There are 4 current 28mm options. Which one do you recommend and why?

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, Kiwimac said:

I like shooting M; the only reason it raises its head in this context is that a Summilux M lense in 28 is NZD11,500 and a Q2 Reporter or Mono is about NZD10,500. Both have a Summilux 28 bolted to the front which is widely acknowledged to be very good.

If one cannot see the frame lines in an M at 28 (I can see one side or the other at once, not both and I do not wear glasses) you would either need to use LV/EVF for critical composition, guess and hope or go with an alternative: buy a Q2 and have an EVF that allows you to see everything more easily or (more expensively) buy an SL2 or SL2s and use the 28 on there.

It's not really that I want to shoot the Q2 (although I do not not want to, if you see what I mean), merely exploring how you use a 28 on an M if you cannot see the composition guidelines clearly.

Yeah, I get the conundrum. M is generally not as precise for framing as EVF based cameras - as you know. I feel 28 works fine although of course there is a bit of guess work involved from not seeing all framelines simultanously, but in practice it works well.

Going back to M, 35mm has become my main lens again with 28 and 50 being secondary. 

The other thing I love about M is using older lenses/lens designs. I don’t shoot modern lenses anymore, as I feel images become more organic and charming compared to the ultra modern look of say the Q. Again all personal preference.

My 28mm lens is the 28:5.6 Summaron re-issue. Had 28mm Elmarit ASPH v2 before that, which is also a great lens - but too high contrast for my taste now. 🙂

Edited February 5, 2023 by mcpallesen

[Kiwimac]

How do you find the Summaron? It intrigues me and there’s a mint pre owned one for sale here at one of the two main dealers in the country. 

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Kiwimac said:

How do you find the Summaron? It intrigues me and there’s a mint pre owned one for sale here at one of the two main dealers in the country. 

Love it! Fave 28mm for rendering both in colour and mono! 😊

[BJohn]

Depends on so many things that it is hard to give you a proper advice.

You can see some images from the Lux 28 here:

 

 

To be clear: a lot of lenses can be compared. In most cases there isn't that much difference.

But I wouldn't compare it with the Cron 28, the Q2 or think about whether you need one stop more. The Lux 28 renders differently in a very unique way. But again: depends on your use cases. You don't have that much of a subject separation but there is some and for me, that's enough and quite perfect.

[goldenbear]

On 2/2/2023 at 6:09 PM, Kiwimac said:

The Summaron intrigues

 me. I like the size and weight and the fact that it can turn your M into a point and shoot. Sometimes that’s what you need. 
 

On the downside the aperture might restrict it as an only 28. 

The other 3 also work at 5.6 and below. 😉 

I have both the Lux and latest Elmarit. The unique rendering and character of the Lux is incomparable, and I love it. At 1-2m it is magic. The Elmarit is my hiking, street, biking lens, usually sans hood. I love its small size and weight for those uses. It’s also a lens I can throw on one of the M’s and let a family member use it as a point-and-shoot. 

Shot with M-D. 

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!

[Tessar.]

10 hours ago, Kiwimac said:

I like shooting M; the only reason it raises its head in this context is that a Summilux M lense in 28 is NZD11,500 and a Q2 Reporter or Mono is about NZD10,500. Both have a Summilux 28 bolted to the front which is widely acknowledged to be very good.

If one cannot see the frame lines in an M at 28 (I can see one side or the other at once, not both and I do not wear glasses) you would either need to use LV/EVF for critical composition, guess and hope or go with an alternative: buy a Q2 and have an EVF that allows you to see everything more easily or (more expensively) buy an SL2 or SL2s and use the 28 on there.

It's not really that I want to shoot the Q2 (although I do not not want to, if you see what I mean), merely exploring how you use a 28 on an M if you cannot see the composition guidelines clearly.

For me, using the built in optical vf on a rangefinder camera with any lens you have to "use The Force".  It's only accurate at one distance, anything else is an approximation.  I'm happy enough using the built in vf with 28mm lenses and moving my eye around, but mainly because if you shoot enough with the same lens you get to know what's in the frame, generally speaking. That's just me though .  Personally I don't like using a 50mm as the framelines are too small and there's too much outside of them, which I find off-putting.  If I do use a 50mm I attach an eyepiece magnifier which "zooms in" on the centre of the vf and blots out the bits outside of the framelines.  I guess if any of this bothered me too much I wouldn't be using an rf camera .

[Kiwimac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I accept that there is some vagueness involved generally; I think the VF design as regards 28 is about as vague as you could get, although I am not sure what VF magnification would be necessary to make the 28 lines more usable.

Having shot an M6TTL for some while, I had to use even more of The Force as there was no checking focus until you got the film back from the lab!

I have thought about getting one of those magnifiers but they appear to be out of stock even at B&H. I will ask my dealer what the situation is and see if I can order one. It would be useful as the focusing patch could usefully be a bit bigger, especially in lower light conditions.

[Tessar.]

1 minute ago, Kiwimac said:

I accept that there is some vagueness involved generally; I think the VF design as regards 28 is about as vague as you could get, although I am not sure what VF magnification would be necessary to make the 28 lines more usable.

