Taken the plunge

[spylaw4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been muttering for some time about going back into film. Problem was what camera to get. I toyed with the idea of an M2 or 3 and monitored prices, but I also felt that an R would be a better bet for me, as the lenses would have dual use on the 4/3 system digitals.

 

Not having too many buckets of do$h floating around I was seriously considering a late R4, but I made the fatal mistake of popping in on Friday to a certain Leica dealer close to New Oxford Street (not the one in the backyard!) got tempted and just had to snap up an R6 in good working order (and with a 6 month guarantee) at a very low and reasonable price (lower than most of the R4s I have been looking at), so now I have the body and I need lenses.

 

Recommendations please, and/or comments on the following which I could see myself getting over the next while.

 

50mm F2 Summicron and/or

60mm f2.8 Macro-elmarit and

90mm f2 Summicron - or the 2.8? and

A reasonably priced w/a - maybe the 24mm?.

 

As we are on the subject and to help with forward planning, what might be the recommendations for tele lenses or zooms?

 

Thanks in advance guys.

[andybarton]

Congratulations, Brian.

 

50s can be picked up for a song, but I'd go for the 60, without question. I haven't used my 50 since I bought my 60.

[RobMac]

50 summicron - Leica's version of a lens cap with glass in it. Sharp from F4 onward US$200+ KEH BGN lenses are nice. Doesn't get better re: preformance/$$

 

28/2.8 latest (with built-in hood) - have 1 on ebay at moment. Comparable to the M 28/2. MUST be the one with built-in hood. US$1000+ but VERY RARE

 

35/2 - not as nice as 28/2.8 but much cheaper US$400+ Great bargain.

 

90/2.8 LATEST design (model #1154 or some such made from 86-96) - only beaten by the F2 apo - at F2 ;> US$500+ but VERY RARE. Check http://www.pebbleplace.com for Leica database.

 

85/1.4 - Soft WO but sharpens up starting at F2+ US$1500 Some love as a portrait lens.

 

100 macro - legend US$1300+

 

180/2.8 APO. On of the best compact 180s in existence. The 3.4 APO is cheap (US$400+) and nice - but at short distances doesn't begin to compare and bokeh is icky for some -- resale prices (for the 3.4) also suck a sthey are thick on the ground. US$1500+

 

180/2 Apo Mother of All Short telephotos. Sharper than Canon 200/1.8 and that's saying something. Hell, buy mine US$4000 (;> - have M8'tist) Usually US$4500+ for ROM version

 

If you can, buy ROM versions - resale is a bit better as folks prepare for the arrival of the R10.

 

The 90/2 pre-asph is generally soft. Some like it, but try for the latest 2.8 instead (IMHO). 60 Macro - no experience with Leica version, but had CZ S model. Very sharp, but bear in mind macro lenses will have much greater focus travel which can inhibit fast focusing and tend to be heavier.

 

Congrats

[Angora]

Speakinw about wide angles, I have the 28 first version. I like it very much, because it's very light, cheap and you can get good results.

[stunsworth]

I used an early 28mm on my 5D and was very impressed by it.

[andybarton]

The 90/2 pre-asph is generally soft. Some like it, but try for the latest 2.8 instead (IMHO). 60 Macro - no experience with Leica version, but had CZ S model. Very sharp, but bear in mind macro lenses will have much greater focus travel which can inhibit fast focusing and tend to be heavier.

 

Congrats

 

My experience with a late 70s 90 is the opposite. I find it very sharp indeed.

 

WRT the 60, the images just snap into focus much more clearly than with the 50 Summicron. It's a fabulous lens, both for a normal lens, and with the added benefit of the macro facility. No hood required.

[jlancasterd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As we are on the subject and to help with forward planning, what might be the recommendations for tele lenses or zooms?

Thanks in advance guys.

 

I have an R8 with the 21-35 Vario-Elmar, 28-90 Vario-Elmarit and an Angeniuex f3.5 70-210 and would recommend any or all of them. Add a 60mm macro and you have pretty well all of the angles covered.

