Next TL Lens To Get?

[Ricard0]

Another newbie question...

I purchased my CL with the Summilux-TL 35 f/1.4 ASPH lens.  I will eventually be adding the APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm f2.8 ASPH and Vario-Elmar-TL 55-135mm f/3.5-.5 ASPH, but am undecided on which wide-angle to get.   Since I have the 35 now it seems the 28 isn't significantly different enough ti warrant the cost.  So I'm thinking either the 18, the 11-23, or the 18-56.

On the one hand a prime 18 would give me a more travel-happy configuration (the 35 is relatively large), but I do like the ability to zoom so I'm leaning towards the 11-23 or 18-56.   I'll be traveling to Spain this summer and expect to be doing lots of architectural shots as well as typical tourist stuff.   Looking for opinions!

 

Thanks,

Rich

[scott kirkpatrick]

I'd recommend the 11-23.  It's sharper than either the 18 or the 23 primes with a nice clear field.  The strength of the primes is that they are small and fast, but that isn't an issue if you want to carefully compose on architectural subjects.  And the 11-23 focuses really close as well.  I have shot with all three.

[grahamhoey]

I have owned all 4 lenses you refer to and for travel I use the 18-56 for 90% of my pictures. The size is quite a bit smaller than the 11-23 and it covers a much larger focal range. I always carry the 35 1.4 for low light however. 

[jaapv]

I'm with Graham here. My travel set is 18-56, 55-135 and Summilux 24 M. I thinking about getting a Voigtländer 10 mm for WA work.  If I want to go light I take the Summicron-C 40 mm for low light and compactness plus the 18-56.

If it really needs to be small: the Summicron 40  and a Color-Skopar 25. Another mini-lens.

[wsself]

I've got both the 11-23 and the 23 prime.  

On a recent trip I had taken I found myself using the 23 prime the majority of the time. I found it to be incredibly versatile - portraits, landscape, architecture, streets. It is also much lighter to carry than the 11-23. If you need to go wider (much wider) and don't mind not having a fast aperture, the 11-23 gives you great coverage and it delivers superb sharpness. Both lenses are winners, just depends on your needs. 

[Bill W]

I have both the 11-23 and 18-56. I generally use the 18-56 most of the time for my shooting. I also have the 23 which is very light and compact. As others have said, it just depends on what you usually shoot, some folks like a wide zoom all the time for how they shoot and others like the 18-56. I also have the 55-135 and it is a really fine but obviously a larger lens. Still it is not heavy to carry around all day.

[erudolph]

Another vote for the 18-56.  It's on the small side and wide enough for many though not all architectural shots.  That said, if traveling, and if possible, I'd take all three zooms plus the 60mm-TL.  A smallish kit that allows for most any situation.

[LocalHero1953]

The thing with the TL/CL lenses is that the zooms do not lose IQ compared to primes (for practical purposes) but do lose aperture. Since I rarely want wide angle at night, or for narrow depth of field, the 11-23 is an ideal catch-all wide angle lens, great for buildings, streetscapes and tourist landmarks, and not bad in crowds. For more people-focused shots the 18-56 is better (IMO), but you will notice the small aperture more, especially if you're trying to isolate faces against messy backgrounds. You already have the Summilux 35, so you have something that will help you there.

[Ricard0]

9 hours ago, erudolph said:

Another vote for the 18-56.  It's on the small side and wide enough for many though not all architectural shots.  That said, if traveling, and if possible, I'd take all three zooms plus the 60mm-TL.  A smallish kit that allows for most any situation.

I like this answer the best - effectively "buy 'em all".   :^)     I might, eventually, but not before April.

Since I also have a D-Lux Typ 109 I can always carry that as my 'lightweight' gear for the tourist-y outings and hiking so I'll take the 23 off the list.   That narrows it down to the 11-23 or the 18-56.   It appears from the feedback here that either would be a good choice.

 

Thanks,

-rich-

[lanetomlane]

I would recommend the 18-56 for most situations but the 11-23 is a wonderful lens when wide angle is required. I also have the 55-135, the 23 and the 35 Summilux which is great in low light conditions. All lenses are great performers it just depends on your shooting style.

