wda Posted January 20, 2023 Share #21 Posted January 20, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) 10 hours ago, Franka373 said: I know that, quote, any lens can be a landscape lens but please give me minute to address my question. It has been my anecdotal understanding that various Leica M lenses are optimized for various distances to get its best output, mainly close to middle distances. I may be wrong but over the years I have read this here and other forums. So my question is are there M lenses that are optimized for landscapes where close up to infinity is sharp at f/8 to 11 or so. Am I way off base here? If not which lenses lend themselves better for landscapes? The lenses I have are the 28 summicron current version, the 50 APO, and the 90 elmarit last version. Thanks for your patience. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 Hi wda, Take a look here Landscape Lenses. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wda Posted January 20, 2023 Share #22 Posted January 20, 2023 (edited) For some inexplicable reason, my tablet will not let me quote and comment. So, a new approach is needed. Leica seems to have a fixation with street photography. You rarely, if ever, find landscape applications being championed. That is why the OP is frustrated by the lack of discussion by Leica on this genre. As you have an excellent set of multi-purpose lenses, I suggest you watch a video or two of acknowledged masters of landscape photography. Joe Cornish, for example. The lens choice is not their main consideration. Concentrate on their choices of focal length. Much landscape photography is done using focal lengths between 50 and 135 mm. Next, go out and try your hand at field work. Work through your collection of lenses and analyse your results. Practise and learn. The more you do, the better you will become. Finally, consider joining a group of photographers by signing up for a venture where your leaders will be experienced landscape professionals. They will help you see and make excellent landscape pictures with the kit you have. That would be a lot cheaper than buying and selling lenses, and more effective. Edited January 20, 2023 by wda 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted January 20, 2023 Share #23 Posted January 20, 2023 I'll toss in my 2 cents. Legend has it that the old 135/4 Tele-Elmar was specifically designed in the 1960s for surveillance work for the US Navy before being made available to the general public. From my experience, naval surveillance typically is well beyond optical infinity...hundreds of yards out. So, this lens should be regarded as good for landscapes (which my old experience validates). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Blanko Posted January 20, 2023 Share #24 Posted January 20, 2023 vor 2 Stunden schrieb Robert Blanko: Everything sharp from close up to infinity (in the same photo) will only work when using wide angle lenses. Just try playing with a DOF app, also taking into account diffraction limit. You cannot trick physics… That said, my proven landscape performers are: WATE 28 Elmarit 50 APO 75 APO 135 APO Telyt All performed very well for my purposes. Forgot to mention the tiny travel companion 90 macro elmar! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franka373 Posted January 20, 2023 Author Share #25 Posted January 20, 2023 Thanks so much for all the responses. I tend to over think things which can be a problem but over thinking has saved me many more times than not. I have learned a bunch on this thread. I will be down in the the Big Bend area the end of March with folks from my photography club. I am preparing for that and want to be sure I won't be missing opportunities. One of the members is a retired photographer from Texas Parks and Wildlife magazine so we are excited for the trip as we will be guided to some great locations. This thread has given me confidence with the the lenses I have and the M11 will be fine. I have been looking at the 21 SEM and 135 APO for a month or so. I may get one or both. My only other thought is a lens for Milky Way photos. More research to do on that end. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RexGig0 Posted January 20, 2023 Share #26 Posted January 20, 2023 (edited) Well, “Readers’ Digest” version, my take: Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZM. I tend to “see” landscapes at about 31mm to 32mm, based upon how I seemed to use my Nikon Nikkor 24-70/2.8G ED lens. The fixed-focal-length lens that seems to stay on a camera, if I am shooting images that include landscapes, is 35mm. If I am driving, cross-country, with a Leica attached to me, it is a Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4 ZM mounted to the camera. Mine eyes have seen the glory of micro-contrast. Done. 