First film Leica M camera

[opt817]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hallo, espelt has recommended Canon ltm lenses. Do you have good experience with it? Where in Europe can I buy Canon ltm lenses, focal length 35 and 50mm?

Is focusing good, because you need adapter LTM (M39) to M mount?

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

Canon LTM lenses are good if you can find them in good condition, old and hazy is the norm.

I'm lucky to have many in good shape with clean glasses.

My opinion is they are not up to Leitz/Leica old lenses of same age.

My LTM Canon 1.4/50 is good but definitely not Summilux killer (as some may write), I have also Canon 1.2/50 this one is in many aspect better * than Noctilux1.0.

The Canon * 1.2/50 is very short hiding less the VF, and the focus ring is larger than Noctilux 1.0, but the optical is to be learned to use (soft and field curvature).

The LTM 1.4/50 shares same characters, so to be learn to use as usual.

 

For me these Canon LTM are fun (third/later) lenses but as first lens, "new" Voigtlander lenses are better choices.

how this looks

Edited February 28, 2022 by a.noctilux

[Huss]

7 hours ago, opt817 said:

Hello,
i'm waitng for good offer for Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1,5 T* | ZM | Leica.

What is your opinion about this lens?

Not a good choice as a first lens, because it has focus shift.  What that means is the point of focus changes as the aperture changes, which is not reflected in the viewfinder.

I have this lens and it is excellent, but I am now used to knowing how to use it.  As a starter lens you may find it frustrating and have a bunch of out of focus pics until you figure it out.

The Zeiss Planar 50 f2 has no such issues, is excellent and you can just concentrate on getting the shot.  Or a Voigtlander 50 1.5 (not the Heliar! That is a soft focus lens) would be good.

[giannis]

15 hours ago, Huss said:

Not a good choice as a first lens, because it has focus shift.  What that means is the point of focus changes as the aperture changes, which is not reflected in the viewfinder.

I have this lens and it is excellent, but I am now used to knowing how to use it.  As a starter lens you may find it frustrating and have a bunch of out of focus pics until you figure it out.

The Zeiss Planar 50 f2 has no such issues, is excellent and you can just concentrate on getting the shot.  Or a Voigtlander 50 1.5 (not the Heliar! That is a soft focus lens) would be good.

This also sums up my opinion to the letter.

 

Only I'd suggest a 35mm f/2 or f/1.4 for a starter lens, because they're usually small, light, reasonably priced and a great starter focal length that can do everything: general walkaround/street lens, environmental portraits, a bit if architecture, fast enough to be used as low-light lens, etc. . For all these reasons (including size/weight, price, and speed), I'd get the 35mm f/1.4 Nokton at first. 

[aesop]

16 hours ago, Huss said:

Not a good choice as a first lens, because it has focus shift.  What that means is the point of focus changes as the aperture changes, which is not reflected in the viewfinder.

I have this lens and it is excellent, but I am now used to knowing how to use it.  As a starter lens you may find it frustrating and have a bunch of out of focus pics until you figure it out.

The Zeiss Planar 50 f2 has no such issues, is excellent and you can just concentrate on getting the shot.  Or a Voigtlander 50 1.5 (not the Heliar! That is a soft focus lens) would be good.

 

    ...out of curiosity (and mildly off-topic), how does one efficiently address focus shift in a lens such as the Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1,5 T* | ZM | Leica? Would it simply be a case of ensuring that focusing is always the last step when shooting? Further, where the aperture has been altered last and focus thus impacted (but not in the VF), what are the correct remedial steps to ensure the VF reflects actual focus before the shutter is released? Thanks.

 

[LocalHero1953]

7 minutes ago, aesop said:

 

    ...out of curiosity (and mildly off-topic), how does one efficiently address focus shift in a lens such as the Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1,5 T* | ZM | Leica? Would it simply be a case of ensuring that focusing is always the last step when shooting? Further, where the aperture has been altered last and focus thus impacted (but not in the VF), what are the correct remedial steps to ensure the VF reflects actual focus before the shutter is released? Thanks.

 

I had one and I just practised on the M240, using liveview to check focus. Once I worked out how much focus shift there was at different apertures, I got in the habit of making little tweaks to the focus ring. But it would be a real nuisance learning how to use it on a film camera! Best avoided IMO, even though it is otherwise a very nice lens. 

