Sharpest M Lenses

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

For cost, weight, and performance I don't think you could beat:

Zeiss Biogon T* 2.8/25 ZM 

Zeiss Planar T* 2.0/50 ZM

They are spectacularly good lenses (Ming Then compared did an interesting comparison between the Biogon and APO-Summicron)

 

The 2.8/35 Biogon is indeed a 'sharp' lens but is just too contrasty for my liking.

People have mentioned the 2.0/50 APO-Summicron. It is heavy (and of course expensive) for it's size but, although I do buy my lenses to use, I probably wouldn't take a $10K lens on a long hike esp if used hand-held. Day walk yes.

 

 

If you want Leica and minimal weight:

2.8/28 Elmarit

2.0/50 Sumicron ASPH or 2.5/50 Summmarit.

 

 

I don't have my Zeiss lenses any more and if I want a really light weight lens set, I tend to take my:

2.5/28 Elmarit ASPH, 2.8/50 Elmar-M,and maybe the 4.0/90 Macro-Elmar.

 

I just went on a 4-day walk in Tasmania where weight was an issue, and decided to take only two lenses and no tripod. I wanted them to be a bit faster if I was stuck in low light. Although I have my share of fast lenses I have not wanted the 28 Summilux due to: size/weight/VF blockage in one of my most used focal lengths; I think that in most circumstances 2.0 is plenty fast enough for a wider lens (although I do have a 21 Summilux, and I love the rendering of the 28 Summicron which is quite sympathetic with the 50 Summilux. 

So I took:

M10

2.0/28 Summicron ASPH

1.4/50 Summilux

It was a perfect combination for me :-)

 

Thank you Mark.

 

Appreciate the long write up. To be honest, I am happy to take any gear on a hike... I am not that precious about gear anymore as I know I look after it and I have it all insured. I used to be very precious and that often stopped my getting the shot.

 

I am going to have a little look into the Zeiss offerings, although now I am starting to think that other than a 135 I probably have all the gear I need. 21, 28, 50, 90. Maybe a small sharp Zeiss 35 would fit the bill.

 

I might have a play around with the 28, 35 and 50 today as relevant apertures and see what I think.

[Advertisement]

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

[Leicalifer]

I like 75 mm apo and 90 mm f4 Makro Elmar. If you haven’t shot one the 90 mm is fantastic, small compact and wow sharp.

[pgk]

Point taken thanks Jaap - Is the one with build in hood the same optically as the previous one?

 

Yes, but ......

 

I've had several of the E39 versions which are optically identical to the E46 version (the last version before the apo). None of the E39 copies were perfect in their focusing and there are many threads in which similar comments have been made. My E46 version is spot on, so whilst the E39 versions can be bought very cheaply, the E46 may actually be a better lens mechanically (after all why modify an already acceptable design unless there was a reason). My experience suggests that the E46 version is the one to go for anyway. So I'd suggest that if you want a pre-apo version (which is an excellent lens - I print to near 30" x 20" and one of my best selling prints is from this lens) look for an E46 copy - they aren't as cheap as the E39 versions but they are well made and will of course be somewhat newer (though still have some age). Peter Loy (www.peterloy.com) has a copy from 1992 in stock, described as near mint, for £625 for example, so not cheap but not silly money either.

[albertknappmd]

Hi chaps,

 

I have a lovely little set of lenses now (mostly summilux's) but I think I would like to buy a smaller set that I can use purely for landscapes when I go hiking, walking in places like Norway, Iceland, New Zealand etc. I never normally care for 'sharpness' over other attributes but for this application I think I do.

 

I have the following lenses that I feel will work well for this already.

 

21mm SE

28mm Elmarit ASPH II

35mm Lux APSH non FLE - Possibly not ideal?

50mm Summilux ASPH - Possibly not ideal? Is the 50 cron sharper?

75mm Lux - Not ideal

90mm Cron ASPH - Probably perfect sharpness, just heavy.

 

So what are your thoughts?

 

What is the general consensus on sharpest lenses? I guess I'd be interested in 35-50-75-90. But maybe I have all I need?

 

Cheers

 

The 50 Cron is sharpest lens in the galaxy...

The 90 Cron is a bit heavy but amazingly sharp..

I have the 21 3.4 and is is light and very very sharp..

My kit!

Albert     

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!

[spydrxx]

The 50 Cron is sharpest lens in the galaxy...

The 90 Cron is a bit heavy but amazingly sharp..

I have the 21 3.4 and is is light and very very sharp..

My kit!

Albert     

 

Terrific glacier shot, capturing not only the blue ice but the crevice depth. Was that your 50 Chron?

