Help a beginner on his journey to finding the right lenses

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

54 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

35 FLE (the latest lux) / Summicron ASPH II if you like modern rendering
35 Steel Rim re-issue / 35 Summicron IV if you like moderate character
35 lux pre-asph if you like strong character

Or a Summarit 2.4 or 2.5 if you simply want a slightly slower, excellent performer for less money (or another maker's lens of course).

[hansvons]

1 minute ago, pgk said:

I would say that a 1mm shift of focal length from 35mm moving wider (shorter focal length) has far more impact visually than a 1mm shift in focal length from 50mm going narrower (longer focal length).

Yes. And that's because it's an exponential function of two squared ( root 2 = 1.4 as we have in the f-stop order. 2 x 1.4 = 2.8; 2.8 x 1.4 = 4, and so on). 

[Advertisement]

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

[hansvons]

7 minutes ago, pgk said:

Or a Summarit 2.4 or 2.5 if you simply want a slightly slower, excellent performer for less money (or another maker's lens of course).

That's a gem of a lens if you don't want flares at all. No hood is required. It's as sharp as the Summicron ASPH (it's a similar ASPH design), similar in size but a bit lighter. Love it!!

 

I shot the image below with the Summarit f2.5 on Kodak 5207 at f 2.5 on an M4P a few days ago.

 

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!

[M8X2]

I must say, I would have not expected such a rich discussion here, many, many, MANY thanks! 

The examples shared by Philip/pippy are amazing and make the point about 35/50 very clear (in fact, I would put a print of the 35mm image on my wall).

I wouldn't mind saving a few on lenses at the beginning, so I am likely going to buy some of them used. Maybe not the 35 Lux, let's see. It has a lot going for it with the close focussing, integrated hood, and the compact size.

[Almizilero]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb hansvons:

That's a gem of a lens if you don't want flares at all. No hood is required. It's as sharp as the Summicron ASPH (it's a similar ASPH design), similar in size but a bit lighter. Love it!!

 

I shot the image below with the Summarit f2.5 on Kodak 5207 at f 2.5 on an M4P a few days ago.

 

I second this! As I said, I'm actually looking for the right 35 for me and the Summarit 2.4 and the Summicron ASPH were contenders. From my copies, I would say this: The Summarit is every bit as sharp as the Summicron ASPH. In the extremest corners (really at the very edges) the Summarit even beats the Summicron (both wide open, the Summicron catches up at the same aperture). The Summicron has, to my eyes, more of the mysterious "microcontrast". The images just have a little more punch and background separation at the same apertures. This can only be seen in direct comparison, you wouldn't see anything that feels inferior when just looking at the results from the Summarit. Both highly recommended!

[hansvons]

@Almizilero spot on!! Exactly my findings. Both lenses are stellar but underrated in the current hype of vintage lenses. 

[cdnchris]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I started with Leica M just last year, and my first lens is a 35 Summicron ASPH (v6, 11674). I feel like 35mm was a great start for me to learn to build a story rather than focus on singular elements. A lot of my photography before the M was very ... narrow? before forcing myself to live with the 35mm and learn to include more in the frame. I find the Summicron walks the line between character and clinical wonderfully (for me). The price was easier to handle as well. On occasion I wish for another stop of light but as others have said higher ISOs are generally fine, and I think 1.4 would have been frustrating in the beginning to learn to focus. Closer focus would be nice on occasion, but it's generally what I would call "half a lean" back from where I start and then I'm thinking more critically about elements in the frame. I think if I had've gotten a 50 lux instead of the 35 I wouldn't have grown in the same way. Everyone's journey is different of course - I'd echo some of the other recommendations here, check out the 28, 35 and 50 posts here and other places and see what images really speak to you. I hope you have a fun time in the process!

 

[newtoleica]

A pitch in for the 35 Summilux ASPH v1. This lens renders beautifully, much nicer than the later FLE (I) version which can be a bit harsh. It's sort of half way between the older pre-ASPH look and a modern lens. It was replaced as it has some focus shift. however, its reported that the 6-bit versions shift a bit less as Leica maybe tightened tolerances and if you either shoot it wide open or stopped down beyond f5.6 (as one would usually in either instance on the street) its not an issue. I've certainly never had a problem with it in 10,000s of images. It can be had now for around £2500.

