Looking for my first R lens for my CL

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just got the chance to buy a really cheap new in box Leica R-Adapter-M.

So now I just want to play with an R lens with my CL. Some of them are really cheap (against M counterparts) Some are very expensive (the latest and rarest one) So which on to begin with ?

Right now, I've settled with these : 

• Q2 = 28 and 35mm.
• Summilux-TL 1.4/35 = 50mm.
• Summarit-M 2.4/50 = 75mm
• APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 2.8/60 = 90mm

Looks like I am missing wide and long lenses. 

The lenses that caught my eyes are :

• Elmarit-R 2.8/28 = 42mm (as a cheap hyperfocal lens for street photography) 
• Summicron-R 2/50 = 75mm as a cheap replacement of my Summarit-M 2.4/50
• Summilux-R 1.4/50 = 75mm as a nice portrait lens
• Summilux-R 1.4/80 = 120mm is it good enough to be used with CL pixel density in the center part ? 
• Summicron-R 2/90 = 135mm way cheaper than the APO, may be good enough for portrait ?
• APO-Summicron-R 2/90 = 135mm as a long portrait lens. But it is quite more expensive than the M twin.
• Macro-APO-Elmarit-R 2.8/100mm = 150mm maybe as a replacement of my APO-Macro-TL 2.8/60

So what's your experience with these lenses with the CL ?

Thanks for your help. 

Edited November 13, 2019 by nicci78

[lct]

I have a dozen of them but they felt too bulky on the CL together with the adapter so i just tried briefly the lenses below. At first glance:
R 28/2.8 v2 (11259): Very good but felt too big compared to my M 28/2.8 asph v1 with less acutance than the latter. 
R 35/2 v2 (11339): Very good but bulkier with less acutance than M 35/2 asph.
R 50/2 v2 (11216): Very good with a bit less flare than M 50/2 v4 & v5 but bulkier than the latters. 
R 60/2.8 (11347): Excellent but i did not try it with the macro adapter.
R 90/2 pre-apo (11219): Excellent but bulky again. Now the M 90/2 v2 is bulky too. 
R 135/2.8 (11211): Good but outperformed by the M 135/3.4. Good alternative to the M 135/2.8 with goggles though.
R 180/3.4 (11242): Excellent. The 2.5m MFD is still too long but feels more acceptable on a 270mm equiv. lens.

[Advertisement]

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

[nicci78]

Wow thank you so much @lct 

So much information 

  
I understand that the main issue is bulk and being older generation lens against latest M one. 

180mm has 2.5m minimum focusing distance ? Crazy 

 

[lct]

Other colleagues here won't find those lenses too bulky at all on the CL. Ask Ramarren what he thinks about that. About the R 180/3.4 apo, see Marco Cavina's Google translation here.

[nicci78]

Ok thanks. 
I will try several R lenses tomorrow. 

Edited November 13, 2019 by nicci78

[ropo54]

The CL/TL w R80 1.4 works very nicely.

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!

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you ropo54

I think that I will buy it. It is the one that kind of makes sense. 
Isn’t too heavy ? Do you need to use the tripod accessory for the R-Adapter ? Or using the CL tripod mount is OK ? 
 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by nicci78

[ropo54]

23 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Thank you ropo54

I think that I will buy it. It is the one that kind of makes sense. 
Isn’t too heavy ? Do you need to use the tripod accessory for the R-Adapter ? Or using the CL tripod mount is OK ? 
 

 

I have used it hand held.

It is a wonderful lens (and about 50% of the price of the M 75 1.4). It is a tad unbalanced but for my intentions, manageable. A bit heavy, but not too heavy. Somewhat similar to the feel of a Noctilux on the CL.

I use a Novoflex R adapter with the Leica M adapters. I also find using a handgrip with thumbs up helps stability when handholding the CL (with any lens attached).

Rob

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!

Edited November 14, 2019 by ropo54

[scott kirkpatrick]

I've used both the R Summilux 80 and the R APO Summicron 90 on my SL.  These are heavy lenses and balance well on the SL.  The 90 is somewhat more compact and lighter, and might handle better on a CL.  Both can make lovely portraits.  e.g. 

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!

S1030217 1 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

But the R lens that best extends the capabilities of my CL is the 180/2.8.  It is light, focuses quickly, and balances well on the CL.  

[bags27]

Such good problems, Phil!

Scott beat me to it with a tele suggestion.

Consider, too, the more expensive, slightly slower, but I think even better optically 180 f/3.4 R APO Telyt. This lens has a real history (originally Mandler designed it as a spotting scope for the Canadian navy) and is absolutely brilliant. Then, you can have terrific fun shooting landscape and Paris cityscape in compressed distances, among other things. If you want to extend that range, the APO 2x extender pairs perfectly, and, voila! you're a birder.

I have the not quite as great, but still very good R 80-200 f/4 and APO 2x and it's a lot of fun. Zooming helps with small things like birds, but I'd be tempted to swap my zoom for that lens. 

 

[ramarren]

I have used MOSTLY R lenses with both the SL and CL. They don't feel particularly bulky to me at all ... As with an SLR, you use the lens+adapter assembly as the means to holding and working the body, rather than holding onto the body. As a group of lenses, the placement of focusing ring and aperture is MUCH more consistent than M lenses, and despite the bulk of them over the M lenses, they prove to be much more ergonomic in use. The R Adapter M stacked on the M Adapter L works perfectly with all of them on the CL, and the adapters removable tripod foot supports the lens and camera on a tripod at the correct point without stressing the camera body the way the on-body tripod mount would with a large lens. 

