A moment of reflection

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I went through a whole lot of old photographs lately, to determine which lens took the largest number that I like most - interesting results, if wholly subjective. .

 

1. Summilux 24

2. Summilux 50 asph

3. Super-Elmar 18

4. Elmar-M 50 collapsible

5. Elmarit-M 90

6. Color-Skopar 75

7..Summicron 35 asph.

 

On my Monochrom, just three:

1. Biogon-C 35

2. Tele-Tessar 85

3. Canon 1.8/50 LTM

 

 

I was really surprised about the rating for the colour photography, for instance, I would not have expected the Summicron to end way down, nor the Super-Elmar to come so high, as I do not use it too much. The same for the Elmar-M; I use it mainly for film.

[Advertisement]

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

[cirke]

I've sold my 24 Summilux for the 28 Summilux and I was maybe wrong, the 24 Summilux has something magical

[jaapv]

It pushed out both my 21 and 28 lenses - they get only very little use nowadays.

[Paul J]

Interesting. When you say "like the most" do you mean the image or the rendering?

 

I have recently found that while my favourite lens is my Noctilux, many of my favourite pictures are from my 35 Summilux or 21 Super Elmar because of the extra compositional space and dynamic it gives.

 

However I've also found this move around in a personal trend which shifts distinctly from periods of wide angle compositional sort of pictures to tighter slices with longer lengths 90 and 135.

 

Too add things further, on several occasions I've had photos I've really not liked, and then years later they've become favourites because of a shift in my own perception.

 

The shifting perception and psychology of it is is quite fascinating and becomes more interesting when you look back retrospectively at how it's affected your overall style.

[Paul J]

It will be interesting to see how this affects your lens choice now you know this.

[pgk]

I've tried this but for me it simply doesn't work. You might like to try again and figure it out for discrete time periods - say monthly or every two months. I find that I pick up a lens and use it - then shift for a time, then move on again, but eventually return and start again. So all my lenses get used but if I were to look at specific times, some would get more use than others depending on what I was doing and where I was. I'm always loath to dispose of any lenses these days because I find that doing so tends to mean regretting doing so and an expensive re-buy.

[dem331]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting. When you say "like the most" do you mean the image or the rendering?

 

I have recently found that while my favourite lens is my Noctilux, many of my favourite pictures are from my 35 Summilux or 21 Super Elmar because of the extra compositional space and dynamic it gives.

 

However I've also found this move around in a personal trend which shifts distinctly from periods of wide angle compositional sort of pictures to tighter slices with longer lengths 90 and 135.

 

Too add things further, on several occasions I've had photos I've really not liked, and then years later they've become favourites because of a shift in my own perception.

 

The shifting perception and psychology of it is is quite fascinating and becomes more interesting when you look back retrospectively at how it's affected your overall style.

 

 

I agree. It is also interesting how when other people look at your photos they will often remark how good a picture is and it will often be the one that you almost discarded.

[jaapv]

Interesting. When you say "like the most" do you mean the image or the rendering?

 

I have recently found that while my favourite lens is my Noctilux, many of my favourite pictures are from my 35 Summilux or 21 Super Elmar because of the extra compositional space and dynamic it gives.

 

However I've also found this move around in a personal trend which shifts distinctly from periods of wide angle compositional sort of pictures to tighter slices with longer lengths 90 and 135.

 

Too add things further, on several occasions I've had photos I've really not liked, and then years later they've become favourites because of a shift in my own perception.

 

The shifting perception and psychology of it is is quite fascinating and becomes more interesting when you look back retrospectively at how it's affected your overall style.

For me the two go together - as I said, wholly subjective. In my case I find the likes-dislikes fairly consistent over the last ten years. Of course I discounted the other -mentally main- part of my photography, wildlife.

[Wonzo]

I've sold my 24 Summilux for the 28 Summilux and I was maybe wrong, the 24 Summilux has something magical

 

Erick, would you please explain, what the special magic is about the 24mm compared to the 28mm Summilux ? Very interesting for me, as I'm interested in either lens ...

[keithlaban.co.uk]

My lens choice is almost entirely dependent on the focal length needed for the task in hand. Get that right and half the battle is won, get it wrong and it's lost.

 

Of course it would be a different matter if I had multiple choices of the same or similar focal lengths but unfortunately I spent my working life as an artist and photographer rather than a dentist

[jaapv]

I think GAS  is democratic and not restricted to any profession

It is a good thing to analyse one's results from time to time.

[cirke]

Erick, would you please explain, what the special magic is about the 24mm compared to the 28mm Summilux ? Very interesting for me, as I'm interested in either lens ...

 

The 24 Summilux has something that I find in the 50 Noctilux,  like in a dream ,  I don't find the same thing in the 28 Summilux, it's very sharp with a nice Boke

it comes maybe from more vignetting and less sharpness (a default) in the 24 mm wide open

 

I regret my 24 :-)

 

If a 35 Noctilux comes this fall I shall certainly sell my 28 and 35 Summilux

[Peter Branch]

 

........... 3. Super-Elmar 18 ..........I was really surprised about the rating for the colour photography, for instance, I would not have expected the Summicron to end way down, nor the Super-Elmar to come so high, ..........

 

Absolutely no surprise to me.  I love my 18mm SEM, it's helped me get a lot of good pictures.

 

I sold my 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH - it never seemed to work for me, the images were always "disappointing".  Replaced it with a 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH FLE and am constantly amazed by the quality of the images it produces.  

[sblitz]

An interesting list, to say the least -- thanks for posting. I never used a 24, opting instead for 28 and 21. Always thought it was too betwixt and between. I know its subjective, and your view won't necessarily be mine, but what made the 24 push the 28 and 21 out? Also, why two 50s and these two in particular. Do you see that much of a rendering difference? Just curious -- and hoping your answers don't entice me to add a few more lenses to my stable :-)

[Hayek]

Jaap--

 

You haven't succumbed to the siren song of the 50 APO? 

[jaapv]

Basically two fifties because of the difference in size and weight. The Summicron 50 does appeal but for me adds too little per Euro. Finance-related diminishing returns.

As for the 24 I went for it because I was very much taken by the idea of a wide angle with shallow DOF at its introduction and went for 24 as being more universally useable. After I bought it I found it covered all my medium wide angle needs. Indoors and for evening reportage it is my first choice grab-to-go lens. I already wore out one lens hood I guess the answer is that It wins out on versatility, not specifically its focal length: on one hand the character Erick mentions, on the other hand a widely useable angle of view at a very high quality stopped down. A bit the same idea as the Summilux 75 amongst moderate teles.

[A miller]

The lengendary Carl Zeiss Biogon 53mm f4.5 MF lens that was custom fit for my Linhof Technika Press (circa late 1950's) is essentially a 24mm in 35mm terms on a 6x9 film plane. I get a lot out of the focal length. Sure, it is not extreme; but the more extreme wide the more limited you are in composition possibilities. I used to think that the 24mn FL was just Leica's answer to the M8's cropped sensor. But now i actually think that the FL has a lot going for it in its own right on a full frame.

[jaapv]

Leica had a 24 mm lens long before they produced the M8, the Elmarit-R (1974). It was a Minolta design which Leica adopted  and optimised. The Elmarit-M 24 is from 1998. Erwin Puts calls it "a masterpiece of optical designing and a landmark design". 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[enboe]

and I was expecting a thread on catadioptric lens designs ...

[jaapv]

I can do that. I was going to test out my MR Tyt 500 with and without the 2x teleextender in the near future anyway