Please help me decide on the right lens...

[plaidshirts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Summarit 75/2.5 (for sale if you're interested in a mint used one) but got a 90mm Elmarit recently to replace it. I found the 75 too close to the 50 which is my main focal length.

Since you said your most used lens is the 85mm, as most people have suggested, a 75 or 90 will be your best fit.

I'd also suggest an .85 VF too for easier focusing and composition. My 90 works very well on my M3 and .85 M6 TTL.

Congrats and have fun!

Edited August 13, 2019 by plaidshirts

[Guest]

How would you guys feel about the following setup:

35 Summilux, 50 1.5 Sonnar (or 50 Summicron (non-APO)), and either Summicron 75 or 90? 

I've been doing some reading and it seems the 35 Lux is quite a special lens- perhaps more so than the Cron equivalent? 

My reasoning for the Sonnar 50 is mostly economic. I'm not a big 50 guy, so don't see the point in spending double or more on a Leica 50. I was quite set on going the 50 Cron route, but really am not married to that focal length. 

I think the biggest dilemma remains whether to go Cron 75 or 90, though thankfully I've got at least a year after I get the M-A to mull this over further as I'll only have one lens (most likely the 35) for that period. Someone mentioned Summilux 75... last night I did quite extensive research into the Summicron vs Summilux 75 and it seems most prefer the Cron, but I will look more into it. Ideal would be to get my hands on these lenses and decide for myself, but easier said than done. 

Thank you to everyone who has posted so far- your insights are greatly appreciated. 

[Ko.Fe.]

13 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

ha! i most certainly don't need a leica- who does in 2019 really?-, i've merely just wanted one for years and have finally got the means, so why wouldn't i? it certainly won't become my #1 workhorse camera and, as mentioned in my op, not something i anticipate i'll utilize in the same way as i do my dslr, but will undoubtedly be something nice to compliment my main rig with. 

In this case, I would dare to suggest film era  Leitz 90mm Summicron and magnifier on the M-A VF. Or just an Elmar 90 f4 in M mount. You could get collapsible version. I had one. Very good lens and doesn't cost much.

Cosina Japan made Zeiss and Viogtlander are not Leica made lenses. Here is nothing wrong with them, but they are not giving same images as Leica/Leitz.

Personally, I'd rather have even just one lens, but Leica made. With film the difference is more visible.

 

[ianman]

57 minutes ago, White Buffalo said:

How would you guys feel about the following setup:

35 Summilux, 50 1.5 Sonnar (or 50 Summicron (non-APO)), and either Summicron 75 or 90? 

.....  I'm not a big 50 guy,

If you are "not a big 50 guy," then forget the 50. If you really don't like 28mm, I would suggest 35 and 90.

59 minutes ago, White Buffalo said:

Summicron vs Summilux 75 and it seems most prefer the Cron

Probably because a lot more people have the Summicron. The Summilux is sublime but nowadays it's very expensive.

10 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

And wow, a Summilux 75- I never knew such a lens existed! Sadly, that would be lost on me as I never shoot at such apertures

So why is your choice now for a 1.4 35mm and a 1.5 50mm ??

The 35mm Summicron ASPH is excellent, as it the 35mm Summaron 2.8 for that matter, albeit older. Which brings up another question. Are you after an optically perfect lens or something with more "character"?

 

[hilm3]

The first lens conundrum! For most, if only one lens, a 35 or a 50 is probably the consensus recommendation. Since you are an 85 shooter, a 90 would seem the first choice. Note, though, that framing a 90 with a Leica is not all that accurate unless you use an accessory finder. You can build experience pretty quickly though in terms of accurate framing, but it is a bit of guess work. It is easier with an .85 VF, but then you would need an accessory viewfinder for the 35mm lens. The .85 VF would be easier to focus, with a little less guess work in the framing, A 75mm lens will let you have a little room for cropping.

All that aside, I would start with a .72 VF and a 35mm lens. That's probably the ultimate Leica experience. A collapsible Elmar f=9cm 1:4 is an inexpensive lens as a starter 90, even if you send it out for cleaning. All said and done, though, a 50mm and a few steps forward or back is my preference. A 35-90 is a classic two lens combo. 35-50-90 is pretty traditional. I have a 28mm and a 135mm that I have used maybe once or twice each in the last 20 years. 50 or 90 when I shoot people, 35 for environmental.

Buy the camera, rent a lens is a good option if you have access near you. If you are at a dealer, you can try cameras and lenses at least at the shop.