[Scene Crafter]

As regards "sharpness" my best ever colour landscape photo was of the railway viaduct at Ribblehead when on holiday in Yorkshire in 1984. In superb lighting during good weather the photo was taken with Leica M3 using Kodachrome 64, the lens used was the Leitz Elmar C 90mm. Lens aperture f8 with 1/250 second. Detail resolution across the slide from edges to centre is really impressive, from stone walls in the foreground at about 100 metres to the distant mountain. A group of railway cottages in the middle distance, about 1 and a half miles or 2.3 km away are so clearly resolved that the TV ariels on the roofs are clear to see. Not bad for one of the better value lenses from the Leitz stable!

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am quite interested in the Zeiss 35mm F2.8 Biogon... Can anyone confirm experience with M240 or M10 in terms of corner colour cast and also sharpness at infinity? I read a few things about it not playing perfectly with digital sensors and also at infinity?

But I have also read contrasting things here too?

[lct]

I am quite interested in the Zeiss 35mm F2.8 Biogon... Can anyone confirm experience with M240 or M10 in terms of corner colour cast and also sharpness at infinity? I read a few things about it not playing perfectly with digital sensors and also at infinity?

But I have also read contrasting things here too?

 

I have no experience with the M10 but the lens has no color cast or sharpness problems on my M240, M8.2, digital CL and Sony A7s mod. AFAIK only issue is vignetting with this lens but it is easy to adjust in PP. Here on M240.

 

[JTLeica]

 

I have no experience with the M10 but the lens has no color cast or sharpness problems on my M240, M8.2, digital CL and Sony A7s mod. AFAIK only issue is vignetting with this lens but it is easy to adjust in PP. Here on M240.

 

 

 

Wonderful thank you.

 

I am probably going to use at F4-F8 95% of the time. What about infinity? I read a review somewhere that said it suffered from Astigmatism at infinity? I am not even sure what they meant by this as they didnt elaborate.

[IkarusJohn]

Hi JT,

 

Any of the lenses you list will be sharp enough for landscape on your M10, provided you stop down enough. I’m a fan of the 75 Summilux, I have to say.

 

For myself, the more important question is the focal lengths you really gel with. For me, this changes a bit depending on where I’m going and what I’m likely to want to photograph. Tramping in NZ, I like to reduce choices - too many lenses and too much gear can detract from the experience. That said, when I walked the Milford a couple of years ago, I took my SL and both 24-90 and 90-280 zooms because I knew what I would encounter, and what I wanted to photograph.

 

With an M10 (the only M digital I have is the CCD Monochrom), I’d take a 21, 28 Summilux & 50 Summilux and a table top tripod with stiff legs, not one of those wobbly things. In NZ, you’ll often encounter scenes where you want the stability of a tripod, and the great thing about the little ones is you can press the legs into the earth a little on a mound or a ledge, and then use the WiFi on your M10 for framing and exposure (thats what I do with my SL & TL2. Viewfinder blockage is a non-issue, motion blur likewise.

 

The one thing I don’t like doing is taking too many lenses - it adds nothing but unnecessary options.

 

For filters, I use the Lee filters - lens filter size isn’t an issue as they have adapters.

 

Cheers

John

[lct]

[...] What about infinity? I read a review somewhere that said it suffered from Astigmatism at infinity? I am not even sure what they meant by this as they didnt elaborate.

 

I don't know what this may mean but focussing at infinity is not my cup of tea so i cannot answer this question  sorry. 

[farnz]

Thanks ever so much for the help. I will check the 28 and 35 that I have this weekend, and chose the sharpest one... I am not fussed about the focal length so much, anything between 21 and 50 just to fill the gap.

 

I see that some of the Zeiss lenses are ultra sharp? Anyone have any experience with these. Part of this exercise is that I quite like researching things, regardless of whether I actually purchase or not... 

 

Now you're getting to the point of needing to define 'sharpness' in terms of acutance, resolution, and contrast. A lens with high contrast might appear 'sharp' to the naked eye but a lower contrast lens with higher resolution will be able to produce more fine detail (lp/mm), which is of course important when enlarging a picture.  

 

Pictures from the higher contrast lens will appear sharp (sharper?) because the difference between light and dark will be more pronounced but this might underperform when the picture is enlarged depending on the print medium.  

 

So what's probably most important is what you're going to do with the pictures (or might want to be able to do with them in the future) so if, for example, you'll only ever want to view the pictures online or on your monitor then high contrast will suffice but if you want to enlarge and print them to, say, wall-sized then the resolution and acutance become important.

 

It's the decades-old Zeiss higher contrast / lower resolution vs Leica lower contrast / higher resolution question.  There is no right answer so choose and paint with the brushes that suit your picture.

 

Pete. 

[astrostl]

For MTF, resolution, "sharpness," etc. the two consistently highest-rated lenses are the APO 50/2 and ZM 35/1.4. But what you have is fine.

Edited April 16, 2018 by astrostl

[pgk]

Now you're getting to the point of needing to define 'sharpness' in terms of acutance, resolution, and contrast.

 

The two lenses with differences which illustrate this well IMO are the 75mm Summilux and Summicron.

