Which M-lens for Leica CL?

[Kay Tetzlaff]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi I"m a new owner of a Leica CL and also have one TL prime lens. I'm considering to buy into M Lenses, especially small ones such as Summarit-m 50 F2.4 or Summicron-M 50 F2. There is a lot you can read here and elsewhere regarding comparisons of the two but I'm particularly interested how they perform on the crop sensor which changes depth of field and focal length. Also interested in other M lens recommendations for the CL.

[jaapv]

All M lenses, old and new, perform excellently on the CL. Buy a lens according to your photographic needs/wants. Their character is unchanged. Buy one stop faster if you are concerned about DOF. I find the difference between APS and FF completely irrelevant from a photographic point of view.

[Advertisement]

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

[Einst_Stein]

1 hour ago, Kay Tetzlaff said:

Hi I"m a new owner of a Leica CL and also have one TL prime lens. I'm considering to buy into M Lenses, especially small ones such as Summarit-m 50 F2.4 or Summicron-M 50 F2. There is a lot you can read here and elsewhere regarding comparisons of the two but I'm particularly interested how they perform on the crop sensor which changes depth of field and focal length. Also interested in other M lens recommendations for the CL.

Unless you already have a specific focal length in mind, otherwise start with 24mm (35mm equivalent) or 35mm (50mm equivalent) should be a good starting point. However, you might find much more choices in 35mm. As far as I know, bad Leica M 35mm lens does not exist yet. Leica simply not capable to make one.

While 35mm summicron (f2) is usually more sought off among Leica M users, with CL or TL, 35mm/f2.8 should be a better cost effective choice. The reason is the smaller sensor and the high ISO (compared to film) makes the difference between f2 and f2.8 almost irrelevant. You will save some money.   

On the other hand, TL lenses are really good. I doubt you would find much from M lenses that TL can't do. I use M lenses on CL, but that's because I already have the M lenses before  CL. 

Oh, by the way, don't limit to Leica M lenses, Leica R 35mm lens are good too, and much cheaper.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Einst_Stein

[Guest]

The pair Elmarit-M 24mm and Summicron-M 50mm works very well for me.

[jaapv]

I regularly use the Summicron-C 40 and Voigtländer 25 Color-Skopar on the CL as it is a mini set of high quality.
When I am not concerned about size, the 18-56 TL for general photography and Summilux 24 (M)  as a fast shallow-DOF  lens, are a powerful combination.

[Einst_Stein]

5 minutes ago, Joachim_I said:

The pair Elmarit-M 24mm and Summicron-M 50mm works very well for me.

A nice classical combination! (35mm and 75mm equivalent).

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I regularly use the Summicron-C 40 and Voigtländer 25 Color-Skopar on the CL as it is a mini set of high quality.

Yeah, after all it's CL, 40mm is not discriminated by the OVF. 

[nicci78]

Just convert everything in APS-C 

Aperture stays the same for light gathering. But depth of field equivalencies are better for comparison. 

Summarit-M 2.4/50 = 3.6/75mm. 
Summicron-M 2.0/50 = 3.0/75mm.
Summilux-M 1.4/50 = 2.1/75mm

Summarit-M 2.4/35 = 3.6/53mm. 
Summicron-M 2.0/35 = 3.0/53mm. 
Summilux-M 1.4/35 = 2.1/53mm

 

They will perform well enough with CL, which has über thin stack filter and support automatic software correction. So be sure to use them exclusively with Leica M-Adapter-L.
Coded lenses are easier to manage, but the official adapter will give you access to lens selection menu. 
 

Please also consider R lenses. I think that they are even more suited to CL than M lenses. 
Of course, you will have to use them with Leica R-Adapter-L or stack R-Adapter-M with M-Adapter-L. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by nicci78

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Coded lenses are easier to manage

Yes, but the advantage is really small. None of my M lenses is coded. I have placed the lens selection menu on the FN button and really don't mind manually selecting the correct lens from the list after each lens change. Fortunately, the list of lenses in the menu can be reduced to those lenses you actually use with your CL.

[jaapv]

13 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Just convert everything in APS-C 

Aperture stays the same for light gathering. But depth of field equivalencies are better for comparison. 

Summarit-M 2.4/50 = 3.6/75mm. 
Summicron-M 2.0/50 = 3.0/75mm.
Summilux-M 1.4/50 = 2.1/75mm

Summarit-M 2.4/35 = 3.6/53mm. 
Summicron-M 2.0/35 = 3.0/53mm. 
Summilux-M 1.4/35 = 2.1/53mm

 

They will perform well enough with CL, which has über thin stack filter and support automatic software correction. So be sure to use them exclusively with Leica M-Adapter-L.
Coded lenses are easier to manage, but the official adapter will give you access to lens selection menu. 
 

