Third Lens

[Maksarti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you everyone for your time and comment, i highly appreciate your opinion and it is truly important for me. I know that it is up to me and my style of shooting but I was more looking in to what people say comparing or choosing those lenses for themselves.

My first two lenses where 50 lux and 35 cron because I need them, I can't leave without those focal lengths, and i use them 50%/50%. But 21 or 90 is more of a new wave lenses for myself, and i can't decide what i really want. I know that sounds very amateur and stupid but it is what it is.

off topic:

I have a philosophy of that portrait is good if we see context, I mean something that shapes and helps to understand story, for example environment where someone lives, or place, or even movement. I don't try to say that emotional portrait is less important or worse, because eyes can sometimes tell more story than any environment.

 

Thank you again for your time and comments!

[jaapv]

If yu cannot decide what you want you can do one of two things:

 

1. Buy secondhand (affordable) Leica lenses in the relevant focal length. You can always sell them with little or no loss if they do not pan out.

2.Or you can buy ( the surprisingly good, just look for a good copy) Voigtländer lenses. Even if you do not use them that often, they are affordable enough to keep for occasional use.

 

What you should not do is go for the most expensive new lenses and take a financial hit when they turn out not to be what you wanted.

 

The nice thing about the M system is that there are no bad lenses out there.

[Advertisement]

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

[Peter H]

............

off topic:

I have a philosophy of that portrait is good if we see context, I mean something that shapes and helps to understand story, for example environment where someone lives, or place, or even movement. I don't try to say that emotional portrait is less important or worse, because eyes can sometimes tell more story than any environment.

 

Thank you again for your time and comments!

 

I'm not sure why you say "off topic" because it feels very on topic to me, and suggests that a wider rather than a longer lens might be better suited to your style preference.

[efreed2754]

I'm not sure why you say "off topic" because it feels very on topic to me, and suggests that a wider rather than a longer lens might be better suited to your style preference.

 

This. Based on your "context" viewpoint, agree wider will get more usage. They do for me which is why have an 18 and 24.

 

So 21 or WATE are good solutions. At some future time you will get a longer lens, 75, 90 or 135, or all three.

 

And agree with Jaap that used may be a good solution especially for lenses that aren't used as much.

[Jennifer]

My first two lenses where 50 lux and 35 cron because I need them, I can't leave without those focal lengths, and i use them 50%/50%. But 21 or 90 is more of a new wave lenses for myself, and i can't decide what i really want. I know that sounds very amateur and stupid but it is what it is.

off topic:

I have a philosophy of that portrait is good if we see context, I mean something that shapes and helps to understand story, for example environment where someone lives, or place, or even movement. I don't try to say that emotional portrait is less important or worse, because eyes can sometimes tell more story than any environment.

 

Thank you again for your time and comments!

 

Given what you say here your 50 Lux should work well for you as a portrait lens. Leaving you free to indulge and have fun with a 21 SEM.

[Maksarti]

Thank you Everyone for advice, I ended up getting 21 SE, and Already love it! It is a great lens with it's own signature.

[Numbers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Congratulations. That is a great choice! I absolutely love mine. So is the 90mm next? ;-)

[Maksarti]

90 is absolutely stunning as well! I think when time comes (around Christmas) i will add another thread to this forum with a question about 90 or 135 ) or maybe some retro lens with special rendering? Mmmmm so many roads to go, so little time

[Jennifer]

90 is absolutely stunning as well! I think when time comes (around Christmas) i will add another thread to this forum with a question about 90 or 135 ) or maybe some retro lens with special rendering? Mmmmm so many roads to go, so little time

 

I think you prioritised well. However, by way of a tease, if you've not already seen this post, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/342022-brugge.html , that was taken with my 90 APO.

 

IME when used appropriately the 90 is indeed a lovely lens.

Edited August 13, 2014 by Jennifer

[sblutter]

For the heck of it I picked up a Voight 75mm f:2.5 last yr. My 1st 75.

 

Its sharp as heck, renders very well with nice Boka (8 blades). Useful for tight street shots, portraits, villages etc. Very handy. Spent a month or so shooting with it exclusively to learn its strengths.

 

Along with 50 'cron & 28 'cron ASPH, its replaced Tele-Elmarit 90 in my travel kit, which wasn't getting much work

 

Since you're considering very expensive lenses, obviously cost isn't the question. My recc is based on your predilection for longer lengths. If like 75, you can sell & replace with a Leica one, tho I doubt you'll see any IQ difference in even a large print.

 

Just sayin'... and enjoy your travels!

