Choosing One Leica Lens

[349A]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well if you go one Lens Solution there is only one: 50mm Summilux ASPH.

 

It's also my most used lens.

 

 

Second is my 35mm Cron ASPH. Prefer it the Lux. The Lux has the same issue as the 21mm SuperElmar (which I have) as it is to clinical for me.

 

 

B

 

Completely agree. Some have done nice work with the FLE in PP, in general, this is one of my least favorite Leica lenses. The images almost always appear clinical and cold as ice. The previous non-fle 35/1.4 asph is my choice or the Zeiss 35/1.4. A one lens solution for me would always be a 35mm, you can do almost anything with it. Almost. 

[Advertisement]

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

[colint544]

To pick just one lens is very hard indeed. Personally I'd be torn between either a 50mm or a 35mm. But probably, if it really had to be just a single lens, I'd have to go for the 35mm. 

 

I use a 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE, a lens I've had for more than five years. It took me quite a while to get to really bond with it. The 1.4 aperture can sometimes be a big help. The build quality on my copy isn't great. It rattles like a set of castanets, the aperture ring spins back and forth too easily, with barely a hint of any detent, and just the other day I was disappointed to notice that it has developed some play in the focus.

 

But I've come to like the lens, regardless. When it's on the camera, I always feel that I'll get a decent picture, regardless of the light. I agree that it can have a slightly crisp and clinical character, but I've never really found that to be a problem. I think a photograph is more about the content, the light and composition than anything else. On film, the 35mm Summilux FLE is sensational - lots of character and flexibility. And, most importantly, it has that useful f1.4 aperture - a great 'get out of jail free' bonus.

 

I attach a couple of shots I've taken in my home town of Glasgow, using the 35mm Summilux FLE - the colour shot was on an M9, and the mono one was on my M Monochrom mk1, shot at f1.4.

 

Cheers!

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!

[colonel]

50mm  Tight and a bit claustrophobic. Good for medium distance street and walk about. Good for long distance architecture and landscape. Doubles as portrait or full body modelling lens.

 

35mm  Takes in more of the background. Slightly more open and epic feel. Closer for street and good urban walk about. Ok for some kinds of landscapes. Can use as long body portrait and certain types of people shots. Great general purpose lens for travel

 

28mm  Close urban. Distorts at edges so "edgy" people shots and buildings with curved edges. Good for people groups. Good for interiors where you want to start to see one ceiling, floor and wall

 

24mm = 28mm but more so. Better for interiors - the space starts to breath. People shots getting weird. Quite good for urban architecture

 

21mm The urban tight space lens. Get the buildings and people all squeezed in. Nauseating to use all the time, but used sparingly gets atmosphere no other narrower lens gets. Some people say the difference between 21mm and 24mm is that 21mm can never look like a normal perspective to the brain but I can't comment as my brain is on the blink.

 

75mm  Doubles as flattering people lens with long distance landscape and travel in large spaces. Too close for me for general, love for portrait. Quite nice for gigs and concerts if you not to far from the stage.

 

90mm  Starting to see things far away. Good for low-medium telephoto, such as indoor football, tennis or horse racing if you are on the money

 

135mm The most flattering portrait lens without having to leave the room (some people think this is 180mm but they have bigger rooms). Can use for sneaky street shots but 90% of the time things will come between you and the subject. Good for medium telephoto, e.g. aerodrome, football, etc.

 

>200mm ask JAAPV

 

## disclaimer ## the above are my opinion only and are tongue in check and patent pending. disagreement allowed as long as you end up agreeing. all monetary payments to charities housing the homeless please!

[jsjxyz]

If I have to answer 5 years ago, it would be 35 lux FLE

 

now without doubt

 

50 APO Summicron.

[easy_action]

 

the aperture ring spins back and forth too easily, with barely a hint of any detent

 

Mine is exactly like this too.

 

A shame as in every other way I like this lens very much.

