Do We need fast and asph lenses with the MM?

[bruniroquai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've just came back of my first walk around with the MM, huge files!!! Just with the Cron 40 C and the files are lovely!

 

I'm trying to set the output file like HP5+ so a lot of grey.

 

Do We need fast and asph lenses for the MM?

 

I'm think that with the 50 and 35 lux asph FLE I have more than I need and probably a summarit will be much better for street work and even interior with the MM sensor and ISO capabilities, anyway any of these lenses exceed probably our photographic skills, don`t You think?

 

Cheers!

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest Marc G.]

I think you're underestimating the Summarits. The 35 is optically as sharp as the Summicron asph, even a little sharper when you get to the outer zones of the image area. I'd suggest looking at older lenses.

[bruniroquai]

That is my point, I think it's not necessary expensive and fast asph lenses to make great pictures, don't You think?

 

I will sell my 35 and 50 FLE and go for the 35 and 50 Summarits, but... to get the optimal quality prints, there is much difference between a picture taken with an asph and a picture taken with a non asph?

[Guest Marc G.]

it all comes down to taste. if you like to look at 2m sized prints with a magnifier then you'd be best off with a 50 APO.

 

I'd just sell the 35 FLE and get a Summarit, keep the 50 for the smooth bokeh for portraits, you'd miss it.

 

the 75 and 90 summarits are awesome too

[Jager]

Congrats on the new MM. It's an incredible camera.

 

I'll respectfully disagree that the high file quality of the MM obviates the benefit of good, fast glass. Not that a good photographer won't get great images regardless of what modest lens he might mount on the front; and that a not-so-good photographer will continue to shoot dreck, in spite of having the best glass that money can buy.

 

Better is always better...

[jdlaing]

Do we NEED them?

Probably not.

 

Do we WANT them?

Most definitely.

 

Better is a subjective thought.

Different would be more accurate.

[bruniroquai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

it all comes down to taste. if you like to look at 2m sized prints with a magnifier then you'd be best off with a 50 APO.

 

I'd just sell the 35 FLE and get a Summarit, keep the 50 for the smooth bokeh for portraits, you'd miss it.

 

the 75 and 90 summarits are awesome too

 

And what about buy the 35 and 75 for portraits? 75 and 2.5 is good enough for smooth bokeh?

 

Congrats on the new MM. It's an incredible camera.

 

I'll respectfully disagree that the high file quality of the MM obviates the benefit of good, fast glass. Not that a good photographer won't get great images regardless of what modest lens he might mount on the front; and that a not-so-good photographer will continue to shoot dreck, in spite of having the best glass that money can buy.

 

Better is always better...

 

So, is always better to buy the expensive ones?

 

 

Do we NEED them?

Probably not.

 

Do we WANT them?

Most definitely.

 

Better is a subjective thought.

Different would be more accurate.

 

what's different are You thinking, jdlaing? In terms of image quality or rendering? or the rendering implicates an image quality point?

 

 

Thanks!

[250swb]

 

Do We need fast and asph lenses for the MM?

 

 

There are no 'bad' Leica lenses, and a Summarit at f/5.6 is going to be very close to a Summilux at f/5.6, it is really down to whether you need faster lenses. It is nice to have the best, but not essential, even with the files that the Monochrom can make. What can make more difference is good technique, both in shooting, like using a tripod for super critical work, or in post processing and taking care of highlights and shadows etc.

 

Steve

[jdlaing]

And what about buy the 35 and 75 for portraits? 75 and 2.5 is good enough for smooth bokeh?

 

 

 

So, is always better to buy the expensive ones?

 

 

 

 

what's different are You thinking, jdlaing? In terms of image quality or rendering? or the rendering implicates an image quality point?

 

 

Thanks!

 

Rendering.

[Guest Marc G.]

And what about buy the 35 and 75 for portraits? 75 and 2.5 is good enough for smooth bokeh?

 

 

 

So, is always better to buy the expensive ones?

 

 

 

 

what's different are You thinking, jdlaing? In terms of image quality or rendering? or the rendering implicates an image quality point?

 

 

Thanks!

 

the 35 and 75 summarits are probably the sweet spots in the summarit line. the 35 is overall slightly better than the 35/2 asph and the 75 summarit is very very close to the 75 APO summicron. with a 75 you always get blur, no matter which aperture you choose.

[FrozenInTime]

The Summilux will not always be the best lens, but it's a great all rounder and there are times speed matters.

 

I shot the MM at a pre-dawn balloon launch - and ISO 5000 1/30 @1.4 did not fully yield the results I wanted; mind you people were using flashlights to see what they were doing.

Similarly indoors if there is any action you need as much speed as you can get if you want to avoid motion blur.

 

However your Summarit points are also valid; a small lens is great for street and travel.

 

The solution is to have both and use the right one for the job.