[otto.f]

11 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

Zeiss on a film Leica feels wrong-

No not at all, but my and many others’ experiences are that in the end you want a Leica anyway

11 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

Shooting colour with the 50/1.5 on the M-A you feel would yield strange results?

No but the Leica lenses have more bite and you need that on film. My opinion is purely subjective, but I think that relatively speaking the best home for a Zeiss ZM lens is a sensor

[otto.f]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

Summicron 35- do you feel the IV is better than the later/current model?

My personal view is that this lens has more character than the latest model, which has in my view a sort of hyperneutral drawing. This has been discussed here many times and also recently, you’ll find it in the search. But others find it their true companion. The version iv is also lightweight and fits ergonomically so nice an a film M. It’s not that it’s bad in color but later 35 Summiluxes have proved to be real impressive in colors. 

[evikne]

I bet you will be more confused than enlightened by a thread like this, because everyone has their own opinions. The best advice I can give is to search up as many Leica photos as you can on Flickr, look at the EXIF info and see which lenses are used for your favorite pictures.

For portraits, I guess you will find a lot of great pics taken with the 90mm Summicron pre-ASPH and 75mm Summilux.

[Guest]

I feel like I'm going crazy after spending the past two days tirelessly researching which lenses to go for... 

Summilux 35 ASPH FLE

Summilux 50 FLE

Summicron 35

Summicron 50

Summilux 75

Summicron 90

Currently I am thinking I would start with Summilux 35, or perhaps the Summicron 50? I hear great things about Summilux 50 FLE though... which leads me to the question, how will an FLE differ to the AA in the end results? I will probably add the tele lens later, most likely the Summicron 90 as the Lux 75 just seems too expensive and perhaps too soft? I am also not sure about 75 length. Sadly nowhere to try any of these. 

Will a Summilux at f/2 be sharper than a Summicron at f/2? My guess is yes. 

While I don't shoot at such apertures in my daily life/work as a photographer, perhaps having a faster lens on a Leica would be a welcome thing as I don't know where all I will take it with me- I think it will be used for more intimate photography if that makes sense. 

What a dilemma to have... But let us remove the tele lenses for now since I know 99% certain I will add the Summicron 90 next year... So let us focus on Summicron 35/50 or Summilux 35/50- latest designs of each. 

Thanks to everyone who has posted- believe me, I have logged countless hours the past two days doing more in-depth research, but actually all it has done is make me more uncertain... It really is tough to chose between 35 and 50 for such a system. I shoot people mostly in my life/work on DSLR's and even my medium format, but on a Leica who knows what (and how) I'll shoot, so it's hard to say which length will be more useful to me. 

One thing I know for sure is that I will opt for the classic 35-50-90 setup- would love to own the Mandler design Summilux 75 someday, but no rush for me right now. 

[Guest]

I never thought that something as seemingly innocuous as a decision pertaining to camera lenses could elicit so many fundamental questions... 

Mostly, what is more important to me, sharpness (Summicron) or a more characterful, softer, (Summilux) rendering? 

Without meaning any offence to anyone and just thinking out loud, I have often wondered if a Summilux (and while we're at it, Noctilux) is more of a "show off" item for some people? Of course there any instances where people will require the extra light- and even if they don't, some will definitely prefer the softer rendering. But I wonder if the Summicron is a technically superior lens if we're judging sharpness and is smaller/lighter and costs less, is the only reason to get a Summilux the wider aperture? I take back my comment about "show off"- that's a ridiculous notion, as at the end of the day the renderings of the lenses will be different and ultimately what will make one appeal to the user over the other. 

Also, being completely new to Leica, can someone tell me more about the character of the two lenses- is it a NIGHT AND DAY difference or is it much more subtle than I'm imagining it after all this reading? It almost seems like a big life or death decision that you can't mess up. Again, I wish I could just sample them in person, but I have no such opportunity. If anyone is in or around Toronto, Canada with these aforementioned lenses and would be willing to let me try them first hand, that would really be greatly appreciated.  

[evikne]

6 minutes ago, White Buffalo said:

is the only reason to get a Summilux the wider aperture?

In the grand scheme of things – yes. Leica lenses are designed to be used wide open without any compromises. So a Summilux is only "better" if you actually need/want the extra f-stop.