Personally I don't like the way the 35 summicrons render an image so have never wanted to own one.

There's a thread here: 

 

[IkarusJohn]

I’d rather avoid getting into a discussion of specific lenses - there are many pages on which 35 and the like.  A lot comes down to price and preferred rendering.  As I understand it, the OP is not a beginner to photography, but to the Leica M system.

In relation to cropping, while it is true that you can simulate a 50mm field of view from the centre crop a 35mm image, that’s really only part of the issue.  The point is there is a world of difference between taking all your images with a 28mm lens and cropping to the final image you had in mind, and framing the image you want by using your feet to get the best out of the lens you have.  As @pippy’s images in the other thread show (where we had this discussion), if you move your feet to get the framing you want, the final image is very different from that same framing with a longer lens taken further away.

I do agree that a 35mm is a good single lens choice, because it is so close to your natural vision, you need to work a bit harder to get a striking image (which is a good thing).  Nothing more boring, in my view, than a chocolate boxy image taken with a “standard” lens at 1.7 metres above the ground (ie, head height).

I once went through the Sahara with a photographer from New York who had rushed out the door of his home with an 18mm lens with a cracked front element and nothing else.  Hard work, but his images were fantastic.

[Olaf_ZG]

My journey started three years ago. To me, the main difference between f.e. Fuji and the m-mount, is that basically with fuji you have only choice for a certain f/l with a certain f-stop. With the m-mount you still have on-top of that asph, apo, size, rendering, vintage, modern, leica, zeiss, vl and many others.

During the last years I tried some lenses, some I kept, most I sold. With buying secondhand your loss is minimal, so it is a nice trip to try things out.

I guess the journey will never end, which is great fun, but one should not go across its budget in this game, cause sometimes selling might take a bit longer.

ENJOY!

[Pierre68]

Lots of interesting input here.

I tend to go out with two different focal length on two bodies because I hate to change lenses in the middle of a shoot.

So I might advise the OP to consider buying two M10-R instead of the newer M11. The 2 bodies solution comes in at almost the same price if buying used.

Then my favorite 2 lenses combinations are as follow:

24mm f/3.8 Elmar + 50mm Lux Asph

MATE + 35mm Lux (or Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2, or 35mm reissue Steel Rim)

35mm cron + 75 APO cron 

[hepcat]

On 1/3/2024 at 5:57 AM, M8X2 said:

Hi All,

To be honest, I am not even sure if I am currently capable of recognising the subtle differences between the not-so extreme options at the moment, so I am likely overthinking things.

Instead of asking for specific advice on the particular lenses, what are your recommendations regarding finding the right lenses if you put yourself in the mind of a newbie? Thanks in advance for your input!

I have not read all three pages of this thread, but I have some fifty years' experience, much of that time with Leica.

You ARE, in fact, over-thinking this.  60mp requires a lot of resolution, but there are thousands of photos on websites that show you don't have to have the latest and greatest lenses from Leica to make good photos.  

You will NOT be able to see the subtle differences in lenses in images; particularly sized 1600px on the long side for Web use.  At poster size, the odds are slim that you'll see the differences.  I have an M10-P.  My go-to lenses are 1950s Canon LTM lenses; my favorite is the 50mm f/1.5 Canon Sonnar LTM.  I just took it to my repairman for a cleaning and lube, so I'm using a Summicron v.3 from 1973 while it's out for repair.   My walk-around kit ia a Canon 35mm  f/2.8, the v3 Summicron, and a 1955 Canon 85mm f/1.9.  I use those lenses not because I can't afford the latest, but because they're what I have, and spending $5,000 for a lens doesn't improve my photographs any at all. 

Buy whatever lenses make you happy and go make images.   Don't get hung up in the minutia.  Your time is better spend making photos.

