Which single Leica lens?

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm mostly a 35mmm shooter, but if I'm reading the question correctly you will cover other FL's with other brands.

In which case my vote is also the 50:2 summicron .  I think with the extra compression versus 35mm you 'may' see the Leica character more (for example subject separation) a little more than using 35mm. It's versatile to do most of what a 35 can, as long as space isn't too tight and also arguably nicer for portraits.

That's my vote for the Q at hand although my own personal choice would probably still be the 35:1.4v2 

Edited March 14, 2023 by grahamc

[Guest]

1 hour ago, evikne said:

To me, the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH is the most quintessential Leica lens, in terms of appearance. Perhaps followed by a 50mm Summicron or Summilux pre-ASPH.

You forgot the legendary 50mm f/1.2 Noctilux ASPH. 😃

[Advertisement]

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

[rramesh]

1. Examine your current lenses. Are they the more modern type? If so, you might want to consider an older Leica lens. Or vice versa.
2. Then decide on your preferred focal length.
3. Then buy within your budget.

[Ray Vonn]

Summicron of your preferred focal length, doesn't matter which one they're all great.  You can get all the other "Lux"/ Elmar lenses etc etc after that but Summicron to start with, then determine your direction after that.

[lct]

13 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

For a M mount camera system, I'm looking at using mostly non-Leica lenses.  Between Minolta, Zeiss, and Voigtlander, I can cover pretty much all the focal lengths I need.  

However, I would like to add at least one Leica lens to the quiver.   Is there one Leica lens that stands out above all the others?

Summilux-M 50/1.4 asph (right). I like much the Summicron-M 50/2 v5 too (left) but it doesn't stand above all the others as per your question. The only Summicron 50 that could fit the bill, from this viewpoint, would be the Apo-Summicron-M 50/2 asph (middle). It is an expensive lens though.

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!

 

Edited March 14, 2023 by lct

[Kwesi]

13 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

For a M mount camera system, I'm looking at using mostly non-Leica lenses.  Between Minolta, Zeiss, and Voigtlander, I can cover pretty much all the focal lengths I need.  

However, I would like to add at least one Leica lens to the quiver.   Is there one Leica lens that stands out above all the others?    35mm Summicron?   21mm Summilux?  75mm Noctilux?  Something else?  

What is the essential, quintessential Leica lens?  

 

 

What a great question for someone dipping their toes into the M system.

It sounds like budget is an issue so my suggestion is - start with 3 Zeiss or voigtlander lenses from your preferred focal range of 21 to 90. Use them for about 3 to six months to get a feel for them on an M, issues like viewfinder blockage and ease of viewing frame lines and others like how close you like to be to your subject all go into finding that one focal length that seems to always be on your camera. Once you get there trade the lens that's always on your camera for the best one of that focal length that Leica makes.

[newtoleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Simple Q - what single focal length do you use mostly.... whatever I do is irrelevant to your work.

Secondly - what is your budget?

Thirdly - what sort of rendering do you want? (classic Leica with lots of spherical aberration / glow, modern Leica with sharpness and separation against a more even bokeh)

[Ssssnake529]

31 minutes ago, newtoleica said:

Simple Q - what single focal length do you use mostly.... whatever I do is irrelevant to your work.

Secondly - what is your budget?

Thirdly - what sort of rendering do you want? (classic Leica with lots of spherical aberration / glow, modern Leica with sharpness and separation against a more even bokeh)

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

[pippy]

15 minutes ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often....the 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time. 

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow...

With those preferences added to the fact that you are going to buy an M-11 I'd say the 35mm Summilux ASPH would be your most attractive option.

The lens goes more for Sharpness than Glow and with the M-11 you can easily crop into your preferred 40mm FoV (or, for that matter, 50mm) with hardly any loss of IQ.

Philip.

Edited March 14, 2023 by pippy

[jpto]

2 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

Unlimited budget and you prefer sharpness? I'd recommend the 35MM APO or 50MM APO - they bracket your favoured 40MM. That being said you could get the 35 FLE Lux and have enough change left over to get 50 Voightlander APO, which offers almost the same level of performace of the 50APO at a fraction of the cost.

Edited March 14, 2023 by jpto
formatting

[newtoleica]

2 hours ago, pippy said:

With those preferences added to the fact that you are going to buy an M-11 I'd say the 35mm Summilux ASPH would be your most attractive option.

The lens goes more for Sharpness than Glow and with the M-11 you can easily crop into your preferred 40mm FoV (or, for that matter, 50mm) with hardly any loss of IQ.

Philip.

