Best Prime lens for APS-C

[Waterden]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am using the 21/3.4 Super Elmar asph for a 35mm equivalent of around 31mm. It is sensational!

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

I am using the 21/3.4 Super Elmar asph for a 35mm equivalent of around 31mm. It is sensational!

 

Do you mean you're using it on the CL currently? If so could you tell us how soft are the corners of the frame at f/3.4 if any?

[hteasley]

hi there , im new to Leica , and I'm planning to get the new Leica CL for travel use , can anyone recommends a best prime lens for me ?

thank you guys

 

None of the TL lenses are bad or unworthy, but if I were to get only one, not getting the 23mm Summicron would, to me, be the decision of a crazy person. It is such a fantastic lens, and quite small for travel.

[erudolph]

I've gotten a copy of the 23mm Summicron and am shooting it on the SL while waiting for a CL.  Will the zooms disappoint (maybe a little) in comparison?

[Guest]

The zoom’s ar equally impressive- especially the11-23. Astounding image quality.

 

Often when I try to guess the lens without looking at EXIF, i am often wrong about thinking the 18-56 is a prime (23 or 35).

 

That’s the magic of this system. The zoom’s are like having a bag of slower Aperture (not auto focus speed) primes!

Edited December 2, 2017 by Guest

[vikasmg]

I will use the Summicron-C 40 as prime lens

 

Today I intend to go looking for a roll of film for my (pre-digital) CL and more importantly a battery for it.  The batteries used by the pre-digital CL seem almost extinct in Singapore.  However the good thing about manual pre-digital cameras is that they are not a no-battery=no-camera proposition.  Aperture, shutter, focus - everything is mechanical.

 

If everything is working I will keep the Summicron-C 40 on it.  The digital CL will just have to make do with whatever :-)

 

- Vikas

Edited December 2, 2017 by vikasmg

[Mute-on]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you mean you're using it on the CL currently? If so could you tell us how soft are the corners of the frame at f/3.4 if any?

Why would the corners be soft? Is there a corner softness issue with the 21 SE wide open?

[jaapv]

None at all, and even if there were, the corners are cropped out on an APS-C sensor anyway.

[lct]

None at all, and even if there were, the corners are cropped out on an APS-C sensor anyway.

 

Would be true for M8 and M8.2 cameras but the sensor stack of the CL is thicker than that of M cameras hence some softness in the corners of the frames. I mean with M lenses of course. See the latest Sean Reid's review of the 28/2.8 asph on the CL.

[Mute-on]

Would be true for M8 and M8.2 cameras but the sensor stack of the CL is thicker than that of M cameras hence some softness in the corners of the frames. I mean with M lenses of course. See the latest Sean Reid's review of the 28/2.8 asph on the CL.

Well if this is accurate, it is very disappointing. Naturally it begs the question of why on earth Leica would produce a camera that compromises the performance of its own current production lenses.

 

Has anyone else observed this phenomenon?

Edited December 2, 2017 by Mute-on

[Herr Barnack]

If not the Elmarit-TL 18 mm f/2.8, how about the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit?  That would be my choice.

[lct]

The softness i was referring to is that of the Elmarit-M 28/2.8 asph v1 in the corners when it is mounted on the CL. Sorry for any confusion. The CL was designed with M lenses in mind i guess but it is not made for them obviously. The softness was noticed by Sean Reid below f/5.6 mainly and is less pronounced that the one i get with the same lens on my Fuji X-E2 fortunately. But having M wides as sharp on the CL as on M8 or M8.2 bodies is a no no i suspect, unless other M wides perform better than the 28/2.8 asph v1 on the CL. Hence my question above about the SE 21/3.4.

Edited December 2, 2017 by lct

[jaapv]

Ah- I see. Well, time will tell.

[thighslapper]

The softness i was referring to is that of the Elmarit-M 28/2.8 asph v1 in the corners when it is mounted on the CL. Sorry for any confusion. The CL was designed with M lenses in mind i guess but it is not made for them obviously. The softness was noticed by Sean Reid below f/5.6 mainly and is less pronounced that the one i get with the same lens on my Fuji X-E2 fortunately. But having M wides as sharp on the CL as on M8 or M8.2 bodies is a no no i suspect, unless other M wides perform better than the 28/2.8 asph v1 on the CL. Hence my question above about the SE 21/3.4.

 

The older designs of the 35 and 28 generally perform poorly (the 35/2 and 28/2 in particular) in the periphery on the SL ....but I would have thought on a cropped sensor it would not be very noticeable. Sean often tests an odd selection of lenses - which presumably has more to do with his availability than what many people would use. I would expect all the current production M lenses to work just as well on the SL/TL/CL as on the M10.... and that does seem to be borne out by reports on the forum.