[aesop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I had one and I just practised on the M240, using liveview to check focus. Once I worked out how much focus shift there was at different apertures, I got in the habit of making little tweaks to the focus ring. But it would be a real nuisance learning how to use it on a film camera! Best avoided IMO, even though it is otherwise a very nice lens. 

 

     ...thanks, Paul. I should have been more specific in my post, for I am film-only.

S.

[wizard]

Am 27.2.2022 um 16:10 schrieb 250swb:

I wouldn't go with an M7 because they are becoming difficult to repair.

That seems to be a myth. Leica manufactured the M7 until 2018 at least, so the most recent samples are still under warranty, and will of course be serviced and repaired by Leica, if neccessary.

[Huss]

2 hours ago, aesop said:

 

     ...thanks, Paul. I should have been more specific in my post, for I am film-only.

S.

Exactly what Paul said.  I was able to determine on my M240 where the focus shifted, and then accommodated for that when I use it on film.  There is another issue with the 50 1.5 - Zeiss made them to either nail focus at 1.5, or at 2.8!  And the only way to find out what you have is to test it.  I think originally they set it at 2.8 because they thought that would be a happy medium, but then realized that most people buy this lens to use it at 1.5, or stopped down to f8.

Mine is set for 1.5, and in my testing at f4-5.6 is back focuses, so I adjust for this by focusing slightly in front of where I would normally want it to be.

This is why I totally disagree with those that say it is a great first lens for an M film camera. It is a great lens, but not great first lens unless you don't mind running a bunch of tests before you actually use it.

[250swb]

2 hours ago, wizard said:

That seems to be a myth. Leica manufactured the M7 until 2018 at least, so the most recent samples are still under warranty, and will of course be serviced and repaired by Leica, if neccessary.

So you think a) there is still a warranty on a four year old camera, and b) you think the warranty carry's over to a new owner. I'll have some of what you are smoking. You may get a six month warranty buying from a shop, but that is a dealer warranty not a Leica warranty.

[Huss]

4 minutes ago, 250swb said:

So you think a) there is still a warranty on a four year old camera, and b) you think the warranty carry's over to a new owner. I'll have some of what you are smoking. You may get a six month warranty buying from a shop, but that is a dealer warranty not a Leica warranty.

Leica services the M7.  Why wouldn't they?  They still work on the up to now 40 year old M6! (It first came out in 1984).

Has anyone actually been told by Leica otherwise?  Outside repeating rumours that they heard from a friend of a mom who knew someone who read it someplace from someone who heard from a neighbour who has conversations with his cat?

[wizard]

vor 5 Minuten schrieb 250swb:

So you think a) there is still a warranty on a four year old camera, and b) you think the warranty carry's over to a new owner.

When I bought my M7 in Germany, it came with a 5 year Leica warranty. And yes, that warranty would have carried over to a new owner (but I kept my camera). Whether and when that has changed I do not know.

[Anbaric]

22 minutes ago, Huss said:

Leica services the M7.  Why wouldn't they?  They still work on the up to now 40 year old M6! (It first came out in 1984).

Has anyone actually been told by Leica otherwise?  Outside repeating rumours that they heard from a friend of a mom who knew someone who read it someplace from someone who heard from a neighbour who has conversations with his cat?

I've not heard anything about problems in servicing the M7. On the other hand, while the M6 Classic can be fully serviced, certain metering faults of the M6-TTL, which has more complex electronics and was made from 1998 until the year the M7 launched (2002), can't now be fixed because a circuit board is no longer available. That leaves you with a camera without metering or flash sync. Nobody except Leica knows how many spares they have for the M7. If the electronics fail after they've run out of components for this 20 year old design, then you may at worst be left with a non-functional camera, whereas I suspect the mechanical cameras will be fixable as long as there is film. Leicas from the 1920s and 30s are still being serviced.

[aesop]

1 hour ago, Huss said:

Exactly what Paul said.  I was able to determine on my M240 where the focus shifted, and then accommodated for that when I use it on film.  There is another issue with the 50 1.5 - Zeiss made them to either nail focus at 1.5, or at 2.8!  And the only way to find out what you have is to test it.  I think originally they set it at 2.8 because they thought that would be a happy medium, but then realized that most people buy this lens to use it at 1.5, or stopped down to f8.

Mine is set for 1.5, and in my testing at f4-5.6 is back focuses, so I adjust for this by focusing slightly in front of where I would normally want it to be.

