Dhuff Posted December 16, 2012 Share #1 Â Posted December 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just put down my deposit on a new M (hopefully arriving by February), the Summilux-M 35 mm f/1.4 ASPH and the AP-Summicron-M 90 mm f/2 ASPH. My subjects are varied - I shoot landscape, cityscape and people. I have a bit more in my budget - so what do you recommend? I am thinking either the new 16/18/21, the Summicron-M 50 f/1.4 or the Telephoto 135mm f/3.4. I know it is a wide-open question asked a ton of times, but I would appreciate some experienced views. Thanks in advance. This should be fun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 16, 2012 Posted December 16, 2012 Hi Dhuff, Take a look here New to Leica M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted December 16, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted December 16, 2012 Welcome to the forum. I am a bit lost at your question, I must confess. If you don't know whether you want a 16 mm or a 135, how can you expect somebody else to tell you? I would start by putting the 35 on the camera, the 90 in a cupboard and just shoot the camera with that single lens for three months. After that you will know what you want. Possibly nothing, possibly (although I doubt it) you will start using the 90, maybe you will get a 24 or a 50. Only you yourself can tell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 16, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted December 16, 2012 Welcome to the forum. Â If you don't know yourself what to buy, I would say you have no need for any of them. Wait until you do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 16, 2012 Share #4 Â Posted December 16, 2012 Snap, Jaap Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhuff Posted December 16, 2012 Author Share #5 Â Posted December 16, 2012 Good grief. How about, I find that the 135 is excellent in X or Y regard, but dislike its limitations as far as Z? I think I will stick with the camera, but move on to a different forum. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 17, 2012 Share #6 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Lenses are tools - they get chosen because we want to take certain photographs with them. Not because they are excellent in X,Y or Z, whatever you may mean by that. If you find you need for example a 24 mm for some of your photographs, you may decide whether you need a fast or a slower one, whether distortion is an issue, etc. Then you can find out which one you need. We'll be happy to help. But throwing out a net " which lens is best" is not going to work. Because each and every lens (at least with Leica) is "best" for a stated purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 17, 2012 Share #7 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Welcome to the forum. You've ordered probably the best modern 35/1.4 and 90/2 available but there is a gap between them. I would try a 50 if i were you and the 50/1.4 asph would match very well both of those lenses. 135/3.4? Why not if you envision to use the EVF, otherwise the 135mm frame of the VF is very small really and focussing will be difficult at full aperture unless you use a magnifier. 16/18/21? Another good idea but you'll need the EVF as well unless you like juggling with optical accessory finders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted December 17, 2012 Share #8  Posted December 17, 2012 @Dhuff  Forget the remarks. They come with the territory here.  Listen I have your 35 and love it so much I use it probably 85% of the time. I also have the 90 which is a great performer.  For me landscape is often wider even down to 18 on fixed or 16 on the WATE 16-18-21.  I would recommend renting a lens to try before putting any more funds into your great start as a system.  Who nows you might even decide you want a long lens like the R 180/3.4 with R Adapter for the M.  Be patient, shoot a lot and then come on back with that experience and talk some more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonki-M Posted December 17, 2012 Share #9 Â Posted December 17, 2012 it is rather hard to recommend a focal length b/c there are myriad reasons why people choose what they choose. listing pros and cons mean next to nothing b/c tele and wide angle serves a very different purpose, especially if you are talking about 16 vs 135... Â it's not like we dont want to be helpful, but the question can only be answer by you. Doing as Jaap suggested is one of the best way to determine your decision in your dilemma; go shoot with a 35, see if you yearn for a wider lens, or you think the lens is too wide. or vise versa, go with the 90 alone for a while, and see what you think about the tele focal length... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted December 17, 2012 Share #10 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Welcome. Tough crowd here, huh? But Jaap is right: hard to give a sensible answer when your question spans the whole spectrum of available M focal lenghts... If you absolutely need an answer: get a 50mm (note that there is no such thing as a Summicron 50/1.4: it's either a Summicron 50/2.0 or a Summilux 50/1.4), which will give you a balanced 35/50/90 kit. You'll figure out later whether you need wider and/or longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 17, 2012 Share #11 Â Posted December 17, 2012 I know it is a wide-open question asked a ton of times, but I would appreciate some experienced views. Thanks in advance. Â Hmmm you don't seem to appreciate others views. OK, buy a Noctilux. Now, shall we tell you what to have for dinner tonight?