Please also consider R lenses. I think that they are even more suited to CL than M lenses. 
Of course, you will have to use them with Leica R-Adapter-L or stack R-Adapter-M with M-Adapter-L. 

Shorter R lenses are a bit on the large size for the CL for my taste, but especially long lenses that do not exist in M mount are highly recommended. I buy cheap R-M adapters for each of my R lenses to turn them into "M lenses" as it avoids swapping around adapters.

[Kay Tetzlaff]

Thanks Folks, very useful comments! I should mention I have the 35mm covered however would like to consider M lenses due to large variety of physically small lens options, thus my question on Summarit vs. Summicron 50. Reviews of the Summicron-TL 23mm are very mixed to say the least. 50mm seems to be nice for portraits on APS-C. What about Zeiss 50mm Sonnar or Planar on CL? Any experience?

[jaapv]

38 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Aperture stays the same for light gathering.

Very, very true. But the term "light gathering" is so confusing to many if not most Internet bloggers and blog readers that it has turned into complete baloney, best avoided.

[jaapv]

32 minutes ago, Kay Tetzlaff said:

Thanks Folks, very useful comments! I should mention I have the 35mm covered however would like to consider M lenses due to large variety of physically small lens options, thus my question on Summarit vs. Summicron 50. Reviews of the Summicron-TL 23mm are very mixed to say the least. 50mm seems to be nice for portraits on APS-C. What about Zeiss 50mm Sonnar or Planar on CL? Any experience?

Not these Zeiss lenses as I don't have them, but other ones react just like Leica lenses, no change in character. Which is not surprising, as Leica takes great care to harmonize the output of their cameras across models and systems.

In this case, if you take an image from a FF Leica (*) sensor and an APS Leica (*) sensor, using the same lens and the same camera position, crop the FF one to APS size and print them to the same size, the result will be near-identical, apart from resolution and noise differences, if any.

However, if you "crop" by moving the camera to get the same framing in the viewfinder, you will see a difference in DOF, which, as such, will only make a marginal difference in the print as seen by the viewer, because the print will be seen from all kinds of distances.

(*) meaning Leica-specified

[acapella]

Thanks for  the explanation Jaapv. 

For my understanding: does this same lens on the FF sensor and the APS C sensor not also result in a (marginal)  DOF difference (independent of cropping)?

That’s how I read the table provided by Nicci in this same post (a FF f/x lens will on the APS -C sensor become a f/1.5x lens so with the different DOF characteristics). Or do I make a mistake here?

Regards.

  

[jaapv]

DOF is only dependent on the magnification throughout the system - from subject distance to viewing distance of the print and everything in between, not on the individual values in the (complex) equation, as long as the final outcome is the same.

[gteague]

i posed the same question about two months ago and the responses were that i couldn't go wrong with any of the 50s taken overall. i ended up with the 50/2 with the sliding hood and i couldn't be happier. i mostly park it on f2.8 and it's crispy sharp on the cl even though i was worried my eyes were so bad i wouldn't be able to focus, but that is luckily a non-issue the peaking is so good.

today, in fact, i plan to move it over to my s1 and wring it out on the full frame sensor now that i know it's performing well on the cl.

/guy

Edited May 24, 2020 by gteague

[lct]

If you're after compact lenses, the Summicron 50/2 v4 and Summarit 50/2.5 (50/2.4 is larger) are hard to beat. Both work fine on the digital CL. Same for the Summicron 50/2 v5 which is a bit more bulky. My favorite 50s on the CL are the latest Elmar 50/2.8 in good light and the Sonnar 50/1.5 in low light and for portraits. The Summilux 50/1.4 asph and pre-asph work fine too but they are significantly bigger. 

[Sjz]

Anyone tried the Voigtlander Nokton  21mm F1.4. 

[Kay Tetzlaff]

Thanks for your tips regarding the 50mm lenses! I'm so happy with the TL 35; but I miss that 'Leica' look from other native tl lenses. Therefore I hope to become happy with classic M's!?

  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Guest]

6 hours ago, lct said:

My favorite 50s on the CL are the latest Elmar 50/2.8 in good light

I really should give it another try. Somehow I always reach for a Summicron (v4 or anniversary).