Best Leica M/LTM mount lens ever ?

[LichtUndDunkelheit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm curious - given the extreme amount of great options of current and historic original Leica and third party lenses for M (or LTM, useable with an adapter) - which do you personally think is the very best one, and why do you think so ?

 

[lct]

If by "best" you mean best optical performance, the Summicron 50/2 apo is probably the champion.

[Advertisement]

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

[helged]

If by "best" you mean best optical performance, the Summicron 50/2 apo is probably the champion.

+1: From an optical perfection, small size, relatively low weight point of view. Downsides: Expensive, the build-in hood is too short, and it is somewhat prone to flare (not talking of the first batch of problem-lenses, but in general).

 

Another lens that I adore is the 75mm Lux-M, for it's dualistic rendering: Soft (but still sharp in the centre), gloomy and with a hint of blueish/greenish colours wide open; turning into very sharp, high micro-contrast and with pleasant/realistic colours from f4.5 or thereabout.

 

A third top contender: 21mm Super-Elmar-M, a very fine wide angle lens: Small, low-weight, sharp, contrasty, nice colours, flare-resistant and almost without miscoloring in the corners/along the edges.

 

A fourth favorite: 90mm Macro-Elmar-M. Small, low-weight, sharp, nice out-of-focus rendering, shortish focus distance, can be used with various tubes for close focus distance.

 

Let me add that I am one if those few that are not too found of the 35mm FLE Lux-M; I find its oof rendering too harsh. In comparison, I prefer the 28mm Lux-M, although the latter is on the heavy side for my liking.

 

Apologise for not being able to limit the response to one lens. If pressed, it would likely be the 50APO-M.

[Paul J]

Best and favourites are different things.

 

I don't really care what the best is unless I have a need for it.

 

My favourite all-time lens of any brand is the Noctilux 0.95.

 

I think the most versatile is the 35mm Summilux. I have the FLE.

 

"best" is probably the 50 APO-Summicron. But personally I shoot medium format instead for that characteristic - but that's just me.

[Ernstk]

Clearly, the newer lenses will be better performers but in its time the Summilux 35 pre aspherical was a great lens.

 

I think that it still is and is almost 2 lenses in one. Wide open, it provides the Leica 'glow' while stopped down, it's as good as a contemporary Summicron.

 

It still seems to have a bit of a cult following...

 

Ernst

Edited February 27, 2018 by Ernstk

[earleygallery]

The best lens is the same as the best holiday destination, or the best car, or best music.

[spydrxx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is no "best" without further clarification of demands/usage.  Having said that, I'll fall back and say "best" is the one you have with you at the moment you need it

[rramesh]

The choices are many and depends on personal preference and what works best in a given situation.

 

For me the best lens is the one that is currently mounted on my camera.

[sblutter]

If handling & all day weight are added to the criteria, Summi 50 v4.  Lovely rendering.

 

Anything heavier in a 50 is a nuisance to me & have no desire to fight with 0.95 > 1.4 for the 0.001% of the time I might have actual need for those apertures.  2.0 provides plenty of separation.

 

That said, I do use every length avail from 21 to 135

 

My wish is a collapsible 50 2.0 that focuses to .7m.  The old version doesn't and of the several I have , all have soft focus issues.  For old school walking around all day, the most recent collapsible 2.8 is a very light weight sweetie & a must

 

OURFO always in the bag for on the fly macro

[LichtUndDunkelheit]

Clearly, the newer lenses will be better performers

Debatable. For example the Summicron 50 collapsible seems to be the king of black and white. Many of the Mandler lenses arent current anymore, but they are all still very popular. Etc.

 

 

There is no "best" without further clarification of demands/usage.  Having said that, I'll fall back and say "best" is the one you have with you at the moment you need it

I'm just looking for a bit of orientation in this flood of M lenses, so I figured I'd ask what people think is the best, leaving the criteria of what constitutes "best" to them, too.

[Alberti]

Clearly, the newer lenses will be better performers but in its time the Summilux 35 pre aspherical was a great lens.

 

I think that it still is and is almost 2 lenses in one. Wide open, it provides the Leica 'glow' while stopped down, it's as good as a contemporary Summicron.

 

It still seems to have a bit of a cult following...

 

Ernst

 

The same "Wide open, it provides the Leica 'glow' while stopped down, it's as good as a contemporary Summicron." goes for the 35 Summicron version 1 I have (since 1973). Interesting is that inside in evenings (low color temperature) the lens is marvelous, so the correction wide open favours these circumstances I have noticed. Great on MM. And this one certainly has a big following. 

My experiences: For me, my modern Leica candidates are Cron 50 V and Macro Elmar 90. Surprise candidates for quality in a small pocket like mine are the M-Rokkor 28 and MC-Rokkor 40 mm even though some are put off by the 28mm's haze (but it renders cities more than marvelous and surprise surprise too is that this 28 does not need coding at all, no flags , green nor magenta to be seen on the unforgiving M-240). As for 50 mm I will not say Nikkor, Jupiter or Canon. Too special. And the 28 ZM does not have that nice rendering of the Rokkor with its Elmarit IV-look.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Alberti

[Ernstk]

The other nice 'Rokkor' lens is the 90/4. I have the Elmar C version of it and it's excellent.

 

I'm not sure if they're identical but it's a very good value lens.

 

 

Elmar C 90/4

 

[mmx_2]

"Best" is of course a very relative term but "best" in terms of sharpness and correctness I would list the following:

 

SEM18, SEM21, Elmar24, Elmarit ASPH 28, Apo-Summicron 50, Macro Elmar 90

 

Out of them I today only own the Elmar 24. Why, because 18 is too wide for me, SEM21 would be very nice but I already have the Elmar 24 which is close in performance and angle of view. I was never much of a 28 guy and the Elmarit 28 was a bit boring, too perfect . The 50 would flare too often that in end I sold it. Plus, it also suffered from being boring . So instead today I have Super-Angulon 21 (fantastic on film and BW digital), Elmar 24 (perfect for landscapes, but a SEM21 would be just as good), Summilux 35 FLE (lots of character wide open and just fantastic when stopped down plus I like the 35 much better than 28), Summilux 50 (very flare resistant, performance wise close to the Summicron with the addition of having f1.4, plus all my lenses have E46 filter size).

 

If we also add some non- M-lenses (since on both M10 and M240 they are just an adapter away) to the list I would add Apo-Macro Elmarit 100-R (super sharp and close to "perfect" and every aperture and distance) and Apo-Telyt 280 f4 (the most impressive tele I've ever tested, color correctness, micro contrast and resolution is just purely insane). I would guess that the Apo Elmarit 180 R is just as good as the 100 and 280. These lenses are already diffraction limited and only a higher resolution sensor prevents us from getting more from them.

 

Otherwise my bet would be the SL Summilux 50, it's supposed to outperform even the Apo and Zeiss Otus lenses.

 

That being said, when it comes to taking "real life pictures" the above listed lenses might not be the "best lenses". For instance, if I take I portrait of my wife (or any adult except maybe old men and young children) with the Apo 100 she would hate it. It's just too sharp and reveals every little flaw in her skin. If I instead would use a somewhat soft hektor 135 for the same task she might rate the picture as "dreamy and beautiful". So, the right lens for the right task . It’s not strange that the Thambar appeared already in the 1930: s, because already back then lenses where “too perfect and too sharp”. If you also add in versatility and portability to the equation you might end up with a different answer.