This is why I totally disagree with those that say it is a great first lens for an M film camera. It is a great lens, but not great first lens unless you don't mind running a bunch of tests before you actually use it.

 

     ...I would consider the above Zeiss 50/1.5 lens wholly unacceptable. Film photography already has its own challenges without me adding to that list with a known defective lens. My first Leica 50/1.4 ASPH lens was returned and immediately replaced by my dealer as soon as I found out it had a slight focusing anomaly - I still remember both of us rolling our eyes at 'declining Leica QC' <shudder>, and this was way back in 2007 or thereabouts. I guess you digital folks are a bit more forgiving.

S.

 

[giannis]

1 hour ago, aesop said:

 

     ...I would consider the above Zeiss 50/1.5 lens wholly unacceptable. Film photography already has its own challenges without me adding to that list with a known defective lens. My first Leica 50/1.4 ASPH lens was returned and immediately replaced by my dealer as soon as I found out it had a slight focusing anomaly - I still remember both of us rolling our eyes at 'declining Leica QC' <shudder>, and this was way back in 2007 or thereabouts. I guess you digital folks are a bit more forgiving.

S.

 

To add to what other people have already said, and since I use it on film, I'll say the only way to "compensate" for focus shift with film, is though practice and knowing how focus shift works. The easiest method, is either through slight adjustment on the focus ring (i.e. focus "correctly" until the rf patch coincides, then "unfocus" a bit as if you're focusing to the front of your subject), or by slightly leaning backwards (same effect).

In practice, you don't compensate so much for focus shift, but you rather work around it. Focus shift is most prominent at one or two stops away from the aperture at which the lens is calibrated . And it's also most prominent at very close focusing distances. Say, if that Zeiss is calibrated for perfect focus at f/1.5, then the worst case of focus shift will be at f/2 and f/2.8, at close to minimum focus distance. At narrower apertures or/and further away distances, the depth of field is large enough to mask any focus shift (as in, the object you focused on will be sharp and within the DoF).

What I do? Well, at minimum focusing distances (portrait pretty much), I prefer wide open (with that lens) and if I'm gonna stop down I'll stop to f/4 at least and not f/2 or f/2.8. At far away distances, I'll also prefer f/4  and f/1.5 and "avoid" the intermediary f/2 and f/2.8, but even when I use them it's fine. At intermediary distances, same story, only when I "have" to use f/2 and f/2.8, i'll adjust focus a bit or lean with my body a bit. 

Focus shift is an inherent imperfection of many lens designs, that needs to either be corrected with extra elements and groups, or be sacrificed for other benefits. The original Sonnar design (for the Contax rangefinder), "sacrificed" focus shift in order to be able to achieve a fast lens with only three groups (7-elements, 3-groups for the f/1.5 version),  in a tiny package. The main design goal was to keep the number of lens-to-air surfaces (hence groups) to an absolute minimum. This was essential in prewar lenses (no coatings), because it reduced flare and increased contrast considerably (and also speed/lens transmission), contrast back then was hard to come by and had the biggest visual impact on images from a technical standpoint (how resolution works nowadays, also because film resolution is dependent on subject contrast too). As a result, the design was the undisputed "king" of its time (before the introduction of the Planar design, made possible by coatings and which became the "standard" for lenses around 50mm), despite its flaws that are "weird" now especially for a 50mm lens. To name a few: assymetric design with geometric distortion, focus shift, field curvature. 

That said, people appreciated the small size for the speed, and most importantly its bokeh after the bokeh craze (indeed it has very nice bokeh), and the way the lens renders wide open vs stopped down. Because of this popularity for *specific* aspects of the lens, Zeiss reintroduced it, and in fact for a reasonable price vs other companies' "special retro" reintroductions. It remains a specialty lens obviously, and one should be aware of its behaviour, but it ain't bad for the thing it's supposed to.

Let me attach some examples, some with the original sonnar even, just to show it's workable in practice and why *I* like the lens.

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!

And a final one: I see your focus shift, and raise a focus shift + IR focus shift  

Edited March 1, 2022 by giannis

[250swb]

4 hours ago, Huss said:

Leica services the M7.  Why wouldn't they?  They still work on the up to now 40 year old M6! (It first came out in 1984).

