50 summilux asph on CL???

[jkjod]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello! I am trying to get into the rangefinder world. Here is my plan: purchase a 50 Lux ASPH or Hexanon 50 1.2 and put it on a Leica CL (I know it won't focus accurately at the larger apertures because of the shorter base length) because I'd like to have a film camera and in the next couple of years go the digital M route. Has anybody ever tried to shoot with either the 50 Lux ASPH or the Hex 50 1.2 on the CL? I know it sounds crazy but this is the cheapest camera to get into the M system, as I typically shoot digital. The CL would just be another body for the M lenses, and just for fun really. I am by no means a professional photographer, so sorry in advance in this seems ludicrous. Any and all help is appreciated, thanks!

[Advertisement]

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

[RobertJRB]

Hello! I am trying to get into the rangefinder world. Here is my plan: purchase a 50 Lux ASPH or Hexanon 50 1.2 and put it on a Leica CL (I know it won't focus accurately at the larger apertures because of the shorter base length) because I'd like to have a film camera and in the next couple of years go the digital M route. Has anybody ever tried to shoot with either the 50 Lux ASPH or the Hex 50 1.2 on the CL? I know it sounds crazy but this is the cheapest camera to get into the M system, as I typically shoot digital. The CL would just be another body for the M lenses, and just for fun really. I am by no means a professional photographer, so sorry in advance in this seems ludicrous. Any and all help is appreciated, thanks!

 

If you are on a budget, why do u want the 50 lux ASPH? Why not pick a used 50 cron or 50 summarit and add a used M body to it like a M6?

Or really go the CL way and use the 40/2 with it?

 

Do u really need that speed?

[jkjod]

The idea was to buy the lens I really wanted now, and the digital body down the road. I don't shoot film that often, the CL would serve this purpose rather than spending more on a body that will not likely get used daily in the future.

[lct]

...I know it won't focus accurately at the larger apertures because of the shorter base length...

True for the 60/1.2 but not for the 50/1.4 asph, in theory at least, as the effective base length (18.90mm) of the CL's rangefinder is still longer than the critical base length (17.86mm) at full aperture. I have never tried the 50/1.4 asph on the CL though. Welcome to the forum BTW.

[earleygallery]

You can buy a user M2 or M3 for CL money. Or buy a Voigtlander M mount body.

[jaapv]

The Summilux will probably take a big bite out of the viewfinder.

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It takes the meerest fraction off the bottom right corner, less than many lenses do with their appropriate frameline on an M.

 

Steve

[jkjod]

It takes the meerest fraction off the bottom right corner, less than many lenses do with their appropriate frameline on an M.

 

Steve

 

The 50 Lux on the CL, right? Have you ever tried this before? Thanks

[Guest rivercityrocker]

Personally I'd get real M body (maybe an M3) and a 50 Cron before I'd get a CL and a Lux.

[250swb]

The 50 Lux on the CL, right? Have you ever tried this before? Thanks

 

Yes I did it just before I replied to Jaap. It even cuts the wider 40mm frameline less than a 40mm lens and hood would cut it, and only just encroaches on the 50mm frameline. And that is with the sliding lens hood extended. A lot of lenses cut the corner of their appropriate frameline, but the Summilux, like the Summicron, has a sliding hood which makes it much more compact. Missing a bit of the image isn't important and the eye and brain soon learn their own tactics to compensate.

 

Steve

[Guest]

The idea was to buy the lens I really wanted now, and the digital body down the road. I don't shoot film that often, the CL would serve this purpose rather than spending more on a body that will not likely get used daily in the future.

 

Did you consider a Minolta CLE body, which has much more solid exposure measuring than the CL? This is a collectors' item, praised mainly by the ones, who want to sell it. Both CL and CLE are not suited for working distances under 3m with your dream lens.

 

+1 on the suggestion of a Voigty M body, since you want the minimal spending for an analog body.

 

Unless you already have the 1.4/50A, why not rent it and a M9 (or an M8 and a 1.4/35 not necessarily the Leica lens) for a week-end to find out if the rangefinder concept suits you? You'd have instant results and a fair chance to improve on the spot.

 

Otherwise there are very good 1.4/50 SLR lenses also with auto focus available, being twice that big but they cost a fraction. Many here tend to disregard costs when it comes to photography, while you have stated, that this is your entry to the Leica world now.

 

If the M1.4/50A lens is what you want ( you're right, it is fabulous!) as a novice best put it on a well calibrated M3 imo also, just as recommended before.

 

Have fun and please keep us posted.

[gvaliquette]

An M3 as the only M is not a good choice, unless you SWEAR that you'll never want a 35mm lens! Googled 35 mm lenses are more expensive and relatively hard to find. The M3 is a great camera ( I have one ), and is a great 2nd M, I find that, if I am going out with only one M body and several lenses, I take my M4-2. While it is true that you most likely can resell the M3 without a significant loss, why not go for an M2 or a M4-2, for about the same money.

 

About the CLE, which I do NOT own, I have read that, if the circuit board goes, you are left with a door stop, and a relatively light one,.for that matter ;-)

 

A Bessa is also a good, cheap, choice, or also a Zeiss body, although they are somewhat more expensive and harder to find.

 

Don't get me wrong, the CL is a GREAT little body ( yes, I do have one ). But, again, not the best choice as a lone M body.

 

Guy

[TomB_tx]

I agree. I have an M3 with a goggled 35 Summicron, and much prefer to use an M4-M6 with non-goggled 35. The M3 is nice for 50-90 lenses, but so are the others.

I can actually support a CL as an only M-mount body, as I have often traveled with one as my only camera - but think it is at its best with the 40 Summicron (or on a budget the 40 Voigtlander). It can use 50 mm lenses, but loses it's compact feel. (Kind of like a VW Beetle with a V-8 engine.) It is a very nice handling rangefinder.

[jkjod]

Thank you all for the replies. They have been very helpful. I will be sure to keep everyone posted with what happens.

[plewislambert]

"True for the 60/1.2 but not for the 50/1.4 asph, in theory at least, as the effective base length (18.90mm) of the CL's rangefinder is still longer than the critical base length (17.86mm) at full aperture.

I used my CL sometimes with a 50mm f1.5 Voigtlander but not at f1.5. Focus was always good. Mostly I used the 40mm Summicron and still like it. It was CLA'd and the mount modified to bring up the 35mm framelines on my M4-P, which is a whole lot better built than a CL but requires use of a handheld meter. These bodies are not expensive; mine never gave me a moment's worry even though it's 30 years old. I moved to an M9 but will keep the film camera. It's got something about it. I don't know how long an M9 would last!

Philip:)