Waiting for M 240

[Dr.KOL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good day,

 

Some tens of years I used to be very interested in photography. The last years I have been less active and my battery has been Canon 5D Mark II and 6 L-Series lenses. However, I am bored to carry this battery and when I saw the specification of new Leica M, I ordered it.

 

Now it is time to buy the first lenses. I want to get one "universal" lens, one for sceneries and one small tele; preferably also macro.

 

I have been thinking to buy now the following:

 

- 21 mm f/3.4. The alternative for this is Tri-Elmar 16/18/21 f/4. Which one would you take and why?

 

- 35 mm f/1.4 for general use

 

- Macro-Elmar 90 mm f/4

 

At the same time I will acquire the bag, filters, flash, etc. This will be quite an expensive package but I have allocated the needed funds.

 

In addition to my question about the wide angle lens, I would like to hear your opinion about two issues:

 

- how good or bad you consider my selection

 

- would it be better to take 90 mm f/2.0 rather than Macro-Elmar? I have for my Canon the 100 mm Macro L lens. However, the size of Macro-Elmar is making me excited and I thought that if needed, I could buy later 75 mm f/2.0.

 

I am grateful for all your comments.

 

Regards, KOL

[lct]

Welcome to the forum.

1. 21/3.4 or WATE is a matter of tastes. If you prefer smaller lenses the 21/3.4 is a must. Otherwise the WATE offers more flexibility if you like extra wides. I don't have experience with either lens though.

2. Your selection is a matter of tastes again. I don't like too wide gaps between focal lengths personally so if 35 is your favorite FL i would have chosen 24 or 28 and 50 or 75 instead.

3. 90/2 asph and 90/4 macro are different beasts indeed. I use mainly the former for low light and the latter is always in my bag due to its small size and closeup capabilities.

FWIW

[Jeff S]

Have you ever used a film or digital M before?

 

If not, I recommend getting your general lens (35, if that's your choice) first, then see how you like the RF experience before deciding on the next lens. I also think that using one lens will help you identify what you're missing based on your photo style and needs. Nobody else can help in that regard, except regarding technical differences.

 

It's unfortunate that Leica removed the frame line lever from the M, which allowed one to preview frame lines other than the ones corresponding to the lens attached. You might want to rent or borrow a used M9 while you're waiting for the M, since it has the preview lever, and basically handles like the new M when used in traditional RF mode.

 

Jeff

[Dr.KOL]

Thank you Jeff,

 

I had for years (still in the storage) a Contax with 28 mm, 50 mm and 90 mm Zeiss lenses. I liked this camera a lot before the digital era but I did not find much use for the 50 mm lens and I often hoped that the wide angle would be a bit wider.

 

One of the reasons I'm buying a new camera is that I will get a new baby in February. This time I have the time to take a lot of photos. When my three earlier kids were born 18, 17 and 14 years ago my life was very different and I was traveling more than 200 days annually abroad.

 

I live in Finnish Lapland and in Estonia and as far as I know there are no ways to rent cameras and lenses; at least not Leica.

 

My plan is, however, to use mostly the 35 mm lens for the first year but I would like something longer for portraits of the kid and my new wife and because we will stay quite long periods in Lapland, I would like to capture the beautiful scenery there. Life some 250 km north of the Polar Circle is pretty easy going and I will have lots of time there to play with the camera. Otherwise there is nothing else to do than to count the snow flakes in the winter and mosquitos in the summer.

 

Best regards, KOL

[Jeff S]

One of the reasons I'm buying a new camera is that I will get a new baby in February.

 

Congrats, in advance.

 

Not to dissuade you from the M, but a close friend of mine who uses Leica M, Canon DSLR, and various other larger format film cameras, depending on the subject and need, just bought an Olympus OM-D for taking pics of his new baby girl. He couldn't be happier with his decision, including the IQ, image stabilization, and small form factor. I've seen the results, and they are outstanding.

