Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd like some advice on a telephoto lens for landscape photography with the M11 (only other M lens is a 35).
I do like long lens landscape photography and on a recent trip with my Sony system, here are the stats for 32 favorite images in terms of focal length:
24-50 = 5
51-90 = 6
91-400 = 21
So, bearing in mind the cropability, what do you recommend - 90 or 135?
Maximum aperture is not too important.
I will be using the Visioflex and a tripod.
Thanks.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

90 & willingness to crop may be more flexible than 135. The longer you go (lens wise), the more you depart from the rangefinder design of the M series ... Have you considered the excellent Leica SL at all - perhaps waiting for the next release (which may be called SL3) with the 2022 upcoming next generation of Sony sensor pitch - might turn out to be 80-100M, can't never have enough for landscape?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Deekay,   You ask a good question.  A lot of well intentioned photographers to include myself will offer all types of advice for the best focal length to use.  With the M11, I personally use Leica lenses because I like they way the M lenses render.  I have used M cameras for over 40+ years and find the 135 Apo Telyt M to be excellent to isolate the landscape.  But at the end of the day, it will be your decision that suits your genre of photography and wallet best. You have a lot of choices.  I am certain others will chime in with suggestions.  r/ Mark

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 20 Minuten schrieb jankap:

What is against Sony (FF?) for landscape photography? Think of a rotating LCD with your camera near the ground. Telephoto and optical viewfinder?? Horses for courses!

I agree that the Sony with all its wonderfull Zooms you are much better served. If it has absolutely to be the M11 then maybe you could buy the famous M Lens 16-600mm Noctilux. That would serve all purposes and is only 1 pint heavy 🤗

Edited by M10 for me
Link to post
Share on other sites

@deekay the 90mm apo is an amazing lens, my copy resolves well and would easily crop leaving enough resolution for printing large.  
 

I’ve been looking for good alternatives beyond 90mm, the 135 apo or tele-elmar are great optics however they’re limiting.
The next alternative is using the R adapter with a Leica 180mm and then add a 1.4x or 2x converter to  extend its range.  Alternatively, the 70-180mm R lens could be used however its very heavy and large. 

The M is a great camera for telephoto work, the idea of its use as a 50mm and wider went away with the visoflex on the M240.  The sensor on the M11 is proving to be spectacular from all the testing results.  
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you eventually also shoot handheld sometimes with the rangefinder (IMO the reason to buy a Leica M) I would prefer 90mm. 135 in the optical viewfinder gets pretty small and not easy to focus. Of course on the tripod with live view its not a problem and the 135/3.4 is an excellent lens.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, M10 for me said:

I agree that the Sony with all its wonderfull Zooms you are much better served. If it has absolutely to be the M11 then maybe you could buy the famous M Lens 16-600mm Noctilux. That would serve all purposes and is only 1 pint heavy 🤗

A very heavy pint. But after haven drunk a pint of that size, you could not drive the truck to transport that lens.🤭

Edited by jankap
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mzbe said:

90 & willingness to crop may be more flexible than 135. The longer you go (lens wise), the more you depart from the rangefinder design of the M series ... Have you considered the excellent Leica SL at all - perhaps waiting for the next release (which may be called SL3) with the 2022 upcoming next generation of Sony sensor pitch - might turn out to be 80-100M, can't never have enough for landscape?

SL2 is too heavy although I have never considered it with M lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jankap said:

What is against Sony (FF?) for landscape photography? Think of a rotating LCD with your camera near the ground. Telephoto and optical viewfinder?? Horses for courses!

Yes, understood. I just want to see how I can do using the M11 for landscape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For landscape you need 21, 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90mm. I have all these lenses and need them regularly. 

But I wonder if you need more lenses when you just shoot around 30 images.

BTW I do not believe that anybody can answer your question. You have to know what focal length you need. I need them all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, M10 for me said:

For landscape you need 21, 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90mm. I have all these lenses and need them regularly. 

But I wonder if you need more lenses when you just shoot around 30 images.

BTW I do not believe that anybody can answer your question. You have to know what focal length you need. I need them all.

~30 favorite images

Well, the question also concerns the qualities of those particular lenses, not simply their focal lengths.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, deekay said:

I'd like some advice on a telephoto lens for landscape photography with the M11 (only other M lens is a 35).
I do like long lens landscape photography and on a recent trip with my Sony system, here are the stats for 32 favorite images in terms of focal length:
24-50 = 5
51-90 = 6
91-400 = 21
So, bearing in mind the cropability, what do you recommend - 90 or 135?
Maximum aperture is not too important.
I will be using the Visioflex and a tripod.
Thanks.

 

 

I think given that you can crop very well with the M11, a 90mm (APO?) will give you more flexibility. If you crop at the 135mm equivalent you will still have 26 megapixels, will that be enough?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Recently I made a switch from Nikon to M11 kit. I do landscapes primarily, but do trek a lot (3-5 day treks are average for me). I can tell you that there are few opportunities that you will definitely miss with an M-kit, primarily b/c it does not have a zoom lens (not b/c of reach). Second, you are going to have to get some weather kits to protect you gear from rain etc… As far as the reach, you won’t miss much if you are willing to crop. I do have a fair chunk of takes within the 150-200mm range. So cropping from 90mm wasn’t great. So I went with the following:

40mm: I never liked 50.

15mm: About 18% of my shots are between 16-35mm range

90mm: Covers the range upto 120mm. This is where about 40% of my shots where

135mm: Covers upto 180mm. 120-180 is where about 30% of my shots where.

I can tell you that I don’t miss that many opportunity with just primes. Depending on your favorite location and style, this may be a wrong direction. I did a 2 month long test run before committing. And I still have my Nikon kit if I feel I want to go back.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, rmravi said:

Recently I made a switch from Nikon to M11 kit. I do landscapes primarily, but do trek a lot (3-5 day treks are average for me). I can tell you that there are few opportunities that you will definitely miss with an M-kit, primarily b/c it does not have a zoom lens (not b/c of reach). Second, you are going to have to get some weather kits to protect you gear from rain etc… As far as the reach, you won’t miss much if you are willing to crop. I do have a fair chunk of takes within the 150-200mm range. So cropping from 90mm wasn’t great. So I went with the following:

40mm: I never liked 50.

15mm: About 18% of my shots are between 16-35mm range

90mm: Covers the range upto 120mm. This is where about 40% of my shots where

135mm: Covers upto 180mm. 120-180 is where about 30% of my shots where.

I can tell you that I don’t miss that many opportunity with just primes. Depending on your favorite location and style, this may be a wrong direction. I did a 2 month long test run before committing. And I still have my Nikon kit if I feel I want to go back.

 

I too am predominantly a landscape photographer and switched to the M11 for its compact body, small lenses and cropability. Do you routinely take all of your lenses out with you, or just those you think will suit the location/style of picture you intend to take? I am trying to resist the temptation of buying lots of lenses!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I switched from the Sony A7R system and have a 35 and a 90. Even though I used to use my 100-400 a lot, I'm not switching back. I have really enjoyed using the pared down M11 and 2 lenses. Somehow the files seem more malleable than my Sony ones.

With regard to the comment about weather protection, I haven't yet used the system in really bad (rainy) weather but my understanding is the camera (and the lenses, not sure) are at least on a par in terms of weather protection, if not better, than Sony.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...