I agree. 35mm is very close to 40mm and given the lack of 40mm tramlines it's a 35mm. with no budget limitations on this I would look at the 35 APO Cron v the latest 35mm ASPH FLE (v2). I couldn't afford either as I had an overall budget of the same but for 3 used lenses. I went 35 Summilux ASPH pre-fle, 24 Elmarit and 50 Summilux ASPH as 24 and 35 account for most of my use and occasionally 50. I don't like 28 much - too close to 35 and not wide enough. The 24 is just useable without a separate finder and not as distorted as the 21. I find 75 too close to 50 to bother with and 90 has a poor hit rate for me on the rangefinder. Just me.

[Olaf_ZG]

To me, with 50mm being my favorite FL, I decided that I wanted a summilux. I do have several non-leica lenses but those I hardly use.

The lens was expensive, even second hand, but as I bought it to keep it, I don’t mind: will be enjoying this lens a long time.

[Kwesi]

4 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

ok so now this gets interesting...

The most expensive new M Lens is the 75/1.25 at $14.395. So lets say that's your budget.

Why blow it all on one lens? keep your 40 especially if its the summicron-c, and grab 2 luxes.

 

[Harout62]

5 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

Reading this post, I would say the most useful lens for you would be the 35 Summilux FLE VII.  There are more expensive lenses but since you use the 40 75% of the time on your CLE. Then you would be using the 35 FLE just as much on your M11.   And with 60 mpx it gives you the opportunity to crop into the 50 range , close focus gives you a good portrait lens with the ability to crop tight. And it is razor sharp wide open so great lens for when the sun goes down. 
very nice colour and fantastic Bokhe .  

[CSG123]

For me, when I bought my 1967 M4 about 13 years ago, I bought both a 35mm screw mount lens and a 5cm DR Summicron.  I thought I'd keep both but found I rarely used the 35 so sold it to a friend.  I came from an era where I think the most commonly used lens was a 50 and that's what I grew up using on fixed rangefinders (or close to it - my Yashica J I used in high school has a 45mm fixed lens.  50 equivalent is what I use mostly with my Fuji bodies with the 35 equivalent right behind.  All depends on budget and what your main areas of interest are in photography.

[darylgo]

Put your 40mm lens on the M11, go on a nice vacation with a Leica Store nearby, look at all the nice lenses.  Oftentimes the haptics play a large part of lens preference, trying them on the body is beneficial to tell you if you want to handle the type of lens you are thinking of purchasing.  Sharpness preferred over glow, yet don't rule out the new 35mm summilux reissue, it's a lens you might fall in love with.  

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

... Sharpness preferred over glow, yet don't rule out the new 35mm summilux reissue, it's a lens you might fall in love with.  

What @darylgo said.

[Casey Jefferson]

 

11 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

If you have e the dough, 35mm summilux ASPHERICAL (double aspherical or AA)? 🤣 THAT will be the holy grail of 35mm world.

My research on that lens is that it's a modern lens with sharp rendering but also with bokeh that's less luminance, more contrast/saturation. The following iterations (ASPH, FLE, FLE II) give more of a "central hotspot" look to it, and less contrast and saturation than the focus plane. Creamy bokeh with lots of contrast is what makes some Leica lens unique IMHO. Lenses from other manufacturers often have very sharp in focus plane and desaturated bokeh. Hence if a Leica lens do that, people will often describe the rendering to be "modern" (or too modern).

 

PS: I don't have actually experience shooting with that lens and my statements were based on user posted images. So do correct me if I'm wrong. 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Casey Jefferson

[jimmielx]

20 hours ago, Ssssnake529 said:

I use a 40mm most often.  My current M-mount rangefinder is a film camera (Minolta CLE) which has 40mm frame lines.   The 40 is what I'm shooting with 75% of the time.  

I'm getting a Leica M11, hence this interest in acquiring a Leica lens.   

My budget for this one lens is pretty much unlimited.  I can't afford an entire stable of the most expensive Leica glass, but I can afford to pay pretty much anything for a single lens.  

Probably more focused on sharpness than glow.   

I'm worried a bit about getting the focus right with really shallow depth of field, otherwise I would have just gone for a Noctilux.  

 

 

In that case I’d go for an APO-Summicron either 35mm or 50mm. If the 40mm feels about right or you sometimes wish it was a bit wider I’d go 35mm. If you’re always cropping in from the 40mm I’d go for the 50mm.  Another plus for the 35mm would be it’s very close focus ability - downside of the 35mm would be lack of current availability. 
Either would be excellent and represent the peak of modern Leica M lens design. Perfectly sized for the M, beautiful smooth bokeh, entirely wide enough aperture on an M11, not so crazy narrow depth of field. 
 

If I could have any lens I’d go with the 35mm APO. That said, to your previous comment about the ‘quintessential’ lens, I would still say that’s a 50mm. 

 

Happy shopping!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ssssnake529]

Thanks to the hive mind for all the advice.

I decided to get two lenses:  APO Summicron 75mm and the APO Summicron 35mm.   These two lenses should take care of virtually all of the shooting I will do with this camera.