that, we will agree that the 28 will not become a 35 on an M8 A 28 is a 28 that happen to have a tighter crop lines when used on the M8 I think you will be doing yourself a disservice if you start multiplying the focal lengths by 1.33 If you prefer the stamp and the character of the 35mm on your analog camera, you should get a 35 on the M8. And just compose according to the bright lines that you see in the viewfinder. I find it much simpler this way. Cheers, Jean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted March 17, 2007 Share #17 Posted March 17, 2007 I don't have a 35mm lens at present, but I imagine that its effective 47mm field of view would also make it very useful as a standard lens on the M8. I find the 35mm more useful on the M8 than my 28mm. The M8 crop seems to be less than the 1.33 suggests. I took my M7 with a 50mm and compared the M8 with a 35mm to it and the M8 has a much larger field of view than the 47mm crop suggests. Somebody better at math than me should try measuring the fields of view and see what the true crop is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Campbell Posted March 17, 2007 Share #18 Posted March 17, 2007 the 28mm 2.8 is excellent wide open, is perfectly rectilinear, has modest vignetting at 2.8 and no vignetting by 5.6, and is very compact. It's one of the most flare-resistant lenses that I've ever worked with. It's "harsher" than the classic Leica look (which the 35mm and 50mm chrons deliver in spades, for example) - overall and micro contrast tend to be high, but this is only relative to some of the other Leica lenses - it still is a distinctively Leica lens. I work only in B&W so I shoot it without a filter which opens up the shadows a bit and mitigates the contrast. The focal length works well for me - it spends a lot of time on my camera - but this is a matter of personal taste. I was initially concerned that it might be a tad slow, but this has not been an issue since 1.92 improved high ISO performance and I've gotten my high ISO workflow straightened out. If you buy it you'll do yourself a favor if you can find a copy of the classic vented metal hood designed for the 35 and 50 chrons (Leica # 12585). It fits and works reliably on the 28 and is more satisfying than the plastic shade that comes with the lens. The 12585 is designed to be stored reversed on the lens - this doesn't quite work on the 28. I'm working on a work-around which I'll post once I sort it out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted March 17, 2007 Share #19 Posted March 17, 2007 I have the 28 summicron and it's my fantastic standard lens on the M8. I use it 90% of the times. If it was a f1.4 I would sell the Noctilux and never have to change lens again. Giulio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted March 18, 2007 Share #20 Posted March 18, 2007 Shots were taken in Chicago, along the river. These are just the JPG's and they printed remarkably well. The RAW files are of course even better. What they don't show is how deep into the shadows detail is kept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.