 

The M is a great camera (I plan to get one to supplement my M8.2s), but cameras are tools for a task. And, if you haven't regularly used an M (or even if you have), you might find that a moving baby may suggest a different tool (and for a lot less money).

 

You could still get a used M8.2 or M9 in the meantime to see how that works for you, and sell it if not, or if the M arrives. I don't think you'll lose much on the body, and the lenses will work the same on the M.

 

Just a thought.

 

Jeff

[lct]

....if you haven't regularly used an M (or even if you have), you might find that a moving baby may suggest a different tool...

+1

[erlingmm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The OP seems to be fully qualified to choose to work with a rangefinder. I never advise people to go stepwise via older models, the new cameras are so much better that it will give an entirely different experience.

I newborn child will not be much of a challenge with respect to focusing the first year, and by that time you will be an expert in using the camera.

Given your description of use, I would start with the 50mm Summilux, probably the best portrait lens in Leica's line-up, and sufficiently good aperture-wise to handle the northern dark winters. From there you can try different lenses. The 21 is very nice but hardly a portrait lens, the 75 APO is great for portraits, but possbly too close to the 50. I find myself using 35, 50 and 75 the most, it sounds like they are close, but actually have totally different perspectives and use for me.

[Dr.KOL]

Thank you for your reply.

 

I used to play a lot with cameras but that was a long time ago. I do not think that getting used to a RF camera will be a problem.

 

I like the idea of getting good equipment again and at the same time three good lenses. It is always possible to get something new or to change a lens I did not like.

 

I have tried to find comments about WADE but could not find much. What I would like to know is i.e. how is the image quality of WADE @ 21 mm compared with 21 mm f/3.4.

 

Furthermore, I would like to get some users' comments about 90 mm Macro.

 

Finally, any opinions about 75 mm f/2 vs. 90 mm f/2?

 

I thank you all for your kind comments.

 

Regards, KOL

[jdlaing]

Thank you for your reply.

 

I used to play a lot with cameras but that was a long time ago. I do not think that getting used to a RF camera will be a problem.

 

I like the idea of getting good equipment again and at the same time three good lenses. It is always possible to get something new or to change a lens I did not like.

 

I have tried to find comments about WADE but could not find much. What I would like to know is i.e. how is the image quality of WADE @ 21 mm compared with 21 mm f/3.4.

 

Furthermore, I would like to get some users' comments about 90 mm Macro.

 

Finally, any opinions about 75 mm f/2 vs. 90 mm f/2?

 

I thank you all for your kind comments.

 

Regards, KOL

 

I use the WATE regularly and find the image quality very good.

I whole heartedly recommend it.

It is a little pricey but with it you get essentially three lenses.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/architecture/288148-llano-county-courthouse.html

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/architecture/287110-lee-county-courthouse.html

[Jeff S]

... the new cameras are so much better that it will give an entirely different experience.

 

Maybe why I prefer the M8.2 to the M9?

 

The M isn't yet available for the OP's use, so no M pics will be taken in the meantime.

 

This is why we each give our own personal views and ideas, none of which is right or wrong, because only the user can decide based his/her own needs and preferences.

 

Jeff

[Dr.KOL]

Very true...

 

That's why I'm asking your personal views and ideas.

 

Best, KOL

[Jeff S]

That's why I'm asking your personal views and ideas.

 

Of course.

 

My comment was directed to erlingmm, whose first couple of sentences in his above post were aimed at refuting others' recommendations, and justifying his own, not merely providing you food for thought.

 

Jeff

[efreed2754]

Hi Doc. Think your proposed lineup will work fine. As has been suggested any number of combinations will enable you to capture great shots with the primary criteria how you see the world.

 

Some of us believe 35 is our normal and if you are one of them then go for the 35 Lux.

 

Better to have bigger difference between lenses so 21 is a fine choice. 24 is more normal and has no distortion. No wrong choice. I debated 18 vs WATE and picked the 18. Love having a very wide lens. If you like very, very wide and have the funds the WATE is wonderful. My MATE (28-35-50) is my favorite travel lens.

