Jump to content

Which 35mm lens?


carcam

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm a new again M user and need help picking the right 35mm lens.  I have an M10 and the 50 APO so that is my basis for comparison. I recently tried the Leica 35/2.4 Summarit and it was certainly ok but when I showed my family and friends the pictures of a wedding I shot with both lenses, they were much more impressed with all the 50 APO pictures.  And I'm quite spoiled too.  

 

I'm going to upgrade my 35 Summarit to either the Leica 35/2 or 1.4.  I don't shoot a lot in low light so don't Need the 1.4 but if it's better optically at 2.0 or 2.8, it's worth the expense and weight for me.  

 

With the current 35mm Leica M lenses, is the new 35/1.4 lens the FLE or is that a different lens?  When listed for sale, I don't see it designated FLE but that seems the one to get.  How is the 35 Summicron by comparison?  I assume it's better than the Summarit but is it the same as the FLE at f2.0-2.8? 

 

When I had my early M9 I got the Leica 35/1.4 and had a dreadful time with front focusing.  Is that still a concern?

 

Thanks in advance for any insight :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used the cron and the lux

 

From what i see, the lux is of better contrast and colour and when i shoot widest open, the dof is amazing but then u dont shoot widest open, might not help much

 

Since post pro can add more contrast and adjust colour to suit you

 

 

Instagram @jakontil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you go past the shop where you bought your M10 and 50mm from and give them both a try?

 

You also don't mention why others preferred your 50mm shots. Are you just not as comfortable or confident using a 35mm? Did it have anything at all to do with the quality of the lens, or was it the quality of the composition? Maybe you just need to spend some more time with the 35mm? What about trying a 28mm?

 

(Since you spent 5x as much on a 50mm compared to the 35mm, I assume that 50mm is your favourite focal length)

Edited by michaelwj
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you go past the shop where you bought your M10 and 50mm from and give them both a try?

 

You also don't mention why others preferred your 50mm shots. Are you just not as comfortable or confident using a 35mm? Did it have anything at all to do with the quality of the lens, or was it the quality of the composition? Maybe you just need to spend some more time with the 35mm? What about trying a 28mm?

 

(Since you spent 5x as much on a 50mm compared to the 35mm, I assume that 50mm is your favourite focal length)

 

Michael- I don't have a local store, bought it online.  The wedding was indoors and out and I used both lenses.  In every case the 50 APO was sharper, better contrast and more pleasing images.  The 35 Summarit was definitely acceptable in every regard and if that was the only lens I used it would be fine.  However, in many cases the 50 APO images were simply stunning and grabbed your attention even if the subject matter was so so.  

You are right, I am a 50mm guy and that is my comfort zone which may account in part for the better images.  I did find that the 50 was better outside and the 35 better inside with more constricted space.  Hence my interest in the 35 FLE.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Carcam,  I most highly recommend you send time first perfecting shooting the 50 APO.  It is a superb lens.  Then, if you think you need a 35 Lux or Cron, either do as Michaelwj in Post #3 suggested or simply rent each lens and see how they draw.  You can rent the lenses via Lens Rentals online.  Based on my experience, I found that you need at least a week with each lens and a good number of images to see how they each draw.  Plus it depends on what genre of photography you are shooting.  In the past, I have owned the 35 AA, Lux FLE and Cron.  Each one draws in a unique way.  I finally decided the 35mm lenses all be they superb, the new 28mm Elmarit fit the bill for my type of photography.  Many on this forum will tell you, don't listen to what people write here...that is good advice.  Only you can decide what focal length meets your needs/wants based on how the lens draws.  Way too many people get caught up with GAS...rather than spending time mastering the lenses they own and creating, you guessed correctly...superb photographs!  I live by the idea, a camera and lenses are merely tools and its your creative mind and technique that creates the photograph.   r/ Mark

Edited by LeicaR10
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 50/2 apo matches well both 35/2 asph and 35/1.4 FLE. If you don't need f/1.4 go for the 35/2 asph that will provide sharper results than your 35/2.5 below f/5.6 in borders and corners mainly. F/1.4 may help to get more pop with a 35 though but the 35/1.4 FLE is significantly bulkier than both 35/2 asph and 35/2.5. Better compromise to me is the 35/2 asph but it is a matter of tastes obviously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 50/2 apo matches well both 35/2 asph and 35/1.4 FLE. If you don't need f/1.4 go for the 35/2 asph that will provide sharper results than your 35/2.5 below f/5.6 in borders and corners mainly. F/1.4 may help to get more pop with a 35 though but the 35/1.4 FLE is significantly bulkier than both 35/2 asph and 35/2.5. Better compromise to me is the 35/2 asph but it is a matter of tastes obviously.

 

 

I agree with this.

 

The Summarit is a great little lens but it will not render photographs similarly to the APO-50, and the corners, at least with the Summarit I previously had were really too soft (and I am not a corner peeper).  The other advantage of the 35 Summicron over the 35 Summilux, apart from less weight and bulk, is consistency of 39mm filters. 

