50mm f2 or 60mm f2.8 as fist/most used R lens ?

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

I have finally got into the R system with a beautiful R7 and want to get a single lens at first.

Although I have shot for years I can't make up my mind between a Leica 50mm f2 Summicron R or a 60mm f2.8 R

 

The 50mm is more comfortable for walk about and a stop more light but the 60mm has a cool macro ability (not a big thing for me but occasional use) and more (minimal ??) flattering portraits ?

 

what do you guys think also on the ways these lenses handle

 

rgds

[Advertisement]

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

[jip]

The Macro Elmarit-R is amazing and really good, but at 60mm I find it a bit long as a single lens.

 

I really like it in combination with a 35mm lens though.

 

35mm and 60mm are a great combo, the 60 will make it possible to take close ups of things like ants or flowers among other things, while also serving as a 'short' portrait lens. The 35mm you can then use as a moderate wide-angle, where you can do group shots, environmental portraits etc. 

 

As this is no answer to your question:

 

I do prefer a 60mm over a 50mm but only if I have another lens like a 28 or 35. So if I'd go one lens only I'd take the 50mm Summicron/Summilux. 

[colonel]

No that's a good answer thanks

I think you are right, a 60 on its own is inconvenient especially as I don't need the macro

I think I'll get the 50mm and also a 180mm or a 135mm and a 24mm or wider as well

[wizard]

...

I think I'll get the 50mm and also a 180mm or a 135mm and a 24mm or wider as well

 

Give it another thought. I own both the 50mm Summicron and the 60mm Macro-Elmarit (plus a couple of other lenses), and from my experience an SL2 or R7 makes a GREAT combo, both optically and handling-wise. Though I like the 50mm Summicron, too, I use the 60mm lens 9 out of 10 times. If that isn't proof, nothing is.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

[TomB_tx]

I have both 50 Summicron-R and Summilux-R, as well as the Macro Elmarit-R 60. Overall I prefer the Summicron images, but when hiking I'll take the 60 with 35 and 135 as a kit.

[gvaliquette]

The 60mm Elmarit is my only R lens around that focal length, although I have multiple M 50mm lenses.  I don't miss a 50mm R lens, although I also have other R focal length lenses.

 

Do reconsider.  The 60mm Elmarit offers many possibilities, and the difference between 50mm and 60mm is actually negligible, especially if you plan on buying other focal length lenses later (a 35mm, a 28mm, a 135mm, etc.).

 

Guy

[gbealnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Both are fine, I have the (older/oldest) 50 Summicron R, and have never tried (but always wanted to) the 60 Macro.

A thought though, I have a couple of Leitz Elpro's, bought really to use on my X-Vario, and they fit straight onto the 50/2. So whie the 60 macro seems to have a niche, I find that I can accomplish most close-up requirements with the 50/2 and an Elpro.

Jip makes a good point though, 60 and 35.

Gary

[dkCambridgeshire]

Why not visit RDC in Goswell Rd and try both ? 

 

dunk

[T.E.]

I've both lenses, newer versions. Both are great lenses. I do prefer, however, the 60 over the 50, so that the 50 won't quite collect dust on the shelf but is used only occasionally. The 60 gives me the more satisfying results, esp. concerning colour rendering. To me, the focal length difference 50 vs. 60 is too small to be relevant.

You say you don't need macro. Have you given it a try ? If you buy the 60 and still don't like macro or its overall performance (which I doubt) you can always sell with hardly any loss and get the 50.

 

Thomas

[dkCambridgeshire]

Also, if you have the Leica Pocket Book 8th Edition, compare the MTF graphs at f5.6 and draw your own conclusions. Also consider the fact that the 60mm has a very recessed and extremely well baffled front end which serves as a better hood than that built into the 50mm.

 

dunk

[gvaliquette]

.....   Also consider the fact that the 60mm has a very recessed and extremely well baffled front end which serves as a better hood than that built into the 50mm.

 

dunk

 

colonel,

 

Well, if you look at the "engineering drawing" in the data sheet, you will see that the extended front end is actually required to accommodate the long focusing helical needed to reach 1:2.

 

If you don't have access to the data sheets, PM me and I'll email the 60mm Macro-Elmarit-R and the 50mm Summicron-R data sheets to you.  Leica removed them from their website with the cancellation of the R line, but I have the *.pdf files on my computer.

 

Guy

[AZach]

Hi, lots of technical data sheets are alko available in the Wiki-section of this site:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/R_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

 

Please enjoy.

[ph.]

