28mm isn't quite right so which 35mm? Or?

[GarethC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought a 28/2 Elmarit Asph with the M8 but it's just not seeing that much use, it's too wide for people and not wide enough for landscapes.

 

It seems that the best answer for me is a 35mm of some description. I'll almost certainly be selling the 28mm in the next 3 months or so (I'd like to get the 35mm before I part with it just to confirm the correctness of my decision) but need a "replacement" as I would end up going from 15mm to 50mm otherwise.

 

I won't be using it for portraits that much so sharpness is key. Excellent bokeh is also another selling feature.

 

I've only got one kidney left, the other one was removed to pay for the M8 and I'm not a lens worshipper, they kick around in the bag or on the lens so I don't want to be worrying about the condition of a ridiculously expensive piece of glass. That said, I will be selling the 28 so I ahve a bit of a head start on $ and am happy enough to throw in more money for the right lens.

 

So what is the right lens? I seem to be walking myself in circles with version this that and the other, Lux, Cron, VC, ya da ya da.

 

Help!!!!

[stunsworth]

35mm ASPH Summicron. Just a fantastic lens. I thought so on my film Ms and I've seen no reason to change my opinion of the M8.

[Advertisement]

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

[carstenw]

I currently have the 35/1.4 Asph, 35/2 Asph and a borrowed copy of the 35/2 IV, and I will be trying to compare them in the next few days. I would be happy to try to take some images according to requests.

[jedi996sps]

I currently have the 35/1.4 Asph, 35/2 Asph and a borrowed copy of the 35/2 IV, and I will be trying to compare them in the next few days. I would be happy to try to take some images according to requests.

 

Hi,

at some point i will be be getting a 35mm so it would be really really useful to c the results of the cron against the lux.

[gwelland]

Shameless plug for Sean Reid's reviews - he has a detailed comparison of a whole bunch of 35mm RF lenses over at Reid Reviews. If you're serious about spending Leica Summicron/Lux money then this is a cheap investment.

[Jack_Flesher]

I am loving the 35 FOV on the M8. You mentioned in the other thread, you like the 50 FoV, just not the hood on the Summicron -- but you didn't elaborate which version you have. As re hoods, I just leave them on the lens right way, and forget about caps, but that's me. Built-in hoods are pretty convenient from that perspective, but IMO don't offer much in the way of bump protection.

 

Back to the point -- It's a personal thing, but I find the 35 and 50 reasonably close in perspective and most folks probably won't need both if they have to sell a kidney to get them. (And I'll probably sell my 50.) Again, my ideal trio seems to be the 21, 35 and 75 -- love the spacing and they really cover about 95% of everything I want to do with the M8. However, I am investigating some 90's just for fun too And to be clear, I wouldn't argue with somebody claiming 24, 35, 50 or 21, 28, 50 as their ideal trio, even though the latter isn't working for you...

 

 

Jack

[Philinflash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...As re hoods, I just leave them on the lens right way, and forget about caps, but that's me. ...

 

Agree re hoods; especially the 35 Cron hood/cap. The cap comes off real easily. I lost it the first half-hour of the first day shooting in the field. Now, I leave the replacement cap "at home."

 

 

... my ideal trio seems to be the 21, 35 and 75 -- love the spacing and they really cover about 95% of everything I want to do with the M8. ...

 

Jack

 

I agree with that, too. I am thinking of the 90 macro for close-up work, but that's it. The 35 Cron and the 75 work well as a pair with having the same f-stop range makes it more intuitive to swap back and forth -- one less variable. Blending images in Photoshop can give you great wide angle results if you've got time and static subjects.

 

Gareth, the one thing that worries me is that if you are finding the 28 too wide, maybe the 35 won't be that much different to you. The angle of view is not much different between the two. And one of the nice things about your 28 is that is very compact, which makes the camera lighter and less obtrusive. Finally, you are going to get hammered on reselling the 28; it ain't a collectors item yet! Why not go for a non-Leica 50 mm and keep your 28? Or a used 50?

 

Confused? At the end of the day, your choice of lenses is very personal you best look in the mirror on this one.

[rosuna]

My ideal trio is the 24, 35 and 75.

