Lens for mountain landscapes

[Maxpina]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings to this beautiful and very interesting forum, I am a happy owner of a Leica IIIG with Elmar 5 f3.5, I state that I mainly shoot in the mountains in large format, now I would like to do a photographic project with the IIIG, mythical Leica, I'm looking for information on which lens could be better for landscapes, a friend recommended me a Summaron 35 f3.5 what do you think?
Thanks for the valuable advice ...

Max

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

That can only be a Mountain Elmar. 
http://www.tamarkin.com/blog/mountain-elmar

[Maxpina]

@jaapv Wow what prices! It will be a super lens ... I was looking for something more affordable in terms of cost ...

[250swb]

9 minutes ago, Maxpina said:

@jaapv Wow what prices! It will be a super lens ... I was looking for something more affordable in terms of cost ...

The LTM Voigtlander 75mm Color Skopar f/2.5, or alternatively the Voigtlander 90mm Apo Lanthar which is also screw mount. All of the LTM Skopar series are excellent lenses and also small and light.

Although the title of this page is 'Leica M Mount' it does cover the LTM lenses because of course they only need an adapter to mount on an M.

https://cameraquest.com/voigtlen.htm

 

[Ouroboros]

1 hour ago, Maxpina said:

Greetings to this beautiful and very interesting forum, I am a happy owner of a Leica IIIG with Elmar 5 f3.5, I state that I mainly shoot in the mountains in large format, now I would like to do a photographic project with the IIIG, mythical Leica, I'm looking for information on which lens could be better for landscapes, a friend recommended me a Summaron 35 f3.5 what do you think?
Thanks for the valuable advice ...

Max

You might need to consider the additional cost of an external viewfinder for composing with lenses that have wider or narrower angles of view than a 50mm  on a IIIG.  Another option might be the new Voigtlander 40mm Heliar f2.8 which is available in ltm and  is possibly easier to use without an external finder.

The 50mm elmar f3.5 is perfectly good and usable for photographing mountains.  Have you tried using it?  

[jaapv]

47 minutes ago, Maxpina said:

@jaapv Wow what prices! It will be a super lens ... I was looking for something more affordable in terms of cost ...

Well, it is not that good by modern standards, but it is highly collectible.

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With my IIIg, I use 50mm, of course with one of these sometimes : 21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 85mm (Jupiter 9, a soso lens I don't recommend), 90mm, 135mm.

At first, each one must be framed (if not mandatory) with aux. viewfinder.

Either one can be used for everyday pictures and mountain/landscape.

I suggest that  taking time exploring one(or more) of those can be a joyful journey.

Summaron 3.5/3.5cm or Elmar 4/90 can be good companions to Elmar 5cm

I use the trio nice lenses 35/50/90 + adapters sometimes with my Monochrom : results are at top.

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by a.noctilux

[hmzimelka]

The Summaron 3.5cm f/3.5, while very sharp at the centre, isn't a great landscape lens due to strong field curvature and a weak mid-zone.  

I would only use this lens for landscapes at f/11. It's relatively sharp in the focus plane at f/8 but due to field curvature this plane of focus isn't going to be good for landscapes.

It is, however, very small and compact. However, a Color-Skopar 35/2.5 will be a much much better performer.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2022 by hmzimelka

[a.noctilux]

@hmzimelka

good point, but not everybody need the "sharpness" in landscape on 100% of the frame.

For me the Summaron 3.5/3.5cm can give very nice results on film (sharpness is not ALL that I need),

nothing wrong for me using this lens wide open exploring it's "lovely glow".

Of course, I can pick a "better" lens (what for ?) in my multiple 35mm, LTM mount ( for IIIg ! ) Summicron "I", Summaron 2.8 or Canon LTM in f/2 or f/3.2, but not one has the Summaron 3.5 behaviors that I learned to love.

[pippy]

8 hours ago, Maxpina said:

...I'm looking for information on which lens could be better for landscapes, a friend recommended me a Summaron 35 f3.5 what do you think?...

Hi and welcome to the forum.

In order to give you a more meaningful answer for your particular needs would you please tell us which f/l lenses (and which format!) do you typically prefer to use with your large-format system? As you already have a 'Standard' lens are you now after a wide-angle or a long lens?

Philip.

Edited May 3, 2022 by pippy

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Following up on Philip, if you are using a 4x5 and a 150mm lens a 40 or 50mm lens would be comfortable, look into an f2 Summicron ltm, or a Nikon or Canon ltm 50s. The Voigtlander 40mm Heliar is certainly an option. If you use a 210mm, look into something around 75-85mm. Here an 85 Nikon in ltm mount would stand out, there are Leica and Voigtlander lenses too. If you go wide for landscapes, say under 120mm then a 35mm would work for you. Here Voigtlander has some modern 35 formulas in ltm mount, also look into Nikon and Canon.    

[a.noctilux]

😁

I love side notes...

- so long ago, Her Barnack wanted to carry a small camera instead of view camera, he succeeded...

we know the rest

- the "mountain Elmar" (10.5cm f/6.3 in Wiki ) was created to be carried in his hikes

- then we know the rest ...and I'm glad to use so many lenses in so many fields of view that for me 135 format can give good result with either

- every lens can be used for landscape/mountain

- the less useful is wide angle, more wide would translate in film to smaller mountains

[pgk]

9 hours ago, Maxpina said:

I am a happy owner of a Leica IIIG with Elmar 5 f3.5, I state that I mainly shoot in the mountains in large format, now I would like to do a photographic project with the IIIG, mythical Leica, I'm looking for information on which lens could be better for landscapes .....