[spylaw4]

Thank you all for the useful information so far. I"m certainly on the lookout for a 60mm at a reasonable price.

 

I have done a bit of research into the various zooms and opinions do seem to vary a bit. The 21-35 is costly but desirable, and I note the above remark on the Angenieux. There seems to be quite a choice between the 28-70, 28-90, 35-70 x 4 versions. Any thoughts here on the relative merits? Any one should steer clear of?

[lct]

Prices i just got on eBay, all in exc/minty condition:

 

3-cam 28/2.8 # 3185***: 299.00 EUR

3-cam 35/2 # 2936***: 390.00 EUR

1-cam 50/2 # 3083***: 274.50 EUR

3-cam 90/2 # 2949***: 345.00 EUR

3-cam 180/3.4 # 3071***: 575.00 EUR

Cla'd R4s # 1637***: 260.00 EUR

[RobMac]

There is one zoom, made by Minolta, that is widely considered a mutt. I THINK it's the 35-70 3.5, but don't quote me...

 

Regardless, the 35-70 F4 is considered very nice - close to the 28/2.8 latest in performance. Also has a macro settign which some folks really like. Some of the shots I've seen from it are exceptional.

[earleygallery]

Brian,

 

I have been considering a 35-70 zoom. There is a VERY expensive Leica 2.8 version, but aside from that the earliest 3.5 is made in Japan (can't remember if its a minolta design). There was a German made version of the same lens which is said to be better, but the best optically - from what I've read/been told - is the latest f4 version.

 

I understand its the 28-70 which is the one to be avoided. The 28-90 is very good apparently.

 

Another thing worth considering is that you can use Tamron lenses. Some of the Tamrons are very good, especially for focal lengths which you may not use that often or want to 'try'.

[spylaw4]

Continued thanks folks! There is incidentally another thread in the Digital Forum on the 28 -70, but it seems to be possibly not as bad as all that. It's fascinating how opinions differ!

I am inherently attracted to the R zooms which do seem the be useful and cover most focal lengths without too much overlap.

Interesting about Tamron James, but I'm a long way from lenses for focal lengths that are less usual!

[john_newell]

At one point I owned a very large R kit, which thinned down to almost nothing - I kept an R6 solely so I could keep using the 100 Apo-Marcro Elmarit, which I think is the most amazing lens I've ever owned (and that's a lot). At the same time, due to poor resale value and high image quality, I kept a 3rd cam 50/2 and the very excellent 180/3.4, which is definitely underpriced in the used market. I recently added back a 24/2.8, which is a very good lens though not in the truly amazing category. I'm happy with that as a Leica R kit - covers a wide range and gives great performance.

[masjah]

The 21-35 zoom is as good as or better than the primes in this range (some of which are showing their age) unless the ultimate in wide aperture is important. For example, I have this zoom, together with the 35/1.4, which is a bit soft with a bit of vignetting wide open - but I can live with that in the context - available light - in which I use it. The 28-90 zoom is absolutely splendid - it is my main travel lens. I do like the classic look of the 50/2. I also love the 90/2 Apo, 180/2.8 Apo and 280/4 Apo, which are totally superb performers all.

[spylaw4]

I must admit to being attracted to the 28-90 - a useful range and helpfully the same range as my D2! At the end pf the day it may all depend on what comes up in the market at a good price!

 

This is proving to be a useful thread, and I am most grateful for the assistance.

[masjah]

Brian

 

I got my 28-90 as one of the "ex-dem" lenses recently offered (at getting on for half list price). Having already got a 28/2.8PC, 35/1.4, 50/2 and 90/2AA spanning the range, I couldn't have justified the cost of a full price new one! Second-hand examples don't seem very common, as it's a relatively new lens. It might be worth ringing a few dealers just to see if they (or Milton Keynes) might be able to find you an "ex-dem" one.