🙂 Lloyd Chambers seems to really like this lens. His site requires a paid subscription to see his images. He pulls no punches, in his reviews, and does take the Leica-mount lenses into wild areas, to shoot landscapes. This Distagon ZM seems to perform well, with the 40MP of the M10 Monochrom and M10-R, at least. I am not sure if he has tested the M11 with this Distagon. I plan to do some exploratory landscape road trips, in April and May, to include the Big Bend area. I plan to frequently use the Distagon 35mm ZM, and Voigtlander Nokton 21mm f/1.4 VM, the former because I know it works well, and the latter, in order to experiment with 21mm in the wide-open spaces. Edited to add: I do not claim to be a “landscape photographer,” just a photographer who is becoming more serious about landscapes, but is inhibited by living on the hazy SE Texas Coastal Plain. Edited January 20, 2023 by RexGig0 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RexGig0 Posted January 20, 2023 Share #27 Posted January 20, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) My best guess is that it looks like she may be using a Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH FLE: 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 20, 2023 Share #28 Posted January 20, 2023 I would also just chime in to say that the landscape is going to dictate the lens, to a certain extent. If you are in a dense forest or a fairly close in landscape, clearly a wider lens is going to help. For me in Iceland, the landscape is extremely wide open and treeless, so a lot of the compositions are fairly far from the camera, which tends to drive you more towards a longer lens. I often use the Mamiya 7II, and I recall reading back in the day how "useless" the 210mm lens is for that camera. It is an f8 lens and does not even couple to the rangefinder. You need to scale focus. In a country like Iceland, this "useless" lens is extremely useful to me. I mention this to just drive home the argument that the landscape and your photographic vision are going to drive the lens choice. While a lot of photographers consider super wides landscape lenses, for me they don't work at all. I rarely do much landscape work wider than 24 or 28mm, and typically more 40-120mm. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted January 20, 2023 Share #29 Posted January 20, 2023 They are not M lenses, but perhaps they can give you an idea of focal length in landscape work. The one of the moon is a 280mm with the SL2, and the rainbow is the 80mm on the Mamiya 7II, which is around a 39mm equivalent. 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! 8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/362390-landscape-lenses/?do=findComment&comment=4651618'>More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted January 20, 2023 Share #30 Posted January 20, 2023 8 hours ago, Ouroboros said: In my view, Fred is no landscape photographer. His IG gallery looks as good or better than yours, IMO https://www.instagram.com/_fredmirandacom/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franka373 Posted January 20, 2023 Author Share #31 Posted January 20, 2023 I don’t use instagram but the front page looks pretty darn good. Whether one likes his landscapes or not is not the issue. He does a great service testing M lenses in all sorts of situations as well as testing for faults in them. I would think if he says it’s good for landscape I would not doubt him in the least. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lelmer Posted January 20, 2023 Share #32 Posted January 20, 2023 1 hour ago, hdmesa said: His IG gallery looks as good or better than yours, IMO https://www.instagram.com/_fredmirandacom/ Not sure...but question of taste...🙂 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted January 20, 2023 Share #33 Posted January 20, 2023 2 minutes ago, Lelmer said: Not sure...but question of taste...🙂 Right, but our artistic ability isn't on trial in this thread, right? I don't even know what being called a "landscaper" means anyway. I con't consider myself a serious photographer of anything. But I would resent someone saying I wasn't. Make sense? I just thought the initial comment was rude and uncalled for. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted January 20, 2023 Share #34 Posted January 20, 2023 7 minutes ago, hdmesa said: Right, but our artistic ability isn't on trial in this thread, right? I don't even know what being called a "landscaper" means anyway. I con't consider myself a serious photographer of anything. But I would resent someone saying I wasn't. Make sense? I just thought the initial comment was rude and uncalled for. Sorry you took it that way. My point was fairly clear that anyone's dogmatic opinion on what is, or isn't, a good lens for landscape photography is pointless and ultimately not very helpful to anyone. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted January 20, 2023 Share #35 Posted January 20, 2023 Just now, Ouroboros said: Sorry you took it that way. My point was fairly clear that anyone's dogmatic opinion on what is, or isn't, a good lens for landscape photography is pointless and ultimately not very helpful to anyone. That's a true and valid point, but in fairness I've never seen Fred have a dogmatic view on any lens unless it was simply to state a truth about an optical characteristic of a lens. Even Lloyd Chambers, who has very strong opinions on lenses, often says knowing about an optical weakness will help you shoot accordingly and either avoid the issue caused by it or use the weakness to your advantage (field curvature for example). