The paradoxes of M lens size

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, Anbaric said:

But since you probably aren't going to stuff an M in your pocket, for practical purposes it only really matters how much the lens obscures the viewfinder. A larger lens isn't going to make the camera significantly more noticeable than it already is (unless it's a 135 or something), or weigh you down much (unless you carry a bag full of them).

Wrong.
I stuff my M with mounted lens in my pocket all the time. It is either that or a very small handbag that no one will suspect having a real camera inside.

I think you would be surprised how many of us  appreciate being able to carry a powerful FF camera in our pocket without using a neck strap. I use my Ms with wrist strap only and carry it in my hand when it is not stuffed away. And I hate mounting lenses in the open air, so this defines my criterium of a small lens. Does it fit when mounted is my first concern, then IQ and how fast it is.

Anything up to the size of a Summicron 40C is suitable. My Summicron 50 v4 is just a bit too long so it gets much less use, let alone my Summilux 50 and other medium sized lenses.

[RexGig0]

For my personal situation, a lens can be so small as to be inconvenient to handle. I have somewhat long hands, with medium-length fingers. When I move about, with an M camera, I would rather grip the lens barrel with my left hand, so that my right hand is free. Part of this equation is that my right hand is not aging as well as my left hand. Another part is that holding really steady, for a shot, as it works for my individual body structure, is to support most of the weight of the camera and lens with my upraised left hand. I started using the Leica M system, with a pre-owned Summilux-M 50mm ASPH being my first lens, which established what an M lens “should” be. Lenses as large as the APO Summicron-M 75mm ASPH does not seem too large, but feels as if it might be a reasonable upper limit. I seriously doubt that I would enjoy walking about, for very long, with a Noctilux f/0.95 on an M camera. A Re-Edition Steel Rim Summilux-M 35mm lens is on the edge being too small and “fiddly.” 

If, on the other hand, I want to keep the camera slung under a jacket or vest, or keep a camera in a large pocket, or belt pouch, a compact lens is, then, convenient. I have used a Cosina Voigtlander Color Skopar 35mm f/2.5 II, in this way.

I became accustomed to gripping lens barrels, from the time I started DSLR shooting, when my favored lens was a Tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro lens. (Macro and close-range shooting of small subjects was my motivation to start using interchangeable-lens cameras.) 

[dpitt]

58 minutes ago, RexGig0 said:

I started using the Leica M system, with a pre-owned Summilux-M 50mm ASPH being my first lens, which established what an M lens “should” be.

Strangely enough, my first Leica M lens was the Summicron 40C. So it seems that is my definition of what an M lens should be

I have no issues with small lenses as long as they have a tab.

Edited November 29, 2023 by dpitt

[pippy]

13 hours ago, setuporg said:

I’ve recently come across this intriguing pancake photo that would make an M pocketable!...

There is a thread about the Brightin Star here, Setuporg, which might be of interest to you;

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/377951-brightin-star-xslim-m-28mm-f28-m-mount-lens/#comment-4787973

To answer the OP; I'm another who has a very strong preference for compact lenses and, for me, physical size has almost always been of prime importance when selecting any particular f/l of lens. If a lens has what was Leitz' 'standard' E39mm filter thread then that would be another plus-point. With lenses 50mm and shorter I also have a preference for those with tabs and even more so when the tab has an infinity lock.

Philip.

Edited November 29, 2023 by pippy

[pippy]

1 hour ago, dpitt said:

...Anything up to the size of a Summicron 40C is suitable. My Summicron 50 v4 is just a bit too long so it gets much less use...

Even although the v4 Summicron is hardly enormous I have, on occasion, considered acquiring one of the LLL 50mm f2 ELCAN lenses specifically because it is somewhat shorter in the barrrel than the Summicron. Difficult to find one in the UK, though, and I would like to give one a 'test-drive' before committing myself.

Philip.

Edited November 29, 2023 by pippy

[Smudgerer]

For me the new / re-issued Voigtlander 28mm Color Skopar 2.8 would be a preferred choice over the Brightin Star 28mm. The Voigtlander still feels and operates like a "real" lens, plus it is very compact when mounted on a M and it's performance is excellent..........

[evikne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My first Leica lens was a 50mm Summilux ASPH, but I always thought it was just a tad too long, which is why I've sold and repurchased it so many times. The pre-ASPH is much better. My 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH is almost too small, and the only lens I've had that I think looks better with the hood than without. Setting the aperture is a bit fiddly, but I don't do that very often. Focusing is a bit cumbersome too on such a small lens; I don't like using a focus tab, so instead I try as best I can to hold around the lens and use it as if it had a focus ring.

[setuporg]

36 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

For me the new / re-issued Voigtlander 28mm Color Skopar 2.8 would be a preferred choice over the Brightin Star 28mm. The Voigtlander still feels and operates like a "real" lens, plus it is very compact when mounted on a M and it's performance is excellent..........

Type I or II?

[FrozenInTime]

15 hours ago, setuporg said:

I’ve recently come across this intriguing pancake photo that would make an M pocketable!

 

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!

I suspect changing aperture with gloves on would be a challenge.