 

The Summicron is a lens with all the characteristics of a modern highly corrected design. Its overall contrast is high and it performance from wide open until it becomes diffraction limited (F/11~16ish) is superb. Fine detail is very precisely imaged and appears very 'sharp' indeed - high resolution with high acutance. A lens which maybe a little too revealing in some portraits  .

 

The Summilux is somewhat soft wide open with good but not quite  as high contrast as the Summicron throughout its aperture range. Stopped down it soon reveals plenty of fine detail but never with the absolute 'punch' of the Summicron as its acutance is lower. That said the impression can be of a smoother image and this certainly suits some subjects well. Sorry about the subjective descriptors .

 

In essence I suspect that the Summilux still has some residual spherical aberration which is rather better corrected in the Summicron, by using of aspheric glass.

 

Both are, IMO, superb lenses but with significantly different characteristics. Both are very usable and both have their strengths and weaknesses.

[JTLeica]

I have an update for you all - thanks again for your help.

 

I have just purchased:

 

15mm Voigt III - New £500 - I have a 21mm so I thought 18mm was a little close...

90mm Macro-Elmar - Latest Version with adapter - £1750

135mm Tele-Elmar - Version 1 (tapered) - £400 in nnear mint condition...

 

The 35mm Zeiss Biogon is the only remaining purchase but still undecided. I think my 35 Lux APSH stopped down is going to be as good. If its not, I might buy that too.

 

Thanks again

[farnz]

I can sell you a first class lens sharpener if you feel you need one.

 

Pete.

[sdk]

The Voigtlander 90mm/3.5 Apo Lanthar is a wonderful lightweight travel telephoto. It's very sharp by f/5.6, has no visible longitudinal or lateral chromatic aberration, and is higher contrast (no flare, more accurate looking) than the 90mm/2.8 Thin Tele Elmarit. It's Leica screw mount so you need an adapter fo M cameras, which is an easy conversion. 90mm Apo Lanthars are not available new now but used ones are pretty common.

The 35mm/1.4 Zeiss Distagon ZM is a terrific lens, but slightly bigger than the Leica 35mm/1.4 ASPH lenses, and perhaps people would not like it for travel. The 35mm/1.4 ZM does block quite a quadrant of the optical finder and is better for cameras with EVF or live view for precise framing. The 35mm/2.8 C Biogon is fantastic, and tiny, and barely blocks the optical viewfinder of M cameras, especially with the hood off.

Edited April 19, 2018 by sdk

[Ronazle]

I tend to agree that the Voigtlander 90mm may be your best choice as it is both sharp and light.  Myself, I would lug the 90mm ASPH Summicron. A weight/bulk reducing alternative for 50mm is the Voigtlander 50mm F:3.5 Heliar which is probably the sharpest 50mm out there, at least the sharpest 50mm costing less than $5000 USD. Putts and others have verified its unbelievable corner to corner performance -  costing less than $800 USD it is a great buy.  However, filters are a problem (27mm). Regards, Ron

Edited May 28, 2018 by Ronazle

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jonatdonuts]

That is a mighty fine collection from 21 to 90. All of them (apart from the 75mm) would be excellent for landscape in all aspects (sharpness, rendition, resolution, weight etc). 

 

The weather conditions, your shooting technique, and the quality of print would have far greater impact on the final image than the latest APO lens. 

 

You mentioned that the 90 summicron is heavy. It's really not in comparison to DSLR / mirrorless autofocus lenses. There is the 90mm Elmarit or Summarit that is around 100-150g lighter but then again that's around the same weight as a king size mars bar. 

 

Eat the mars bar before you leave the house and enjoy the excellent kit you have now!

Hi chaps,

 

I have a lovely little set of lenses now (mostly summilux's) but I think I would like to buy a smaller set that I can use purely for landscapes when I go hiking, walking in places like Norway, Iceland, New Zealand etc. I never normally care for 'sharpness' over other attributes but for this application I think I do.

 

I have the following lenses that I feel will work well for this already.

 

21mm SE

28mm Elmarit ASPH II

35mm Lux APSH non FLE - Possibly not ideal?

50mm Summilux ASPH - Possibly not ideal? Is the 50 cron sharper?

75mm Lux - Not ideal

90mm Cron ASPH - Probably perfect sharpness, just heavy.

 

So what are your thoughts?

 

What is the general consensus on sharpest lenses? I guess I'd be interested in 35-50-75-90. But maybe I have all I need?

 

Cheers

Edited May 28, 2018 by jonatdonuts

[IkarusJohn]

I’ve taken my best landscapes here in NZ using the 75 Summilux.

 

If you know these lenses, take them. You don’t need to carry them with you all the time. Mostly, you can have your camera bag under the seat or in the boot of your car reasonably safely (just keep away from heavily touristed areas :-)

 

Were it me, I’d take the 21-28-50-75. I’m not a 35 or 90 user. They are all very good performers - I have a Monochrom image taken up the Matituki Valley with the 75 Summilux printed just over a metre (on the long side) and it’s tack sharp.

 

Cheers

John