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted December 17, 2012 Share #12  Posted December 17, 2012 Hi David and welcome to the forum  I agree with the others that nobody can really advise which lens, let alone focal length, to buy. I've seen the galleries on your site, though, and it seems that you've predominantly used longer focal lengths in the past, is that right? If this is correct and you have an M on order which is to replace your current equipment, then you should consider the longer R lenses (there are threads in the R forum about that).  Naturally, if you're supplementing as opposed to replacing your other photo equipment with the M then the situation is different of course. The 35 FLE is great, I have one and use it extensively on film (I don't use digital). The 50 Asph is even greater (imho) but you may or may not find 35 and 50 to be too close.  Two pieces of advice to anyone moving to the M: do not feel a need to buy the latest Leica lenses. As nice as they are, buying the current lenses risks missing a veeeery large part of what the M system can offer. As much as I like the 35 FLE and 50 Asph, I use old M mount and screw mount lenses too and sometimes even more than the new lenses (for instance I celebrated last year's Christmas holidays with only my Leica II and the Summitar - an absolutely brilliant combo).  Secondly, don't overlook the "slower" lenses, including current lenses like the Summarits. With a digital body you are much less constrained by their "less wide" aperture, except perhaps artistically for the occasional shot (unless you're a bokeh junkie in which case it will be for every shot and you can have nothing but an 1.4 or faster lens).  As for 135mm, I have considered the 135AA but have read a lot on this forum about the 135 Tele-Elmar which is a steal at current prices and which apparently performs extraordinarily well (in the Wiki you will find links under each lens to forum discussions with very useful advice). So that's the one I will eventually purchase.  In any event, the bottom line is that only you can decide which focal length to buy and which lens at a given focal length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 17, 2012 Share #13 Â Posted December 17, 2012 I think I will stick with the camera, but move on to a different forum. Thanks. Â Cheerio. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted December 17, 2012 Share #14 Â Posted December 17, 2012 If you are already getting the 35 and 90 lenses and you shoot mostly citiscape, landscape and portraits I think the WATE (16-18-21) would be a good lens to look at and giving you a good range from 90 to 16. the 50 summilux ASPH is one hell of a lens and the one I use most of the time. In fact I have 2 bodies with the 50 lux on one and the 28 summicron ASPH on the other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted December 17, 2012 Share #15 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Cheerio. Â Really Ian, is this how we should behave here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted December 17, 2012 Share #16 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Yes I can see the Christmas spirit is settling in on the Leica Forum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted December 17, 2012 Share #17  Posted December 17, 2012 I just put down my deposit on a new M (hopefully arriving by February), the Summilux-M 35 mm f/1.4 ASPH and the AP-Summicron-M 90 mm f/2 ASPH. My subjects are varied - I shoot landscape, cityscape and people. I have a bit more in my budget - so what do you recommend?  Hello, I too think, that two lenses should suffice for the moment. Land-, cityscape and people, 35+90 are very good. You could look at the 75er instead of the 90er. For this multiple lens 16/18/21 you need a gigantic optical finder. I suggest to save your budget for a move to the new M, coming somewhere in 2013. This new M has live view, with live view there isn't a need for optical finders any more. Jan  PS Leica would appreciate of course, if you buy all of their products from north/west to south/east. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveclem Posted December 17, 2012 Share #18 Â Posted December 17, 2012 Good grief. How about, I find that the 135 is excellent in X or Y regard, but dislike its limitations as far as Z? I think I will stick with the camera, but move on to a different forum. Thanks. Â Â Nothing wrong, obstreperous or touchy about the responses you got from your initial post. If you feel the need to have a hissy fit perhaps you should just buy the lot and hang anyone else's opinion. Rangefinders suit wider angle lenses, you're not n the oil business are you? Â Â Apologies to mods, been a long day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted December 17, 2012 Share #19 Â Posted December 17, 2012 I see that you seem to have some money burning a hole into your pockets. Good luck, and I'm a tiny bit envious. I think I'd have a go at the MATE (the other Tri-Elmar) in your place. However, that's neither here nor there. Besides, I already have more lenses than I can reasonably handle. Â Instead of having members writing their recommendations especially for your completely unknown tastes, why not hang around here and have a look at about a zillion posts here discussing exactly what you're asking? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 17, 2012 Share #20  Posted December 17, 2012 ...I already have more lenses than I can reasonably handle... Exactly what i keep repeating before acquiring a new lens. Pity that the Coué method does not work for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.