These are my current R lenses:

• Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5
• Elmarit-R 19mm f/2.8 v1
• Elmarit--R 28mm f/2.8
• Summicron-R 50mm f/2
• Summilux-R 50mm f/1.4
• Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8
• Summicron-R 90mm f/2
• Macro-Elmar-R 100mm f/4 (in bellows mount, with Focusing Bellows-R)
• Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8
• Elmar-R 180mm f/4

All of them perform beautifully with the CL. In some cases, they outperform the M lenses I use as well. The Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm followed by the Elmarit-R 28mm/Summilux-R 50mm, followed by the Summicron-R 90mm are my most used lenses. The Super-Elmar-R 15mm is another "special" lens with its own beautiful, unique rendering qualities. 

I use M mount lenses on the CL too, for the convenience of their smaller size and weight when carrying the camera for casual and walking about shooting. But whenever I pull the CL out to do something of a more serious, pointed nature, it's always one of these lenses I turn to.

G

[nicci78]

Thanks to everybody ! So many valuable information. 
I was too slow to get perfect condition and cheap Summicron-R 50 & 90mm 😓it was only 800€ both with 6 months warranty. 
Tomorrow I may get an R7 + Summilux-R 80mm for 1,880€ both in good condition with 3 months warranty. 


 

Edited November 14, 2019 by nicci78

[nicci78]

By the way is there any difference between old Summilux-R 50mm against latest Summilux-R 50mm with ROM ? 

[ramarren]

Check the wiki on this site. There might be two series, but by and large most changes to the Lux  50 R are a matter of mount changes, not optical changes. 

[lct]

7 hours ago, nicci78 said:

By the way is there any difference between old Summilux-R 50mm against latest Summilux-R 50mm with ROM ? 

I have no experience with those lenses but they have a different optical formula. R 50/1.4 v1 from the seventies (11875, 11776) have seven elements while v2 from the nineties (11344) has eight elements. See E. Puts, § 6.3.16 & 6.3.17 here.
 

[nicci78]

9 hours ago, ramarren said:

Check the wiki on this site. There might be two series, but by and large most changes to the Lux  50 R are a matter of mount changes, not optical changes. 

Don't worry, I just checked the price. Summilux-R 50mm E60 is super rare and super expensive. No reason to buy it instead of cheaper Summilux-M 50mm asph.

Same case for APO-Summicron-R 90mm asph more expensive than APO-Summicron-M 90mm asph. But it may worth it for the ergonomics and the closer minimum focusing distance. 

Best bargain seems to be Summicron-R 50mm, Summicron-R 90mm or Summilux-R 80mm. They are way cheaper than their M twins

 

 

[nicci78]

What about the zoom lenses ? Does they worth it ? 

 

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

R zooms are small, but not close to the quality of the L zooms, but certainly good as travel lenses or for rare occasions.  I have the 35-70/4.0 (which also has a Macro setting) and a 21-35/3.5 and I have used them on occasion with nice results.  Both with ROM, so the SL knows what you are doing, even down to the focal length.  The original cameras needed to shape the flash cone angle to the focal length.

As a challenge, I will be interested to see if the focal length is transmitted to the IBIS software in the SL2.

Edited November 15, 2019 by scott kirkpatrick

[nicci78]

I think that I will start with the Leica designed but Kyocera made Vario-Elmar-R 4/35-70 macro. Not too heavy and quite compact. It gives me a nice f/4 50-105mm zoom lens.

Which seems to be a better complement to the Q2 than the Vario-Elmar-TL 18-56 f/3,5-5,6. Because 28mm is redundant with Q2 and f/5.6 is quite slow for 85mm equivalent. 

It will also be more versatile than APO-Vario-Elmarit-TL 55-135 f/3.5-4.5  With a more useful range and a much closer focusing distance. 

 

What bothers me, is that Lumix S 24-105 f/4  macro is just a bit bigger and heavier than 35-70 f/4 + adapters. Used price is also the same.

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

14 hours ago, lct said:

I have no experience with those lenses but they have a different optical formula. R 50/1.4 v1 from the seventies (11875, 11776) have seven elements while v2 from the nineties (11344) has eight elements. See E. Puts, § 6.3.16 & 6.3.17 here.
 

That's what I thought but didn't have time to look up. Thank you!

 

6 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Don't worry, I just checked the price. Summilux-R 50mm E60 is super rare and super expensive. No reason to buy it instead of cheaper Summilux-M 50mm asph.

Same case for APO-Summicron-R 90mm asph more expensive than APO-Summicron-M 90mm asph. But it may worth it for the ergonomics and the closer minimum focusing distance. 

Best bargain seems to be Summicron-R 50mm, Summicron-R 90mm or Summilux-R 80mm. They are way cheaper than their M twins

 

 

I've not bought lenses based upon their comparative prices except insomuch as I bought a bunch of R lenses back in the 2011 to 2014 period because I could afford to.  At one time I had purchased about 16 lenses, with an aggregate average cost of about $350 apiece. When I sold off six of them and was left with the set above, the six I sold were valued much higher than when I bought them and paid me back about $4000 worth of that total $5600 purchase price, so I paid $1600 for 10 lenses ... about $160 apiece. A tremendous bargain given the quality of these lenses!

G