Edited January 5 by hepcat

[hepcat]

As a matter of fact, if you want to see what older glass is capable of on modern sensors, you need look no further than here:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/268173-the-view-through-older-glass/#comment-2100618

[newtoleica]

6 hours ago, hepcat said:

I have not read all three pages of this thread, but I have some fifty years' experience, much of that time with Leica.

You ARE, in fact, over-thinking this.  60mp requires a lot of resolution, but there are thousands of photos on websites that show you don't have to have the latest and greatest lenses from Leica to make good photos.  

You will NOT be able to see the subtle differences in lenses in images; particularly sized 1600px on the long side for Web use.  At poster size, the odds are slim that you'll see the differences.  I have an M10-P.  My go-to lenses are 1950s Canon LTM lenses; my favorite is the 50mm f/1.5 Canon Sonnar LTM.  I just took it to my repairman for a cleaning and lube, so I'm using a Summicron v.3 from 1973 while it's out for repair.   My walk-around kit ia a Canon 35mm  f/2.8, the v3 Summicron, and a 1955 Canon 85mm f/1.9.  I use those lenses not because I can't afford the latest, but because they're what I have, and spending $5,000 for a lens doesn't improve my photographs any at all. 

Buy whatever lenses make you happy and go make images.   Don't get hung up in the minutia.  Your time is better spend making photos.

Well said. A lens shouldn’t be measured by looking for sharpness at 100% on a screen, but looking at the whole image at a normal viewing distance and asking yourself “does this photograph speak to my soul”? Of course you WILL need a decent image to start with, and most of what’s posted on gear forums isn’t… HEPCAT IS RIGHT - all Leica lenses have this sort of character compared to most lenses from other manufacturers (some notable exceptions like the Nikon 85 1.4 and 28 1.4 AFD). Most modern lenses are technically great but lack soul, Leicas not. 

[M8X2]

Thanks all, you really helped me and you changed my mind in a few ways, so your input is greatly appreciated. Here is a short summary of where I stand:

(1) I will only buy a single 35 mm lens first, but most likely a modern design like a 35 Lux FLE or FLE II and not search for a pre-ASPH for now because of the focus shift issues. The learning curve is steep enough with an M kit that works. 

(2) I am only later going to add other lenses along the journey, certainly a wide-angle and maybe a 75 Summarit.

(3) I am still going to go with an M11. I don't mind the extra costs over an M10 as I want to keep my camera for a long time. There are already some used M11s available, unfortunately most of them in silver (I prefer black). I will stick with one body, maybe add a Monochrome at some day. I need a light kit that I am actually going to carry with me. This is also why I will sell the Q2.

[IkarusJohn]

6 hours ago, M8X2 said:

Thanks all, you really helped me and you changed my mind in a few ways, so your input is greatly appreciated. Here is a short summary of where I stand:

(1) I will only buy a single 35 mm lens first, but most likely a modern design like a 35 Lux FLE or FLE II and not search for a pre-ASPH for now because of the focus shift issues. The learning curve is steep enough with an M kit that works. 

(2) I am only later going to add other lenses along the journey, certainly a wide-angle and maybe a 75 Summarit.

(3) I am still going to go with an M11. I don't mind the extra costs over an M10 as I want to keep my camera for a long time. There are already some used M11s available, unfortunately most of them in silver (I prefer black). I will stick with one body, maybe add a Monochrome at some day. I need a light kit that I am actually going to carry with me. This is also why I will sell the Q2.

Good choices, I think. Good luck!

I know I said I would avoid specific lens recommendations. For your 35, have a look at the “Which 35” thread (I’m on my phone and can’t search it). Lots of good advice there. 

I’ve had 2 copies of the FLE and didn’t get on with either (I found them harsh and the bokeh distractingly busy). I settled on the APO Summicron. 

Others will differ.

 

[hansvons]

12 hours ago, M8X2 said:

(1) I will only buy a single 35 mm lens first, but most likely a modern design like a 35 Lux FLE or FLE II

This is a good choice. Enjoy!!