 

[RayD28]

17 hours ago, evikne said:

Even with a Leica M, I still feel I have the biggest camera, because the others around me usually just use their cell phones. 😄 It's increasingly rare to see someone using a "real" camera.

I've seen people use their full-size iPad to take vacation photos.  Made an M look like a matchbox.  

 

2 hours ago, pippy said:

Even although the v4 Summicron is hardly enormous I have, on occasion, considered acquiring one of the LLL 50mm f2 ELCAN lenses specifically because it is somewhat shorter in the barrrel than the Summicron. Difficult to find one in the UK, though, and I would like to give one a 'test-drive' before committing myself.

Philip.

Philip, is a collapsable 50mm another alternative?  I've thought about getting one.  

[pippy]

18 minutes ago, RayD28 said:

...Philip, is a collapsable 50mm another alternative?  I've thought about getting one...

As it happens, Ray, I do have a 50mm f2.8 Elmar (M) collapsible - it was the first lens I bought for my M2 back in 1980 - and it is a fine enough lens but when extended is only a millimetre or so shorter than the Summicron so not much of an advantage. Being one of the original versions (as opposed to the recent 'reissue') it has the disadvantage whereby the whole of the extended part of the barrel rotates as the lens is focussed meaning that the aperture index isn't always visible immediately. This also means that when a circ. pola is used (and I use one quite a bit) the filter needs to be adjusted fairly often.

I suppose that I could consider one of the recent versions - which have received great reviews - but, quite frankly, I'd prefer a shorter, rigid lens in any case.

Philip.

[Danner]

I had a Mamiya 7 with 50/80/150 lenses, which I traded to transition to an M system.  And, the compact size of the M range was a major factor in that decision.  Nowadays, I very much prefer the more compact lenses, even over faster version in the M range.  Sometimes, the M6 body feels a bit bulky to me.

[Smudgerer]

3 hours ago, setuporg said:

Type I or II?

Type II M mount..........though optically I am told they are similar, maybe the same. I like this lens a lot.

 

 

[Smudgerer]

2 hours ago, RayD28 said:

I've seen people use their full-size iPad to take vacation photos.  Made an M look like a matchbox.  

 

Philip, is a collapsable 50mm another alternative?  I've thought about getting one.  

If you can find a good example of the 50mm f2 SUMMITAR collapsible that lens is really worth owning despite it's age, but Pippy's suggestion of the collapsible 50mm Elmar is a good one too, especially so the last version.

[dpitt]

4 hours ago, RayD28 said:

I've seen people use their full-size iPad to take vacation photos.  Made an M look like a matchbox.  

 

Philip, is a collapsable 50mm another alternative?  I've thought about getting one.  

It is the collapsible 50mm that I take with me when I want a pocketable 50mm.
The collapsible is not bad at all, but both the Summicron 40C and Summicron 50 v4 have a more modern rendering. IMO having both 50s makes perfect sense because of their different character and use.

Edited November 29, 2023 by dpitt

[dpitt]

15 hours ago, TheGodParticle/Hari said:

The irony is that I sometimes feel the 21/1.4 is too big while the SL2S dangles from another shoulder with one of the E82 monsters. 

The irony is that everyone seems to like using M lenses on the SL because of their size and using R lenses is less popular.

IMO the gain in size and weight is relatively small. Because of the SL body you still have a large and heavy package anyway. With R lenses you get lenses that are much smaller than the SL lenses, you have some excellent zoom lenses, and the R primes have the same IQ as the M lenses of the same period.
And the combination looks more balanced than with tiny M lenses.

[IkarusJohn]

There is, of course, a trade-off between size and image quality.  There’s a reason the more modern M lenses are larger than their predecessors.

That said, the 35 & 50 APO Summicrons are remarkably small for their image quality.  If I want small, they are my choices on my M-A, along with the 28 Summaron, 35 Summilux pre-asph v2 and 50/2 Summitar collapsible.

But in general terms, I choose lenses for focal length and image quality.   Having just spent 6 weeks with my X2D and XCD 38V, even my 0.95 Noctilux feels modest on an M camera.

[bourne]

There has been very little mention of the 35 and 50 summicrons ( non-APO) for their small size and fabulous image quality!  I love them.

[Pyrogallol]

If you really want small...

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

3 hours ago, dpitt said:

The irony is that everyone seems to like using M lenses on the SL because of their size and using R lenses is less popular.

IMO the gain in size and weight is relatively small. Because of the SL body you still have a large and heavy package anyway. With R lenses you get lenses that are much smaller than the SL lenses, you have some excellent zoom lenses, and the R primes have the same IQ as the M lenses of the same period.
And the combination looks more balanced than with tiny M lenses.

Folks could also be using M/R lenses on the SL due to the convenience of EVF and focus peaking. Love the geotagging built into the 601, don’t love that the SL2/S doesn’t. 

For me, the M is for the optical rangefinder method of shooting. The SL is for purposes where the M doesn’t excel, but I don’t treat it as a second hand citizen either. I have a few R lenses that rarely get picked up … 60 macro usage fulfilled by AF options, 35-70 doesn’t get picked over the 24-90 and the 70-180 gave way to the 90-280. 

Big and pig as the SL lenses are in comparison to the M ones, i appreciate the AF, weather sealing and optical excellence.