[carstenw]

I enjoy the 28, 35, 75 trio, and throw in the WATE when I need wide. I don't find myself particularly reaching for the 21 focal length, nor do I miss the 24 between 21 and 28, for some reason, brilliant lens though it is.

[GarethC]

Hi Jack, both kidneys are still intact, maybe a little worse for wear but that's lifestyle, not photography

 

I can't remember which version 50mm, but I'm pretty sure it's V4.

 

I have the VC 15/3.5, which is quickly turning into a favourite, I never thought I'd use the M8 for landscapes but never say never I guess.

 

Philip, you are obviously absolutely correct, it is a purely personal decision, but one that I am hoping to make with the benefit of other people's advice/observations.

 

You hit on my major concern and that is that the 35 is a bit close to the 50. I was thinking of maybe looking at a 24mm or 25mm. It may seema bit straange but with the 28 I feel like I'm in no-man's land so need to commit to something longer or wider. That said, I recall a Zeiss 25/2.8 on my 5D that was the perfect lens but I detested the 28mm focal length.

 

Given the crop factor on th eM8 vs full frame on the 5D I'm beginning to think I just have a hang up with the label "28mm". Maybe somebody should call it the "more than 27mm focal length".

[hdrmd]

For all the other considerations of sharpness, contrast, bokeh, and also for the money, the 35mm Summicron is very hard to beat. The only fault I can find is that it is small, if one has large hands. DR

[sean_reid]

Shameless plug for Sean Reid's reviews - he has a detailed comparison of a whole bunch of 35mm RF lenses over at Reid Reviews. If you're serious about spending Leica Summicron/Lux money then this is a cheap investment.

 

Thanks Graham. I did indeed recently publish a very extensive review of 35 mm RF lenses.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[norm_snyder]

Two votes: One for the 35mm Pre-ASPH Summicron for every-day, carry around lens. One for the 35mm Nokton f1.2 for low light--a real bargain. If I had to keep just one it would be the Summicron. I agree that this focal length on the M8 seems just right for me. My current "spread" is 21-35-75, but I am thinking about that Zeiss 18mm when it becomes available....

 

Another thought: Depending on what it is going to be used for, a 35mm Pre-Aspherical Summilux [small, light, fast], if not as critically sharp as the current generation of lenses, might combine some of the attributes of the two 35's I own, and reduce the load [weight and financial].

 

NS

[jaapv]

I sold my 24 because the ZI Biogon 21 and Summicron 35 are the most used shortish lenses in my hands. Both lenses I can gladly recommend. The 24 is a beautiful lens as well -it is just that the focal length on the M8 turned out to be as unloved by me as it was on film -unexpectedly so.

[sean_reid]

BTW, both 28 and 35 are my most-used focal lengths on the M8.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest Walt]

I'd second Sean on the 28 and 35. These are really the only two lenses I use on the M8. With film Leicas I only used 35 and 50, so this makes sense. I have tried the tiny, very good VC 25/F4 and I could see going to 24 and 35, though the selection of 24s and 25s is not, for me, as good as the selection of 28s. The 24s and 25s are either slow or get heavy very quickly.

 

Walt

[Jlondon53]

From your post I'm gathering that you are new to the M system/rangefinder photography. If I'm wrong, I apologize. Your desire to limit your lens arsenal is impressive to me and is in my opinion, the first step to learning good rangefinder technique. I just feel that you should hold on to your 28mm lens for a while longer and save yourself some regret later. Rangefinder and SLR photography are not only technologies, but more importantly shooting "styles". I fear that you may have not had your rangefinder long enough to differentiate from the SLR mentality, technique, and way of "seeing". As a stand-alone lens on a "full-frame" M camera, the 35mm lens has been commonly accepted as the "normal" lens as opposed the the 50mm of the SLR world. Good rangefinder technique generally requires that you get closer to your subject - hence the technical fact that the accuracy of the M8's framelines favor closer camera to subject distances. While there is no full frame 35mm lens equivilent for the M8, the 28mm at 1.3x is as close as you can get - with the 24mm (my personal pref) on the wider side. Since you expressed a pref for the longer focal length side, that again means the 28mm. While my 35mm 1.4 lux asph is my favorite lens for "technical" reasons, if I had to choose between it and my 24mm, I would probably short out my brain. My suggestion to you would be to try to be open to a new way of seeing rather than try to make the M8/lens combo fit into an SLR mentality/familiarity. It's been said that M optics are not just lenses, they are jewells and unlike the camera, you should never sell them, nor is there reason.