My film SL and R bodies decorate the shelves together with their M cousin, but the R optics still beat most others. VERY robust and both their MTFs can still hold their own if one cares for brick wall portraits . I use R lenses on digital nowadays. Not only my Microphene and Diafine used to go stale, but a long time ago, the darkroom was needed for other use, so I cannot speak for film. My Rs are only ever excersised once a year or so for colour film snaps, but the lenses live on.

 

I own both the Summicron 50(R version) and the Elmarit60. Probably just a lack of pocket space or overwhelming lazyness, but I only bring one "normal" so as to have space for other focal lengths. The 60mm can go very close and its native sunshade is deeper than the 50, so I carry the 60 rather than the 50. Modern auto-iso does not create havoc with one stop extra.

 

p.

[philmcm]

The best lens I have ever owned from any manufacturer, hands down, is the Macro Elmarit-R 60 f/2.8 (mine is from 1976). It's never yet let me down in any conditions or any situation. 

 

Years ago when I went fly fishing regularly, I had a battered old favourite home-made trout fly. No matter what the conditions were, if the fish weren't rising or if everyone else was having success and I wasn't, I'd fall back on that old fly, and whether it was luck, self-confidence or something intangible, it never once failed to at least get me a "take" if not actually land something.

 

That's exactly how I feel about the Macro Elmarit 60 f/2.8. Forget the word "macro" and just go with it. It won't let you down.

 

[spydrxx]

In the R line I owned 35, 50, 80-200, 90, 135, 180 and 400 Leica lenses at various times. My favorites were the 35, 50, 90, and 80-200. Among those favorites, I did a fair amount of research, with much good guidance from from members here and Doug Herr's private Wildlight Photo site, and selected the best of breed in Elmarit & Summicrons. Non disappointed me, and if you get the best versions, they won't disappoint you either..

[Hugh 38]

I have  both   a   Sumicron  50  and the  Elmarit  60 .  If  I had  to go  back  to  having  one  only  it   would  be  the   Elmarit 60 . I like  the  slightly  longer  focal length  and  it   takes  you a little  closer to the  subject. If   I am  out  and  about     the    macro   is  useful  if  I  see  a   flower  or   something   small  to  photograph . I  am not   bothered  about   loosing  a  stop.  The    60   goes   well with  a  28 .

 

The  only   downside  to  the   Elmarit  60  is   you have  to turn  the   lens  a lot  more  to  focus  it  which  is  hard  for a moving  subject. Last   year  I  tried  to  photograph  a  dancer  with it  and  I   could  not  focus fast  enough . The  50  would  have  been  better. 

 

I  do not  know the  technical  details but     both  lenses   produce  good  slides  which  look  good  on the  screen .

[colonel]

thanks so much everyone

 

I think technically, from what I can gather, is that the 60mm is stronger. It also seems to have more "modern" contrast, however I decided that for my usage, having the extra stop of light combined with the slightly wider angle won out.

 

I have been using the 50mm now for some days and the quality is excellent. Its slightly glowy at f2 but still very usable and has a lovely draw. The one thing to get used to is the much longer focus throw compared to M lenses, but I presume that's standard across R lenses ? My "new" 135mm f2.8 seems the same

 

This is f2.8 on the couple:

 

 

rgds

[wizard]

...

 

The  only   downside  to  the   Elmarit  60  is   you have  to turn  the   lens  a lot  more  to  focus  it  which  is  hard  for a moving  subject. Last   year  I  tried  to  photograph  a  dancer  with it  and  I   could  not  focus fast  enough . The  50  would  have  been  better. 

 

...

 

I beg to differ. In fact, the opposite seems true to me. While it is true that you will have to turn the Elmarit 60 a long way to get down to its minimum focus distance, the range between infinity and, say, 3 meters is rather short, and in fact shorter than with a Summicron 50 lens! With the Elmarit 60, I sometimes find it hard to focus precisely at longer distances, simply because a tiny amount of turning the focus ring results in a rather pronounced change of distance setting. Regarding normal distances, therefore, the Elmarit should be quicker to focus than the Summicron.

 

Best,

 

Andy

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tobey bilek]

If you end up with an original 50 2.0 which use ser 6 filters,  the filter improves sharpness at 2 by a large amount.     Can`t explain but an old wedding photog told me and I tried with several  lenses.  He was right as usual.

 

60 -35 is a nice set.

 

A 60 is one of five lenses I converted to Nikon mount.

[SilentShutter]

There is no need to convert the Leica Elmarit 60 to Nikon SLR or DSLR

I own the Nikkor P 3,5/55 Micro and it is really the sharpest lens I ever used. 

 

But what I really miss is the amazing Vario-Elmar 4,0/80-200 it is just one

of my all time favourites.