Having shot an M6TTL for some while, I had to use even more of The Force as there was no checking focus until you got the film back from the lab!

I have thought about getting one of those magnifiers but they appear to be out of stock even at B&H. I will ask my dealer what the situation is and see if I can order one. It would be useful as the focusing patch could usefully be a bit bigger, especially in lower light conditions.

I think 0.58x is the magnification to comfortably see the whole frame with 28mm framelines.   I try to use my ZM 25mm lens without an external viewfinder on my M262, but that really is guesswork.  I have an external 24mm optical viewfinder but I don't like using it.

>>I have thought about getting one of those magnifiers but they appear to be out of stock even at B&H. I will ask my dealer what the situation is and see if I can order one. It would be useful as the focusing patch could usefully be a bit bigger, especially in lower light conditions.

I would definitely try to try before you buy.

[Danner]

I like the 28mm f/2.8 Elamrit-M ASPH (11,606), it strikes a balance between performance, compactness and value.  Like the snap-on plastic hood too :-)

[Kiwimac]

Another option....

Local dealer has a late series MATE in Grade 8 condition (optically perfect, some wear marks here and there) which offers 28,35 and 50 albeit at f4 to f22.

I had one when I shot film M and it was actually a pretty useful travel lens. It's slightly more than a new Elmarit or Summaron and less than any of the others and is a Mandler design.

How about that for a wild card? 🤣

[PhoToad]

I own one and find it very versatile for travelling. Mechanically, it is great (especially if it is from one of the later series) and image quality is very good; one just needs taking care to avoid flare (with light source just outside the frame) when using the 50 mm.

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, PhoToad said:

one just needs taking care to avoid flare (with light source just outside the frame) when using the 50 mm.

+1 

And, given its mechanical complexity, I would only buy from a trusted dealer providing warranty and return policy, and preferably a recent service.

I’d like to see a more modern tri-Elmar (or similar), with less mechanical complexity (and perhaps actual zoom capability like the WATE). 

Jeff

[RexGig0]

On 2/5/2023 at 2:21 AM, Kiwimac said:

OOI, can anyone actually see both left and right 28mm frame lines at the same time in an M10?

I can see one or the other but not both. I think I would end up having to guess my composition unless I had an EVF mounted. 35 is comfortable but 28 not so much.

It almost makes me wonder if getting a Q2 instead might be a more user friendly solution.

I cannot see the left and right frame lines, when using a 28mm lens. Wearing eyeglasses has that effect. Being unable to see the left and right edges does not disturb me, much, perhaps because a print would crop the edges, anyway. (Few prints are made, with the aspect ratio delivered by a 35mm-format camera.) I do have an external viewfinder, that will fit into the flash shoe, to show me the 28mm frame lines, but, I rarely use it. I rarely use my electronic Visoflex finders, with 28mm lenses, either. (I will use Live View, on occasion, when it seems useful.)

To be clear, this is what works, for me, so is not what anyone else “should” do. 🙂

Notably, when using a 24-70mm zoom lens, on an SLR, before I had started using the Leica M system, I tended to shoot at 30mm to 32mm, because that was how my brain was “seeing” the images, as I composed them. That may be why I do not fret, when unable to see the 28mm frame lines, with an M camera. This is just me, and may not apply to anyone else. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by RexGig0

[Kiwimac]

I used to shoot two DSLR bodies, one with a 17-35 f2.8 and the other with a 70-200 f2.8

 

When I analysed the image library in LR the most common focal lengths were 17, 35, 70 and 200! The intermediate ranges saw obviously lower use. 

Of course 17 is a fairly esoteric and practically unusable focal length on an M without external finders and the like so I cannot replicate that and strangely do not feel the need to. I actually expect to get to 28,50,90,135 eventually

[lct]

•

Edited February 7, 2023 by lct

[sometimesmaybe]

1 hour ago, Kiwimac said:

I actually expect to get to 28,50,90,135 eventually

if you like shooting 70mm, then 75mm is worth considering 

[Kiwimac]

I'm not sure I like shooting it per se (although it is 'around' the 85mm portrait area, as is 90) - it is simply that the zoom has hard stops at 70 and 200 and for some reason, those were where I ended up spending most time. It was entirely unplanned - rarely (if ever) in 40+ years as a photographer have I deliberately chosen a specific focal length in advance of taking the image.

Either it was what was on the camera when the scene unfolded or it was a simple choice between 'wide zoom' or 'tele zoom'!

[JimmyCheng]

I've just made a video, comparing the 4 lenses (mostly the 3 major ones) in detail (including optical performance tests). Hope it helps:

 

[IMAGEPOWER]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb JimmyCheng:

I've just made a video, comparing the 4 lenses (mostly the 3 major ones) in detail (including optical performance tests). Hope it helps:

 

See post #24 😉

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Einst_Stein]

Most recent 35mm, f2 or f1.4 is up to you.

35mm is better for composition, far less irrelevant objects in the view . 28mm usually requires cropping.