[FrozenInTime]

6 hours ago, lanetomlane said:

I would recommend the 18-56 for most situations but the 11-23 is a wonderful lens when wide angle is required. I also have the 55-135, the 23 and the 35 Summilux which is great in low light conditions. All lenses are great performers it just depends on your shooting style.

I concur - the 18-56 is a really useful all round until the light fades; then switch to the 23 and 35. The 60, 11-23 and 55-135 stay in the bag as use as required lenses.

There do seem to be a fair number succumbing to the buy them all philosophy, which was never really possibly with prior leica systems. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I do have them all (except the 18).  The ones that I use are the 11-23, 23, 35, and 55-135.  And the 60 when macro is indicated and I can't quite make the 35 or the 11-23 do the job properly.  The 18-56 has seen very little use.

Edited January 3 by scott kirkpatrick

[Marac]

I agree with Scott, his main 4 lenses are the ones I still own, had them all at some point, 18 was ok, 18-56 useful for travel lens but the 11-23 is the best for wide angle bar none.

 

The OP was asking about wide angle lens, my vote is for the 11-23, it's fantastic and is my most used lens when I'm visiting the Lake District or Scotland.

 

Below is a shot straight out of camera CL/11-23@11mm f5

Hello guest!
Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.

[Ricard0]

21 minutes ago, Marac said:

I agree with Scott, his main 4 lenses are the ones I still own, had them all at some point, 18 was ok, 18-56 useful for travel lens but the 11-23 is the best for wide angle bar none.

 

The OP was asking about wide angle lens, my vote is for the 11-23, it's fantastic and is my most used lens when I'm visiting the Lake District or Scotland.

 

 

Wow - tough decision...   I was all but decided on the 18-56 since that'd probably work better for general travel photography,  but Leica Store Miami are out of stock.  Then I saw Scott and Marac's posts and that tipped me towards the 11-23 which is (WAS) in stock.  Just pulled the trigger.  Next up will be the 55-135 and maybe later I'll get the 23 for the size and speed.

 

Thanks again everyone.  I'm happy to be back into photography again after a 30 year hiatus, and realize I have lots to learn about digital.  This forum is great!

 

-rich-

Edited January 3 by Ricard0

[Bill W]

2 hours ago, Ricard0 said:

Wow - tough decision...   I was all but decided on the 18-56 since that'd probably work better for general travel photography,  but Leica Store Miami are out of stock.  Then I saw Scott and Marac's posts and that tipped me towards the 11-23 which is (WAS) in stock.  Just pulled the trigger.  Next up will be the 55-135 and maybe later I'll get the 23 for the size and speed.

 

Thanks again everyone.  I'm happy to be back into photography again after a 30 year hiatus, and realize I have lots to learn about digital.  This forum is great!

 

-rich-

I believe Leica Miami has a used 18-56. Looks like a great deal.

[tom0511]

âlso own them all (except the 18mm) and I love the 11-23

[Ricard0]

1 hour ago, Bill W said:

I believe Leica Miami has a used 18-56. Looks like a great deal.

NOW you tell me!  :^)   Probably wouldn't be able to get away with purchasing that one too, but I suspect I'll eventually get it.    Next up is the 55-135, hopefully before the April trip.

[nicci78]

Actually 18mm pancake lens is a must have  

I learnt to like it. Not the sharpest but it changes CL personality into a compact and light camera. 

No other TL or M lens can do that. Even the Summicron-TL 23mm  

And its AF is so fast what a pleasure 

[jaapv]

Hmm - I've got an X2 for that use - even smaller and lighter. No decent EVF of course, but that is not a handicap for this use - and it has a built-in flash.

[nicci78]

Yes of course. But I got my used 2.8/18mm for way less than an used X1 so.

And I rather use a slightly bigger CL+18mm with excellent EVF and AF.  Than very old and very slow X1/X2 with small low res screen. 

18mm pancake are so cheap because of bad press. But actually it is a very lovely lens that is plenty sharp with stellar AF. 

 

Actually I am thinking to buy a very cheap brand new T with full warranty to pair with the 2.8/18mm as a super compact bring everywhere with me camera. 

Edited January 6 by nicci78