[GarethC]

John

 

Yes I am relatively new to rangefinder photography and no need to apologize for an observation, my knowledge base compared to the people here is spectacularly inferior as is my photography. I mean that with all sincerity.

 

You've hit the nail on the head in so many respects but I have to say "THANKS ALOT BUDDY". You're just advocating my demise to the poorhouse.

 

It's interesting what you say about getting closer to the subject as I am noticing that I have to encroach on personal space, Dale Carnegie comes to mind

 

I will say that I have always preferred shorter focal lengths with an slr and dslr and jumped on the 5D when FF became affordable.

 

I think my shooting style is changing, I noticed it after taking the camera for a walk on Saturday, an epiphany of sorts

 

One other thing of note, I have always favoured a fixed focal length and have tried as much as possible to keep to 2-3 fixed length lenses so am used to putting the zoom ring on the bottom of my shoes.

[DaveSee]

John

 

Yes I am relatively new to rangefinder photography and no need to apologize for an observation, my knowledge base compared to the people here is spectacularly inferior as is my photography. I mean that with all sincerity.

 

You've hit the nail on the head in so many respects but I have to say "THANKS ALOT BUDDY". You're just advocating my demise to the poorhouse.

 

It's interesting what you say about getting closer to the subject as I am noticing that I have to encroach on personal space, Dale Carnegie comes to mind

 

I will say that I have always preferred shorter focal lengths with an slr and dslr and jumped on the 5D when FF became affordable.

 

I think my shooting style is changing, I noticed it after taking the camera for a walk on Saturday, an epiphany of sorts

 

One other thing of note, I have always favoured a fixed focal length and have tried as much as possible to keep to 2-3 fixed length lenses so am used to putting the zoom ring on the bottom of my shoes.

 

Hmmm... why I post to such a personal quest--and John, too, including SLR to RF sensibility(I prefer this to technique)--I am also playing within the "mids". Using the CV15 is, to my work, and seeing, topographical: it's not some thing, but a scene made up of things. With the 50s and more "interior", it's /the thing/... studied. Between a 21 and 35 range with the M8 I (we?) enter the "caste of the subject/thing", and /that/ is very tricky with RF gear, because, as has been said, "through the viewfinder(VF), everything's in focus". Why tricky is that some rely on VF framelines, and others(like me) rely on the lens character.

 

With the M8, I too find 28 a little "nowhere", prefering 21, 25, 35 and 50, despite preference to 28 with film, over 35. I use 50, carrying a 75 'cron, for moments(things) within reach... the 75 for those just beyond. Yet, this is /really/ all about the object, the subject of your view, subjective.

 

That said, I'd try the inexpensive, non-body-organ-donation-required CV 25 and 35 Skopar versions+Milich adapters for LTM(8) to best determine which direction you feel most useful from 28 on the M8. Yes, this is a "Leica" forum, but of late, it is more... getting what's deserved of the mighty M8. I'd also hang on to the 28 you have... the 35 'cron sold "as complement" to the film M's became an urban myth as "bokeh king" I'm not pushing CV glass here, but to John's point--and your DC comment--you've already been observed as holding a camera: now, just what do /you/ want from the environment? Oh, and also what you can afford now... and very near--nearer than you'd know!--later. The Leica 24 and 35s are terrific to the core, but you tend toward 35 when you may find 24, or the WATE a better fit, later.

 

hth+rgds,

Dave

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[gogopix]

I bought a 28/2 Elmarit Asph with the M8 but it's just not seeing that much use, it's too wide for people and not wide enough for landscapes.

 

 

Help!!!!

 

I am surprised on this comment. Many (TOO MANY!) years ago I switched for a Nikon with 'std' 50mm to a Leica 35mm film camera and found that the 35mm FOV was in general better than 50mm for travel, interiors.

For landscapes, the 28mm (35mm equivalent) can be stitched easily for nice panorama,

For people I agree, but find the 75mm or 90mm far better.

The extra stop you may also miss.

 

However, if your style is different I think you will have no trouble selling the 28/2 an outstanding lens, and one that I use 70% of the time, and it seemed many on a recent Leica M8 tour used as well.

 

good luck