If not the Summarit, the compact VC and Zeiss lenses hold up well.

[Fgcm]

Summarit 35 and 75 are very good, but Summarit 75 renders in a very different way

I love it.

But for portraits I would use an Elmarit-M 90 (the Elmarit with telescopic hood, not the older Tele Elmarit).

 

To answer the main question, the only aspherical lenses i kept after purchasing and selling too many lenses are a Summilux 50 asph and an Elmarit 28 asph.

I traded a summilux 35 asph, an Elmarit 24 asph.

The summicron 90 asph is too heavy. Noctilux 0,95 is a piece of concrete attached to your camera.

 

The M system is a SMALL, SYMPLE and LIGHT system

 

So, keep it light, simple and small.

 

Franco

[Fgcm]

To give you an idea of what you can do with a Summarit 35, tacke a look at this backlit scene to the 1:1 crop of the people.

Very few lenses can do the same.

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!

[algrove]

For the answer is NO.

I find that many older lenses render very nicely on the MM. I fact I posted a test of about 8-9 50mm lenses on the MM some time ago and the older ones took the prize for me after excluding the APO50. Agree the 40c Cron is a terrific lens for $500-600 which I also included in that test.

[Fgcm]

and these are samples of what you get out of an Elmarit-M 90

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!

[algrove]

This thread is about the Monochrom M just to be clear.

[Guest Marc G.]

Summarit 35 and 75 are very good, but Summarit 75 renders in a very different way

I love it.

But for portraits I would use an Elmarit-M 90 (the Elmarit with telescopic hood, not the older Tele Elmarit).

 

To answer the main question, the only aspherical lenses i kept after purchasing and selling too many lenses are a Summilux 50 asph and an Elmarit 28 asph.

I traded a summilux 35 asph, an Elmarit 24 asph.

The summicron 90 asph is too heavy. Noctilux 0,95 is a piece of concrete attached to your camera.

 

The M system is a SMALL, SYMPLE and LIGHT system

 

So, keep it light, simple and small.

 

Franco

 

You talk about weight. The Elmarit-M weighs around 400g, the 90 APO Summicron comes in at 470g. I doubt you would notice the 70g difference, but you would sometimes notice the 1 stop the Summicron opens up further. The Summarit weighs the same (including the hood) as the Elmarit-M. I had the Summarit and Summicron for a few days to compare them, decided to sell the 90 Summarit and keep the Summicron as the weight issue is pretty much a non-issue. If you want a 90mm lens you have to know that these are heavy. Want to keep it light? Go with the 35/50 Summarits or the 28 Elmarit asph.

[Ecar]

If you want a 90mm lens you have to know that these are heavy.

Or get a Tele-Elmarit or the Macro-Elmar if you can live with f/4.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[01af]

And what about buy the [summarit-M] 35 mm and 75 mm for portraits?

What would be a good idea.

 

 

75 mm and 1:2.5 is good enough for smooth bokeh?

The smoothness of bokeh doesn't depend on the aperture number ... and in particular, it does not necessarily become smoother with wider apertures. To the contrary—many lenses have their harshest bokeh wide open and will show significantly smoother bokeh when stopping down a bit.

 

The aperture controls depth-of-field and the degree of blur beyond DOF. Wider apertures mean more blurred backgrounds—which is not to be confused with bokeh. An aperture of f/2.5 in a 75 mm or 90 mm lens will yield very blurred backgrounds when the lens is focused at portraiture distance (1.5 - 3 m) and the background is sufficiently distant. A close background, however, won't blur very much even at f/2 or f/1.4.

 

 

So, is always better to buy the expensive ones?

No, of course not.

[Jeff S]

 

I will sell my 35 and 50 FLE and go for the 35 and 50 Summarits, but... to get the optimal quality prints, there is much difference between a picture taken with an asph and a picture taken with a non asph?

 

Making optimal quality prints depends on a host of critical factors, not the least of which is the user's skills. There are as many variables in printing as there are in taking a photo in the first place. In the digital world, the workflow spans everything from camera/lens to software, printer, papers, inks, profiles, matting and framing, lighting and display conditions, and all the settings and techniques associated with these factors, not to mention a worthwhile pic to start.

 

I have found, over many years (including darkroom work) that as much or more benefits derive from decisions and techniques after the pic is taken as before. The lens is but one piece of the puzzle. Good photographers and printers can work magic with minimal gear; others struggle even with the latest and greatest stuff.

 

Just as in another of your recent posts, I suggest you actually look at prints, and experiment with printing yourself. I think you'll find that the lens will be one of your lesser concerns when it comes to making prints that 'sing'.

 

The best reason IMO for replacing expensive lenses with lesser cost ones is that you can use the difference to set up your own printing workflow, not because of some rendering issues...at least not until you learn how to use the tools you have for maximum picture taking and printing advantage.

 

Jeff