One version of each focal length?

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

43 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Not sure a claret is the best choice, Philip.  I think the 1973 Romanée Conti would be a better match with the beef!

The '73 is nothing special. The '45 and '59 have much more depth. 

[Danner]

28 Elmarit, 35 Summicron 50 Summilux, 90 Macro-Elmar

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, Danner said:

28 Elmarit, 35 Summicron 50 Summilux, 90 Macro-Elmar

Which 35 Summicron (APO?) and which 50 Summilux (pre-asph or asph, and I or II?)?

It's a good selection of focal lengths. 

Edited December 5, 2023 by fotografr

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, fotografr said:

The '73 is nothing special. The '45 and '59 have much more depth. 

Many people these days are more interested in the bouquet… the bouquet craze. After a bottle or two, they all create a nice blur.

Jeff

[fotografr]

18 hours ago, hansvons said:

 

.

Hence it makes much more sense to own multiple lense of the same focal length than to own a set of primes from 21 - 90, unless you are a filmmaker or you need various focal lengths for different jobs, e.g. architecture vs product shoots. But it‘s interesting how fast one unlearns previsualisation skills when changing focal lengths regularly. 
 

BTW, I use 98% of the time 35mm and own two 35mm lenses for two M cameras. I might get another 35mm lens at some point, or not. The option to choose different characters of the same focal length can be a motivator and drive the story. Motivation is essential to photography. That's why gear matters. 
 

 

 

What it comes down to ultimately is how large and how heavy a camera bag do you want to carry when you leave your home or hotel to go out to shoot? Unless you know exactly what you're going to be shooting and exactly what the lighting conditions will be, you really need to take everything, don't you? Otherwise, clouds roll in and you are stuck with lower contrast lenses because you thought it would stay sunny. There is a point of diminishing returns with respect to gear and having so much that you forget even what you have, or have to spend time trying to decide what to take on a shoot can take the pleasure out of photography pretty quickly. Personally, and I'm speaking only for myself, after 45 years of having a cabinet full of cameras and lenses, I've grown tired of trying to decide what and how much to take with me. Simplification is increasing my photographic enjoyment.

[Jeff S]

I started simply in 1974, but years later I realized that I needed to greatly simplify my photo life when I simultaneously owned and had to choose among 35mm, medium format (6x6 and 6x7) and large format (4x5) film cameras, some from multiple brands, as well as all the associated darkroom and print supplies. In 2009, I fully transitioned to digital, and only owned an M8.2 and 3 lenses.  Along the way, I added an SL2 and a Monochrom to an M10-R, and I’m again feeling like life could be simpler.  At least my three or four M lenses still suffice. It’s better for me when the gear gets out of the way, not when it becomes a deciding factor.  Gear oriented forums are not exactly conducive to this approach.  

Jeff

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I started simply in 1974...

Similar story here.

My father had a IIIb / 50mm Summitar which he taught me how to use when I was very young. In '74, as a 15-y-o, I bought my own IIIa / 50mm Elmar (converted from a 1 Model A) and a couple of years later bought an OM-1 / 50mm Zuiko. I had never used any f/length other than 50mm until I was 20 when I finally bought my M2 / 50mm f2.8 Elmar and added a 35mm f3.5 Summaron. Even then I still used the 50mm for perhaps 90% of my snaps and continued to favour that f/l until relatively recently.

Other than a short time when I borrowed an MPP 5x4 from a friend I've only ever used 35mm format for my personal shooting.

Philip.

Edited December 5, 2023 by pippy

[acalmplace]

In my case, the pleasure of acquiring new gear, the pleasure of owning good and useful gear, the pressure of having too much gear, the pleasure of nerding out on 'the best kit' for me (how many focal lengths/sizes/renderings/apertures), and likely other inclinations, when taken together, will always make me oscillate and buy and sell and think I have too much then too little.