Mountain photographers like W A Poucher FRPS who wrote numerous books on mountains, climbing routes and upland landscape photography, used Leica III series cameras with 35mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses. A general, old rule of thumb though, is to use slight longer lenses for mountain photographs in order to emphasise them, so I would recommend a reasonably good condition 90mm f/4 Elmar, which should be quite reasonably priced and will still work well if stopped down. You could also buy a copy of one of Poucher's earlier (pre-1950) books featuring his black and white photography of mountains (such as "The Lakeland Peaks", "Lakeland Scrapbook" or "A camera in the Cairngorms") much of which would have been taken on a Leica III camera and which will illustrate well what was and is possible with a small camera and simple set of lenses.

[elgenper]

If you use a IIIg with 35 mm, you´re probably using a separate finder already, since the built-in finder has nothing wider than 50.  However, there is a 90 frame, of sorts ( just 4 corners, if I remember correctly), so I´d say 90 would be your obvious choice, to avoid having to change finder every time you change the lens.  And, 35 + 90 is a classical combo, for good reasons.  There are lots of good and cheap screw-mount Elmar 90´s, small and light little things, around.  For my own IIIg (sold long ago, regrettably...) I had a collapsible Summicron 50 plus a thin Tele Elmar 90, and that was it.

Edited May 3, 2022 by elgenper

[Pintpot]

+1 for the 90mm Elmar, good examples are not expensive

This will give you some idea of how good it is

 

[Robert Blanko]

IMHO, there is no single lens for mountain landscapes. If you are on top of a mountain, a (Ultra) wide angle lens such as the WATE may create dramatic perspectives as if you were on top of said mountain when viewing the photo, whereas for remote mountain landscapes the 135 APO may be great. 
 

You will need a set of lenses… 😃😉

[jaapv]

On 5/3/2022 at 6:54 PM, tommonego@gmail.com said:

Following up on Philip, if you are using a 4x5 and a 150mm lens a 40 or 50mm lens would be comfortable, look into an f2 Summicron ltm, or a Nikon or Canon ltm 50s. The Voigtlander 40mm Heliar is certainly an option. If you use a 210mm, look into something around 75-85mm. Here an 85 Nikon in ltm mount would stand out, there are Leica and Voigtlander lenses too. If you go wide for landscapes, say under 120mm then a 35mm would work for you. Here Voigtlander has some modern 35 formulas in ltm mount, also look into Nikon and Canon.    

That is good advice. The Canon 1.8/50 LTM outperforms the Summicron of the time. Good examples can be found for little money. 

[Alberti]

In the mountains I like to use a (dark) yellow filter and a wide lens - because I like the land-scape. Show what is around, the depth and heights.

Wide is: 35mm or less, 28mm.  And the yellow filter takes away the haze. It increases contrast. At least use an extra UV filter.

Avoid any lens with inherent haze, yes I have a hazy copy like a 35mm Canon LTM. I like to point as well to the Orion-15 (28mm, M39). There are very contrasty copies. And very sharp above F8.

In my experience the 90mm the Macro-Elmar is a great choice too, incredibly sharp on my M-body; I have used it to reach across valleys to tens of miles away and get sharp contrasty pictures. So I think the standard LTM 90mm F4 Elmar will to be great too, including the LTM F4 135mm version. Cheap . . and charming for normal use. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

You are unlucky. Most older Canon rangefinder lenses are crystal clear. A simple CLA is probably enough to get it pristine again. (window washing as Will van Manen calls it  )

 

[adan]

On 5/3/2022 at 1:47 AM, Maxpina said:

I'm looking for information on which lens could be better for landscapes, a friend recommended me a Summaron 35 f3.5 what do you think?

1) What lens do you already use and prefer on your large-format camera - and which large format (4x5, 5x7, 8x10)? And do you want to use the same field of view with your IIIG?

2) the IIIG comes with only two built-in framelines, for 90mm and 50mm (4x5 camera equivalents about 270mm and 160mm). As Ourobouros says, you will need to factor in accessory viewfinders for longer or shorter lenses than those two. Individual ones for each focal length, or "zooming" finder that covered perhaps 35mm to 135mm lenses with the wist of a ring.

SMALLER THAN THIS IN REAL-LIFE!!! VIOOH (zooms from 35-135) and SBLOO (dedicated for 35mm)

 

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!

   

- many others can be seen here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Rangefinders_and_Viewfinders

3) Leica made lenses to fit your IIIG in focal lengths from 21mm (~equivalent to 65mm on 4x5 film) to 135mm (~equivalent to a 410mm on 4x5). Divide your view-camera lens focal length by 3.1 to find a similar viewing-angle on the IIIG.

A link to the Leica lenses that fit a IIIG: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Screw-thread_Lenses_x_Type

4) Living at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, I do a fair amount of mountain photography with the "Barnack Format" (24mm x 36mm) myself - although I don't use the Barnack cameras (screw mount).

I have used every focal length from 15mm to 135mm on Leicas to great effect, as well as longer lenses (up to 400mm) on SLR cameras.

Some examples (small, just to suggest how lenses frame in Leica format)