Well you are spot on, Leica will service the M7 and I will never argue against you on that point.  But you must have speed read the conversation and missed most of the words, because it was about if there was still a valid warranty on it for a four year old camera. 🙄

As it happens @wizard says he got a five year warranty on his and recommends purchasing one with such a warranty. So that diminishes the gene pool for an M7 with Leica warranty considerably, find one sold in Germany in the last months of production and if you have a problem in the next six months you are in good shape. How that trumps a dealer warranty of six months on any M7 if you bought one now baffles me given a dealer would still send it back to Leica, but hey, it's somebody else's logic I'm trying to interpret.

Edited March 1, 2022 by 250swb

[ktmrider2]

I used Leica film cameras continuously from 1974 and did not learn about "focus shift" until a few years ago.  It really is only a problem up close and wide open.  Depending on the f stop and focus distance you may never see it.  We are only talking about a couple inches.  I don't think it would keep me from buying the 50f1.5 Zeiss.  However my favorite fast 50 is the Voightlander 50f1.2 which may be cheaper and sharper than the Zeiss.  There are people on the board who have every Leica 50 made and they have sung the praises of the 50f1.2.

Edited March 2, 2022 by ktmrider2

[opt817]

I've contacted good vendor in my country (Slovenia) and they have recommended 

TTArtisan 50mm f/1.4 ASPH. Lens for Leica M.

Reviews are very positive and I'm sad, not to buy legacy product, but if it is really good performer as most reviews are claiming...

Any owner to confirm quality of such lens? What about "focus shift", which is present at all old fast aperture lenses?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wizard]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb Anbaric:

If the electronics fail after they've run out of components for this 20 year old design, then you may at worst be left with a non-functional camera,

It may be a 20 year old design, but since Leica manufactured that camera until not too long ago, I am sure they have sufficient components to replace faulty ones, if needed. The M6TTL is another story since its production was stopped 20 years ago. I agree with you that purely mechanical cameras may likely be repaired forever (provided you find someone who has the skills to do that) and that with electronic components there may be a replacement problem in the distant future, but then again a) I have not heard of M7 cameras failing prematurely due to electronic problems (rather, they seem to be very reliable), and b) if electronics are considered to represent a problem, then nobody should buy ANY digital camera at all. I fail to understand why the rather minimal electronics of an M7 are presented as a problem, when on the other hand people are prepared to spend a lot more money on a digital M camera.

 

vor 13 Stunden schrieb 250swb:

... and recommends purchasing one with such a warranty. So that diminishes the gene pool for an M7 with Leica warranty considerably, find one sold in Germany in the last months of production and if you have a problem in the next six months you are in good shape.

First you assume I must have smoked something (no, I am a non-smoker), now you assert I recommend purchasing something particular. Read my post and stay with the facts, I did not recommend anything, but noted that my camera camera came with a 5 year transferable Leica warranty. Assuming that did apply for M7 cameras produced in 2018, too, this means there will be quite a few still under warranty. My argument was meant to show that Leica is and will be able to service M7 cameras now and for quite some time in the future (at least 10 years if you ask me), or have you ever heard that Leica has stopped servicing a camera once the warranty period expired? So how come you say 'they are becoming difficult to repair'? Did you smoke something very special? If so, let me know, I might be interested 😁.

 

vor 13 Stunden schrieb 250swb:

How that trumps a dealer warranty of six months on any M7 if you bought one now baffles me given a dealer would still send it back to Leica, but hey, it's somebody else's logic I'm trying to interpret.

As pointed out above already, I wasn't comparing a Leica warranty against a dealer warranty, I just countered your argument that M7 cameras are becoming difficult to repair, which in my view is rubbish.

[250swb]

4 hours ago, wizard said:

 

 

As pointed out above already, I wasn't comparing a Leica warranty against a dealer warranty, I just countered your argument that M7 cameras are becoming difficult to repair, which in my view is rubbish.

We can disagree over whether they are going to be more difficult to repair in the future, but you are stretching a point to think your five year Leica warranty is common on Leica cameras around the world, and also in not accepting the point that by now it's very close to running out anyway, which in reality makes a dealer warranty as good.  A dealer warranty opens up the entire stock of second hand M7's in dealers windows for potential buyers and not just the last ones built. Why you think I was suggesting the camera couldn't be serviced at all is a product of your own confused thinking.

But it makes you wonder if Leica felt obliged to offer a five year warranty just to sell the last ones, calming nervous buyers who'd over the years heard about all the problems with the M7's electronics. We'll all have to wait and see how many parts they have left.

Edited March 2, 2022 by 250swb