[Herr Barnack]

As much as I love the 28mm for street photography, it is not for everyone.  If the 28 is too wide for your eye (even though it's very close to the 35 in terms of field of view) then go with the 35.  A 35mm lens is a good all around lens IMO.  Shooting with wide lenses has made me come to think of the 50mm as the shortest of the short teles.  A 50 crops significantly compared to a 28 or 35.  For street photography, I find that with a 50, I have to back up to get my subject 100% inside the viewfinder lines.  Backing up leaves enough room between me and my subject that other people wander aimlessly between camera and subject.  This is why I like the 28 - it eliminates that wandering room.

 

So for one lens, I would go with either the 35mm or 28mm Summilux, current version of either.  If those are just to costly or weight is an issue, then I'd go with the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit M.  Given the capabilities of this lens, it has to be the best deal ever in a wide angle M lens. 

[Leicauser7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the unlikely case you are focused mainly on portraiture, I would go with the 75 lux.  what a lens!    

[fsprow]

I suggest looking over the published photos of the great photographers doing the type work you favor (e.g. street photography) and, if available, establishing the lens they favor.  In my case (not a great photographer!) I have found that the 50mm does the job nearly all the time.

 

Frank

[IkarusJohn]

Would love some input from the group here. If you were able to only buy one Leica lens to use with your new M10, for primarily street photography, which lens would it be? And any of your thoughts on the reasoning would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

I went through this when I bought my M9 - the likes and dislikes, and the classics here were baffling, and the list of Leica lenses daunting; not to mention the prices, which were horrifying!  On the advice of Meister Camera, I bought the Summicron 35/2 ASPH.  Nice lens, but after a while I found it pretty boring - why?

 

It took me a while to work this out, but I realised that I often take pictures to give a perspective or view that others find surprising, or not quite what they expect - drama, I guess.  This involves capturing things people don't see, or providing a perspective which is surprising, or just great timing and composition (in my dreams, anyway).  35mm really didn't do it for me.

 

So, first up, I'd say consider the field of view.  For street, you're really likely to get the most use out of 28, 35 or 50.  If you're often in tighter spaces, then wider might be better, whereas if your environment is more likely to be wide open spaces, you might want the tighter view of a 50.  Also, do you prefer to capture detail? or do you like more environment - say, people's surroundings, getting their feet into the shot etc.  For me, I prefer 28mm, as it gives me more choices - that said, I like to have a 50 in my bag.  50mm was often the cheap and relatively poor standard lens provided free with your SLR when I was a kid - a kit lens, that went onto the shelf when you bought the camera, and was never used again.  Not so with Leica - their 50s are among their best lenses, hands down ...

 

Next, speed - generally, slower means smaller (the 28 Summaron is tiny, the Elmarit still small, Summicron getting bigger and Summilux not so small - but still way smaller than any equivalent SLR lens, but by M lens standards, quite big).  Faster also means more expensive.  With digital, and the quality of higher ISO, for most photography, speed of the lens isn't really an issue - sure, there might be occasions when you want to get a picture in the dark, but to be honest not many of these pictures work for me - I like shadows to be dark and nights black.  Peter Karbe, the lens designer for Leica, says use aperture for depth of field, and I think this is good advice.  Having a Summilux doesn't mean you have to use it wide open all the time - they work very well at f/4 and f/5.6, and diffraction generally doesn't set in till beyond f/16.  Fast lenses give you more choices, and greater creative options - a Summilux will work as well from f/2 as a Summicron, and from f/2.8 as well as an Elmarit; you just have more choice.

 

Finally size and price - covered above.  I have some of Leica's biggest and smallest lenses, and (strangely) size doesn't matter to me.  By any other photographic standards, the M lenses are diminutive (try the SL with the 90-280 zoom if you want some sense of big, or any of the Zeiss Otus lenses).  M lenses are small; but they're expensive.  You will inevitably add to your one lens over time, but buy slowly and sensibly - I've never missed a 35mm lens, but then it is probably the most widely used Leica lens of all, as the advice here shows.

 

Knowing what I know now (and I've been reducing my gear recently), I've had three 35mm M lenses, and sold them all.  I'd be hard picked to choose between the 28 & 50 Summilux, but if I had to take one, it would be the 28 Summilux and I'd miss the 50 focal length like mad.  Your choice, however, will ultimately need to suit your photographic style and needs.  The M10 is a great choice - 28mm is the field of view of the iPhone, and Leica Q and so many other modern cameras, so you should be able to get a feel for what you want to achieve.  