[ianman]

Have you seen Ken Rockwell's site? https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/recommended-lenses.htm  Of course, it's just one more persons opinion but there is a lot of information on his site https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/lens-reviews.htm

Another good source of information is https://photo.imx.nl/

And possibly Thorsten Overgaard... https://www.overgaard.dk/thorsten-overgaard-photography-lounge.html

Just to make your choice even more complicated 🙂 

 

[jankap]

13 hours ago, evikne said:

I bet you will be more confused than enlightened by a thread like this, because everyone has their own opinions. The best advice I can give is to search up as many Leica photos as you can on Flickr, look at the EXIF info and see which lenses are used for your favorite pictures.

For portraits, I guess you will find a lot of great pics taken with the 90mm Summicron pre-ASPH and 75mm Summilux.

That is right. But the best advice is, that he should start small. 

[otto.f]

48 minutes ago, jankap said:

That is right. But the best advice is, that he should start small. 

Agree. It’s a bit strange to start an M with a 90, a lens Leica found on the verge of what’s possible/reasonable with a rangefinder. The philosophy was to have a small, unobtrusive camera (as opposed to for instance the Nikon F with its enormous sound of the shutter) with which you can come close to your subject without intimidating them.

Edited August 14, 2019 by otto.f

[jaapv]

I would always go for the  Summicron 35 asph as first lens. It is, to me, the quintessential Leica M lens. Pair it with a used Elmarit-M 90 -  close to as "sharp" as any of its successors, but in a neat compact package and one is ready to go. A Summilux 50 for shallow-bokeh photography would be the cherry on the cake.

 

[ianman]

1 hour ago, otto.f said:

The philosophy was to have a small, unobtrusive camera (as opposed to for instance the Nikon F with its enormous sound of the shutter) with which you can come close to your subject without intimidating them.

Who's philosophy? I thought Mr Barnack designed his camera to be small and lightweight because he didn't want to carry heavy equipment around.  I've never heard of the unobtrusive part as being part of the original design brief. Didn't that become part of the "legend" later when people like HBC became famous?

[Mute-on]

Go into a store and physically handle all the lenses you are contemplating.  Intrusion of lens hoods onto framelines, physical size, weight, and balance on the camera body are all very real considerations in choosing a Leica M lens.  

A Summilux sounds desirable and the premium choice, but it comes at a price in terms of size and weight, not just cost. It’s not a decision that one ought to make on the basis of internet opinion. 

[a.noctilux]

White Buffalo,

Let's go ahead to confuse you more, I know it's not easy to choose only one first lens with those huge choices.

But nice to know that you will plan classic M -Trio 35/50/90- where I began while there was much less choice, forty years ago.

So let's take this as "rule" then 😁 from which we can go ahead ...

 

- 35mm can be the right choice, but you would need/want quickly another field 50 or 90

in this focal length, I'd choose Summicron (I do have a bunch of them over time and got some sold comprise the next that I suggest you as first 35mm, Summicron-M 2/35mm asph.)

I love(d) this lens (first version like these in Wiki ) that I used to own/use three of different color silver, black, titanium for my different M.

I've sold them all to use exclusively for years the Summilux-M 1.4/35mm asph. mainly for film as ISO setting can not change at will

- 50mm choice is easier, the best choice after wandering for some time is Summilux-M pre-asph. 1.4/50 (E46, collapsible hood), version III of Wiki

I have two of those ( Black, Titanium) along with older E43 model ... I can see them as sweet spot lens for M-A as balance and those nice results bettered by none

 

this may be the right choice of only one 50mm lens over Noctilux 1.0 or Summicron or Summarit (f/1.5, or F/2.5 ) which I happend to use also

...

- later 90mm , there you have plenty of time to choose one then in futur

I think that if you want to begin with 90mm, you will be disappointed by M-A + 90mm

 

 

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, ianman said:

 Didn't that become part of the "legend" later when people like HBC became famous?

The philosophy of the famous users indeed or the way they were ‘translated’ also by Leica or Leica-users who wrote books about it, e.g. Dr Paul Wolff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[earleygallery]

I’ve not read all replies so apologies if I’m repeating anyone. 

The M is rather different to your Nikon. I would suggest that you try to use it to give you a different viewpoint and advise against using it predominantly with a 90. Your Nikon (or a Classic F) is much better if you want to shoot 90 all the time IMHO.

M photography is much more about wide to standard lenses. Embrace that aspect of it. 

I have and use a 90 on an M2 so I’m not saying it’s no good, but it’s very much an occasional lens.

50 probably seems wide to you so start with that, although my personal favourite on an M is the 35 for general street/travel subject matter.

Also consider buying used lenses. Then you can buy a couple for the price of one!