 

For tele your 90 Macro again will be fine. I have a 90 and 75 Lux and 75 Summicron and love the 75 focal length. Find it great for portraits and for general use. A good pair with 35 as is 21, 35,75 set. 75 Summicron focuses pretty close.

 

One other alternative is a 100 APO Macro lens for the reflex. Works on the new M and gives you telephoto and half life size, and 200 with APO double extender. Plus one of the best lenses ever made in that length.

 

After 40 years of shooting, find will get good shots with any lens. If you have a lot of lenses, you will find uses for each one at some time. If you have just one you will get good shots and not miss any when changing lenses. Everything is a series of trade-offs.

 

Ed

[Dr.KOL]

Thanks Ed,

 

You gave me a lot of food for thoughts.

 

Best, KOL

[HeinzX]

I use a 5 D III system with a lot of lenses, but have reduced the number of lenses a bit, because of weight reasons. Sold 24/1,4 II, 85/1,2 II, 50/1,2 and TS-E 90 mm. Kept two zooms the 24/70 II and the 70/200 IS II USM plus 2ply Canon extender III and the 100 and the 180 Macro, as well as the MP-E 65 and the TS-E 17mm. This only to explain, that my situation might have been similiar to your present. But apart from this, I wanted a small and leightweight and high quality system, therefore I bought a M 9 and now a M (the M 9 was sold). I decided for a the following lenses and I am very happy with them: 18 mm for ultra wide, 28/2.8 ASPH( a lens I use very often, small and very sharp and not sensible against frontlighting), a Summilux 50/1,4 ASPH FLE and a 90 mm Macro 4.0 (plus extender). Apart from this I use a R Macro 60 mm (occasionally with Leica extender or/plus APO Leica 2 ply converter ) on a Novoflex adapter, (sometimes on the Canon 5 D III with the matching Novoflex adapter) - but this lens mainly at home.

[Dr.KOL]

Thanks a lot!

 

I have thought to keep 24-70 L II and 70-200/2.8 L II. When it will be introduced, I will probably get 14-24/2.8 and sometimes I'm dreaming about buying the new 200-400/4 with the 1.4 extender. Naturally, I will also keep my 100 L Macro.

 

I am trying to read as much as ever possible about different Leica lenses. I.e. I am trying to understand if 75/2.0 is as great as 90/2.0 is said to be...

 

I will order all the lenses and filters at the same time by the end of the week. If I should decide just now, I would take 21/3.4 & 35/1.4 & 75/2. With this trio I would have space later for 50 mm & 90 mm lenses.

 

I hope the discussion will continue. It is very helpful.

 

Thanks and regards, KOL

[lct]

I'm planning to acquire the 21/3.4 soon or late as i find my 21/2.8 asph too bulky but i want do see how the next firmware update will behave with the former. Otherwise i do own both current 35/1.4 and 75/2 and they make a suberb combo.

[Dr.KOL]

Thank you for your reply.

 

I am also thinking about a combo of 24/3.8 + 50/1.4 + 75/2. And then replace 35 mm by acquiring X2.

 

This combo would give space for a WADE + 90 mm...

 

Best, KOL

[lct]

Depends on which FL works better for you, 35 or 50? If it is 50, the gap between 24 and 50 would be too wide IMO and that between 50 and 75 too shallow. If you see the world in 50mm, as i do, 35/50/90 would be a more classical choice. A 21, a 24 or a 28 could complement that nicely. But again it is a matter of tastes and you'll probably get as many advices as posters in your thread. My best advice would be to decide if 35 or 50 is your favorite focal length before ordering anything.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[rirakuma]

I have the WATE and its fantastic. Its sharp wide open and the distortion isn't a problem if you're doing landscapes. That being said I only got it because I occasionally use the wide end also the short end so it was a no brainer to carry one lens instead of two. If you're confident you can be satisfied with just a 21mm then I believe the 21SEM (which I have not used) will be the best performer.