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted January 20, 2023 Share #36 Posted January 20, 2023 (edited) 42 minutes ago, hdmesa said: That's a true and valid point, but in fairness I've never seen Fred have a dogmatic view on any lens unless it was simply to state a truth about an optical characteristic of a lens. Even Lloyd Chambers, who has very strong opinions on lenses, often says knowing about an optical weakness will help you shoot accordingly and either avoid the issue caused by it or use the weakness to your advantage (field curvature for example). No to grind the subject into the dust, Fred's lens tests were quoted in a way, at least to me, as being definitive and that's where I have a problem with anyone, in this case the person who brought it up earlier, not Fred, who resorts to dogma to make their point. Do not take that as a criticism of Fred's tests, because it isn't. To return to my original point that seems to have fallen short in clarity for yourself, there is amazing landscape work created by, as an example, Lensbaby photographers. You don't need optically perfect lenses to create art. I'm sure you know that. Edited January 20, 2023 by Ouroboros 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted January 20, 2023 Share #37 Posted January 20, 2023 2 minutes ago, Ouroboros said: ...You don't need optically perfect lenses to create art... Lately I've been shooting landscapes with the LLL 35mm 8-Element, so I'd have to agree 👊 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted January 20, 2023 Share #38 Posted January 20, 2023 The lens can be the least of your problems in landscape photography, and anyway at f/8 most lenses all start to look alike. So as a landscape photographer I give myself a break, i just assume there is a landscape photograph to be made with any lens no matter how idiosyncratic it is. And there are no Leica lenses that shine more than others for landscape photography, other than in subtle rendering that I doubt anybody other than the photographer would notice anyway. I love my 50mm Summilux, but nobody else would know enough to pull me up if I lied and said the photograph was made by something else, even another make. A 50mm f/3.5 Elmar stopped down just right will make an image pretty much as good and perfectly in tune with the landscape tradition. The problem comes when the photographer imparts an authority on the photograph just because it’s a Summilux, or Summicron, etc., as if the lens proves it must be a good photograph. But that is often a camera club fixation. 3 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 20, 2023 Share #39 Posted January 20, 2023 19 minutes ago, 250swb said: The lens can be the least of your problems in landscape photography, and anyway at f/8 most lenses all start to look alike. The problem comes when the photographer imparts an authority on the photograph just because it’s a Summilux, or Summicron, etc. Well said. If the MTF charts of modern lenses are compared at smaller apertures it should become pretty evident that there isn't a vast differential between many of them (cheap or expensive). I have shot landscapes at wide apertures but vey rarely. Most are shot at smaller apertures. I have also shot lanscapes on 35mm to 5"x 4" over forty years as a working photographer. I have never lost an image sale due to the lens I have used and some have been far from state of the art! As with regard to focal length, well its important to use the right one for the subject. Any modern and many, if not most, older Leica lenses are perfectly usable for landscapes as many published Leica photographers attest. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted January 20, 2023 Share #40 Posted January 20, 2023 30 minutes ago, 250swb said: The lens can be the least of your problems in landscape photography, and anyway at f/8 most lenses all start to look alike. So as a landscape photographer I give myself a break, i just assume there is a landscape photograph to be made with any lens no matter how idiosyncratic it is. And there are no Leica lenses that shine more than others for landscape photography, other than in subtle rendering that I doubt anybody other than the photographer would notice anyway. I love my 50mm Summilux, but nobody else would know enough to pull me up if I lied and said the photograph was made by something else, even another make. A 50mm f/3.5 Elmar stopped down just right will make an image pretty much as good and perfectly in tune with the landscape tradition. The problem comes when the photographer imparts an authority on the photograph just because it’s a Summilux, or Summicron, etc., as if the lens proves it must be a good photograph. But that is often a camera club fixation. +1 You have the current 28 Summicron. When stopped down, it should be equal or even outperform the 28 Elmarit. So if you want to get everything in focus. set it to f8 or f11 and use hyperfocal distance. It does not get better than that with any 28mm IMO 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.