I don't know that I can settle on a kit. I will likely forever oscillate between too little and too much. I enjoy a 'simple kit', I enjoy a 'perfect kit', I enjoy buying, I enjoy trying new gear, I enjoy knowing my gear, I enjoy simplifying, and I enjoy changing my kit... But I don't particularly enjoy all these somewhat conflicting enjoyments

Edited December 5, 2023 by acalmplace

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, acalmplace said:

In my case, the pleasure of acquiring new gear, the pleasure of owning good and useful gear, the pressure of having too much gear, the pleasure of nerding out on 'the best kit' for me (how many focal lengths/sizes/renderings/apertures), and likely other inclinations, when taken together, will always make me oscillate and buy and sell and think I have too much then too little.

I don't know that I can settle on a kit. I will likely forever oscillate between too little and too much. I enjoy a 'simple kit', I enjoy a 'perfect kit', I enjoy buying, I enjoy trying new gear, I enjoy knowing my gear, I enjoy simplifying, and I enjoy changing my kit... But I don't particularly enjoy all these somewhat conflicting enjoyments

Well, at least you are decisive. 😉

[fotografr]

13 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Not sure a claret is the best choice, Philip.  I think the 1973 Romanée Conti would be a better match with the beef!

We went with a 2016 Chateauneuf-du-Pape but I must not have opened it early enough because by the second glass it began to taste more like a Cotes du Rhone.

[Jeff S]

4 hours ago, pippy said:

Similar story here.

My father had a IIIb / 50mm Summitar which he taught me how to use when I was very young. In '74, as a 15-y-o, I bought my own IIIa / 50mm Elmar (converted from a 1 Model A) and a couple of years later bought an OM-1 / 50mm Zuiko. I had never used any f/length other than 50mm until I was 20 when I finally bought my M2 / 50mm f2.8 Elmar and added a 35mm f3.5 Summaron. Even then I still used the 50mm for perhaps 90% of my snaps and continued to favour that f/l until relatively recently.

Other than a short time when I borrowed an MPP 5x4 from a friend I've only ever used 35mm format for my personal shooting.

Philip.

My start was later in life; 24 at the time, just out of grad school.  Nobody in my family took pictures, other than my dad’s movies or slides of our vacations.  But my family and I loved art, museums, etc, and I began buying photo books and, later, silver prints. With my first “real” job earnings, I bought a Canon EF, later an AE-1, etc., as I tried to make my own “art”. When earnings took off, so did my gear explorations… many formats, 11 different brands, etc.  
 

The Leica years began in the 80’s, both R and M.  But the M was the first system I really bonded with; and so it went.  I haven’t been without an M since, changing body and lenses occasionally, but always keeping a limited kit.  Worked best for me. 
 

Jeff

[pippy]

2 hours ago, fotografr said:

We went with a 2016 Chateauneuf-du-Pape but I must not have opened it early enough because by the second glass it began to taste more like a Cotes du Rhone.

I'm not quite sure I follow you, fotografr. From what you wrote I could understand why the first glass might have tasted more like a lesser C-d-R and second more like a C-d-P but not the other way 'round............

Philip.

Edited December 5, 2023 by pippy

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

I'm not quite sure I follow you, fotografr. From what you wrote I could understand why the first glass might have tasted more like a lesser C-d-R and second more like a C-d-P but not the other way 'round............

Philip.

The food covered it up. Once we'd finished eating and were just having wine, the finish was more pronounced. 

[Olaf_ZG]

On 6/8/2023 at 9:07 AM, Olaf_ZG said:

I don’t have this feeling with lenses (yet) but with the cameras. Having three systems (sl, q and m) this is one too much…

And yet, added a 4th one..,

[fotografr]

6 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And yet, added a 4th one..,

You are much loved at Leica AG. 😉

[yanidel]

When I look at my body of work over the last 15 years, there are pictures that I wish I would have taken with another lens. Consistency of look is very important to me. Sure you can get very close in Lightroom afterwards, but things like unsharp corners or color warmth are difficult to fix afterwards. As an example, this is  the reason why I sold my 35mm Summicron IV and shoot only with the Lux Asph. One 35mm is enough in my case.

[Danner]

23 hours ago, fotografr said:

Which 35 Summicron (APO?) and which 50 Summilux (pre-asph or asph, and I or II?)?

It's a good selection of focal lengths. 

For me, it's the V1 28 Elmarit ASPH; V4 35 'cron; V2 50 lux, and actually have a 'thin' Tele-Elmar for my 90.  Love them all.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Danner