 

Chose the focal length you like, and the fastest you can afford.

 

Cheers

John

[tom0511]

If I have to answer 5 years ago, it would be 35 lux FLE

 

now without doubt

 

50 APO Summicron.

 

+1 -either 50APO or 50 Summicron or 50/1.4

[tobey bilek]

What you have used in past, 35 or 50.

 

With a 35  in horizontal format, the width is the same as distance to picture plane.    A fifty horizontal is same as short side of 35.

 

With 35, 10 feet to subject center,  the picture will be 10 feet wide.   

 

Most people use a 35 today,  I still like a  50.

[low.jason]

35 cron 8 element. period.

[enboe]

What you have used in past, 35 or 50.

 

With a 35  in horizontal format, the width is the same as distance to picture plane.    A fifty horizontal is same as short side of 35.

 

With 35, 10 feet to subject center,  the picture will be 10 feet wide.   

 

Most people use a 35 today,  I still like a  50.

 

Didn't know that, and I've been shooting for 46 years.  Thanks!

[Surelythisnameisfree]

Same here!

[Jul]

What you have used in past, 35 or 50.

With a 35 in horizontal format, the width is the same as distance to picture plane. A fifty horizontal is same as short side of 35.

With 35, 10 feet to subject center, the picture will be 10 feet wide.

24 and 75 are easy to deduce from the 35 and the 50.

With a 24 in horizontal format, the heigth is the same as distance to picture plane.

The short side of the 24 equal the long side of the 35 shot as the same distance.

With a 75, the long side equal the short side of a 50 shot as the same distance.

[eyeheartny]

What you have used in past, 35 or 50.

 

With a 35 in horizontal format, the width is the same as distance to picture plane. A fifty horizontal is same as short side of 35.

 

With 35, 10 feet to subject center, the picture will be 10 feet wide.

 

Most people use a 35 today, I still like a 50.

When you say "width" you mean the width of what is captured in the image? If so that's pretty cool. Handy to know.

[IkarusJohn]

Thanks so much everyone for all of the great comments and recommendations in response to my post. Still waiting for my M10 to arrive, but in the meantime, I think that I am definitely leaning towards a 35 lens. Now just have to decide which one.

 

 

So, what did you decide?

[semi-ambivalent]

Thanks so much everyone for all of the great comments and recommendations in response to my post. Still waiting for my M10 to arrive, but in the meantime, I think that I am definitely leaning towards a 35 lens. Now just have to decide which one.

I always had a 28/50 preference but have been shifting to the 35 (Summicron ASPH in this case) and here's why. I'm not Ernest Bresson and it's not 1936, and I'm not Jerry Winogrand and it's not 1960. It's 2017 and a lot of people in the street just don't want me to be shoving my camera in their faces these days. I have an obligation to respect their space and I have walked away from some good shots because the vibe said I was too close. These are fellow humans after all, and there's always other images. If you think your work is lost over an image or two you're mistaken. Trust me on this, you've already missed a million because you simply didn't see it.

 

A 35 will give you that bit of human space usually and your feet can adjust it. There's a reason it's a classic. The rest of the specs are irrelevant to me. A Summilux is sexy and I have the dosh but not the lens so evidently it's not that important to me.

 

You could do worse than 35,

s-a

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ramarren]

I have all the lenses I could want for the M, from 16mm to 135mm.

 

If I'm going out to shoot with just camera and one lens, and anything might be my target, I grab a 50mm.

If I'm going out to shoot and am carrying my bag, I'll carry 35 and 75 mm most of the time.

All the others require more forethought.

[eyeheartny]

I have all the lenses I could want for the M, from 16mm to 135mm.

 

If I'm going out to shoot with just camera and one lens, and anything might be my target, I grab a 50mm.

If I'm going out to shoot and am carrying my bag, I'll carry 35 and 75 mm most of the time.

All the others require more forethought.

If you had to go for a less-than-Summilux option at 35mm or 50mm, where would you go for a Summicron (or Zeiss) alternative? I'm debating between 50 f1.4/35 f2 versus 50 f2/35 1.4. Would you include the Zeiss lenses at all for the f2 options?