Edited December 2, 2017 by thighslapper

[lct]

[...] I would expect all the current production M lenses to work just as well on the SL/TL/CL as on the M10...

 

I respect what you say of course but i have never seen that so far. The L mount is just a compromise for people expecting to use AF lenses and manual hence M ones eventually. Boils down to two losses for M users: auto-zoom and sharpness of M wides in the corners. Hoping to be proved wrong as usual . 

[Mute-on]

Edited December 2, 2017 by Mute-on

[ramarren]

hi there , im new to Leica , and I'm planning to get the new Leica CL for travel use , can anyone recommends a best prime lens for me ?

thank you guys

 

 

There is no "best" ... there's what works for your needs. 

 

I'd use my WATE (Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm) and Summilux 35mm v2 fitted on the M Adapter L. That would give me a very compact, classic look, fast 50mm equivalent FoV lens with the 35mm, and a nice range of wide FoVs (24mm, 28mm, 32mm) with the WATE. The big advantage of this to me is that I own the adapter and both these lenses already, and it's four focal length choices in two lenses, all with superb quality. (... And obviously, I don't care about auto focus... )

 

I would likely end up shooting with the 35mm lens 90% of the time, just as I currently shoot with a Summicron-M 50mm 90% of the time now on the M-D. 

 

If I were buying new lenses to get autofocus capabilities, it would be the equivalent of a fast 50mm (the Leica Summilux-TL 35mm f/1.4 ASPH) first, and all others after that. For me, a fast 50mm equivalent normal lens is almost always the most versatile and useful lens. 

Edited December 2, 2017 by ramarren

[scott kirkpatrick]

In answer to the originally posted question, I think many of us have existing lenses that will perform well on the CL using adapters for M lenses and L lenses that were purchased for the TL or for use in video (which is also APS-C if you shoot 4K formats).  In my case, the 11-23 zoom and the 23 TL prime are a natural fit, and I might use just one of them.  R lenses can also be adapted, but are generally a bit large to fit well on the CL.

 

To lct's question/comment:  Leica redesigned the 28 Elmarit-asph about a year ago, to make it work well in the corners on the SL.  It is the most challenging of the classic M lenses, requiring the thinner cover glass to be sharp out to the corners.  So there are v1 and v2 in circulation, with different part numbers.  Sean published a comparison that showed the fairly significant improvements, but he has apparently kept his older lens, and that is the one used in the recent report.  I have used the v2, which I have now, on the SL and also find it is quite sharp even when wide open.  When I have a chance, I'll take another look at Sean's two reports on this, with SL and CL. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jonoslack]

I liked much the 40/2 for Leica CL on my R-D1. Interesting 60mm FoV for 50mm lovers. Should not show too soft corners on the CL normally. Remains to see if the sensor stack of the latter is thin enough to avoid such softness at full aperture. The lens is not sharp there at f/2 anyway.

 

Hi There 

I did some serious comparison work with the 28 summicron and the 50 summilux on the Fuji X-T2, the SL, M10 and the CL. 

Neither worked well on the Fuji (smeariness quite a way across the frame). Both are fine on the CL (best on the M10) - I've tested the CL with a number of M lenses (tricky ones) and it passes with flying colours. . . . and so has Sean Reid.

 

. . . but I reckon if the Louistian is set on a prime then the 23 is the one to get (the 35 is better, but it's also much bigger and more expensive). I also agree with lots of others that the 18-56 is a great lens (better than perhaps it ought to be!)

 

best

[jonoslack]

The softness i was referring to is that of the Elmarit-M 28/2.8 asph v1 in the corners when it is mounted on the CL. Sorry for any confusion. The CL was designed with M lenses in mind i guess but it is not made for them obviously. The softness was noticed by Sean Reid below f/5.6 mainly and is less pronounced that the one i get with the same lens on my Fuji X-E2 fortunately. But having M wides as sharp on the CL as on M8 or M8.2 bodies is a no no i suspect, unless other M wides perform better than the 28/2.8 asph v1 on the CL. Hence my question above about the SE 21/3.4.

 

Hi There

Most of the wides on the CL are fine - you shouldn't extrapolate from one lens (I don't have that lens) - I've tried the CL with:

WATE

28 Summaron

28 Summicron (new version)

28 Summilux

35 Summilux (FLE)

50 APO Summicron

50 Summilux

75 Summicron

They are all fine!