 

If you have a 50 and want to go wider, have you considered a 28?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a new again M user and need help picking the right 35mm lens. I have an M10 and the 50 APO so that is my basis for comparison. I recently tried the Leica 35/2.4 Summarit and it was certainly ok but when I showed my family and friends the pictures of a wedding I shot with both lenses, they were much more impressed with all the 50 APO pictures. And I'm quite spoiled too.

 

I'm going to upgrade my 35 Summarit to either the Leica 35/2 or 1.4. I don't shoot a lot in low light so don't Need the 1.4 but if it's better optically at 2.0 or 2.8, it's worth the expense and weight for me.

 

With the current 35mm Leica M lenses, is the new 35/1.4 lens the FLE or is that a different lens? When listed for sale, I don't see it designated FLE but that seems the one to get. How is the 35 Summicron by comparison? I assume it's better than the Summarit but is it the same as the FLE at f2.0-2.8?

 

When I had my early M9 I got the Leica 35/1.4 and had a dreadful time with front focusing. Is that still a concern?

 

Thanks in advance for any insight :)

Hi "carcam"

I have got M10 (sliver) and M 35 Lux Fle, M Apo 50 and M Lux 75. I am happy with this combo!

Please try M 35 Lux or 35 Cron and then get the one that You feel comfortable!

Have a good day!

Thanks!

Edited by phongph
Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly any 35mm lens is a good choice. You first need to ask yourself what you plan to use it for, for the choices are many.

  1. Current Leica M lenses
  2. M lenses from the likes of Zeiss, Voigtlander
  3. Vintage Leica M and LTM lenses
  4. Vintage LTM lenses from Zeiss, Voigtlander, Konica, FSU and others

And in this forum you will hear from many their personal choices, good and bad opinions.

 

Only you can decide based on what you need for your purpose. Note that an expensive lens is not always 'fit for purpose'.

 

I myself, don't use a 35, rather a 28 with a 50.

 

And I typically shoot:

  1. 50mm 40% of the time (Summilux)
  2. 28mm 40% of the time (Summicon)
  3. 90mm 8% of the time (Elmarit-M)
  4. 21mm 8% of the time (SEM)
  5. 15mm 4% of the time (Voigtlander)
Edited by rramesh
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the Summicron 35 Asph and it's a superb lens, but as I prefer the 50 & 28 focal lengths it didn't get used very much. Partly to help finance an M10 I decided to sell and get a much cheaper 35 for the few times when I really needed it. I've ended up with two, each costing about £300, both LTM, the Canon f2 and the Voigtlander Ultron f1.7 and I am very happy with them both - so much so that I can't decide which one to sell! I marginally prefer the Canon I suppose because it's so tiny.

'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael- I don't have a local store, bought it online. The wedding was indoors and out and I used both lenses. In every case the 50 APO was sharper, better contrast and more pleasing images. The 35 Summarit was definitely acceptable in every regard and if that was the only lens I used it would be fine. However, in many cases the 50 APO images were simply stunning and grabbed your attention even if the subject matter was so so.

You are right, I am a 50mm guy and that is my comfort zone which may account in part for the better images. I did find that the 50 was better outside and the 35 better inside with more constricted space. Hence my interest in the 35 FLE.

Please share some examples of the photos you refer to. I would be interested to see the difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A 28mm is often spoken of as a 'natural' complement to a 50, but you must see for yourself.

If ƒ/2 isn't an absolute necessity, the CV 2,5/35 is an inexpensive option for a little-used FL if you don't need the speed; doesn't focus-shift and a great lens. Another stellar but overlooked choice is the Zeiss 2,8/35 'C'; tack-sharp from ƒ/2.8, nearly flare-free and high-contrast. Both are really (really) small.

The Zeiss 1,4/35 has received accolades as perhaps the best 35 in a generation. Big. Heavy. Spectacular colors. Zero focus shift and a flat field. Did I mention big and heavy?

The Leica 35/1.4 FLE is one of my favorites, but whilst the floating element dramatically reduced the focus-shift issue of its immediate predecessor, it didn't eliminate it. Handling wise, it is a dream. 

 

"lct" appears to possess a 35 Summicron ASPH that doesn't focus-shift and in this, may have an outlier sample because many users report the issue from ƒ/2.8-5.6. 

Really loved the look at ƒ/2 but mine shifted like crazy and ruined its share of shots at ƒ/4 before I realized the issue. 

Edited by james.liam
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So Leica calibrated your 35/2 asph and it still has focus shift? Was it 6-bit coded when you bought it? Just curious.

 

 

DAG (Don Goldberg) adjusted it, if you're curious. Improved but not gone. 

 

BTW, Why can't you accept that your experience isn't akin to others? Be happy you have a good one and let it go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After using the 35mm f1.7 Voigtlander Ultron VM for a few days, it has pretty much supplanted my 35mm f2 ASPH. It's simply a better lens optically. The Summicron is more compact, love the ergonomics, but optically there are at least two non-Leica lenses that are better options.

Edited by Gregm61
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...