[sblutter]

28, 50, 75 or

21, 50, 90

 

Or...

 

To me, 50 is always the anchor - move out from there depending on where you're going and what subject matter most attracts your eye

 

If you're disciplining yourself to just 3, I'd be sure to have them distinctly different. (I would end up shooting 90% w/ the 50, cuz that's me)

[Herr Barnack]

Your lens choices should be geared toward the kind of shooting you do. You have a 35mm and a 50mm; my choice for my first two lenses were the 28mm and the 50mm. These two focal lenses are my all around lenses. They cover about 80-90% of the shooting I do, which is documentary and street.

 

My next lens was the 90/2 APO. This lens is outstanding for portraits and shooting wildlife that can be approached reasonably closely such as deer or other animals that have become habituated to humans. The 90 APO is also a must have for documentary work where you cannot get close to your subject without being intrusive or disruptive to the situation.

 

My newest lens is the Super Elmar 21mm f/3.4 - I love this little lens. It is breathtakingly sharp. At f/3.4, it is not a slow lens in my view; I consider it a medium speed lens. With the extreme depth of field that the 21mm focal length provides, f/3.4 is not slow, particularly if you are shooting with a digital M. The 21mm field of view lets you get really close to your subject while including a significant slice of the subject's immediate environment for context. A 21 is a great lens for photographing in confined spaces indoors and for documentary or street photography at less than arm's length distances.

 

While many people like the WATE (16-18-21mm f/4), I have never really cared for this lens or its big brother, the MATE (28-35-50mm f/4). The maximum aperture of f/4 is relatively slow, particularly if you are using a film M camera which does not have the variable ISO capability that the digital M bodies have. With the variable ISO of digital M cameras, f/4 is less of an issue, but the size and bulk of the WATE and MATE lenses is still a factor. If I can have a smaller, lighter lens, I will go that route pretty much every time.

 

The above are my opinions and what works for me. YMMV.

[HeinzX]

It depends if you will change your style of photography with the M240 against your style with the Canon. If not, you are well advised to go for a 90 mm. I had for 90 mm a Summarit - which was good, but changed it for a Macro Elmar because I wanted a less voluminous and lighter lens. This lens is excellent and very small. But I personally use much more my white angel lenses, esp. the Elmarit-M 1:2,8/28 mm ASPH, which is extremly small, very good and is a bargain fot its price and the Super-Elmar-M 1:3,8/18 ASPH for extreme situations (I like this lens very much). My 4th lens is the Summilux-M 1:1,4/50mm ASPH - excellent but not as often used by me as the wide angel lenses. But I have to confess, that I use a Canon system too - a 5 D III with a lot of lenses from 17 mm up to 200 mm plus an 2 ply extender. So I can change, if I need a special lens like the MP-E 65 or the 17mm TS-E or tele lenses. By the way there exist a Fotodiox adapter, which makes it possible to use EF lenses of Canon with a M 240, but to adjust the aperture it is necessary to do this before with a Canon camera. I own this one and it is great for using the MP-E or the 17 TS-E with the Leica M 240. Up to my knowledge Quenox has a similar adapter with a built in iris diaphragm which would be much more convinient, but unfortunately not for adapting EF lenses on a Leica M (i.e. for Sony it exists). If a version for Leica M will come, I surely will buy it.

[paulsydaus]

I would recommend the Macro 90mm f/4. It's not fast but it's tiny, and gives you Macro options down the track. I would also recommend the 75/2 and the 24/3.8...

[MarkP]

...I shoot more with 70-200 then anything else.

 

So is a 90 or 135 is next?

[Maksarti]

So is a 90 or 135 is next?

 

I think it will be 90, just love test shoots with it i made in the store (and around)

[CheshireCat]

A 90mm would be the logical choice, but I would stay away from the Apo Summicron 90 until a new FLE version is released.

[Jennifer]

A 90mm would be the logical choice, but I would stay away from the Apo Summicron 90 until a new FLE version is released.

 

Is that likely??

[CheshireCat]

Is that likely??

 

No idea.

The Apo 90 was released in 1998, and people seem to still love this lens.

I think it should be upgraded with a FLE and better apochromatic correction, but it is just me...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jennifer]

No idea.

The Apo 90 was released in 1998, and people seem to still love this lens.

I think it should be upgraded with a FLE and better apochromatic correction, but it is just me...

 

I'm one of those people who loves the APO 90.

 

Though I might well be wrong, but doesn't Leica tend to only employ FLE's with Summilux lenses?