Lenses — which ones should I get

[John in Nassau]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

given you have a 35and 50 I would opt for something wider.  perhaps 24-25mm, perhaps even a 21.  having just bought one recently (and now on a 25mm kick) I’d vote for a ZM 25.  I’ll defer to others on the Leica equivalent but the Zeiss lens is stunning.

John

 

[Advertisement]

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

[emlokto]

3 hours ago, Danner said:

IMHO, Summilux range is not inherently superior to the Summicron range.  For example, having both 50's, I prefer the Summicron.

I read a bunch before getting into Leica Ms, and somehow I've absorbed the idea that the 35mm Summilux and the 50mm Summicron are the best combination, because I've definitely read some criticism on the 50 Summilux but everyone loves the 50 Summicron. Meanwhile, if you're getting a Summilux, 28mm or 35mm seem to be the favorites. 

[grug norgy]

@RexGig0 thank you for the most nuanced answer, everyone’s thoughtful answers have given me so much insight in to how to think about navigating through selecting possible future lenses, I guess I go into a Leica store try their lenses on digital and then ask them what the used version equivalents might be.  I am so curious to be able to come to understand these signature looks you are talking about.  
 

Going to dig around perhaps these internet examples of these looks you talk about . Thank you again  

[grug norgy]

4 hours ago, hansvons said:

Exactly. Summicrons are lighter, and Summiluxes are faster. Both have their use case. I prefer Summicrons for their smaller footprint, preferably the 35mm ASPH (sharp AND character) and the 50mm V4 (because it has a tab). However, the 35mm Summilux V2 pre-ASPH is an interesting candidate as it's relatively tiny for its speed (compact double Gauss design) but doesn't glow like a 1.0 Promist Black filter at f/1.4 like its predecessors (still pretty soft, though) if you find one with intact coatings, preferably from the late 80ies, early 90ies. Despite the tamed "Leica glow", it still renders '70s-like. Like the 35mm Summicron ASPH V1 from the 90ies, it's a sleeper. Steel Rim, 8-Elements, and KOB steal the show with their fancy names but not with their character. Totally subjective, of course.

Thank you again Hansvons (A leica guru) this Leica glow you speak of sounds really incredible, do you have any other series of the lenses that you think achieved this glow you speak of ?

[grug norgy]

4 hours ago, lct said:

Different feeling here. I have no experience with current Summilux 50/1.4 asph v2 but the v1 of it has more acutance than Summicrons v4 & v5. Also less flare and less focus shift. Not to say  that i prefer one or another. I don't use the Summilux asph for gentle portraits, it is too harsh for my taste, but for landscapes, the Summilux asph is hard to beat. YMMV.

HEy LCT, when you speak of a harshness, what are you referring to ?

 

[grug norgy]

9 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

In each focal length, there will be stella Karbe and Mandler era lenses.  One of the charms of the M system is the massive choice of lenses - not just aperture options, but APO, ASPH, FLE and those without those designations.

My approach has been to identify the focal lengths I like (21-28-35-50-75) then identify the different lenses in a chosen focal length.  Size and weight are less an issue for me.  Stella lenses (for me) are the 35 APO Summicron ASPH (modern, small and lovely bokeh); 75 Summiux (Mandler’s favourite lens, apparently - a two trick pony, soft open and sharp stopped down); 50 Summilux ASPH (flawed, but full of character); 28 Summilux ASPH (modern); and 21 SEM ASPH (don’t have it, but small, sharp and much loved).

Have fun - the forum is a great resource.

Thank John, it certainly is an incredible resource, once i have identified the focal lengths, how do you think I go about trying to discover the exact qualitative, character differences between all the lenses - it's like i know more now, which makes me feel like i know nothing

 

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, emlokto said:

I read a bunch before getting into Leica Ms, and somehow I've absorbed the idea that the 35mm Summilux and the 50mm Summicron are the best combination, because I've definitely read some criticism on the 50 Summilux but everyone loves the 50 Summicron. Meanwhile, if you're getting a Summilux, 28mm or 35mm seem to be the favorites. 

Plenty of folks here consider the 50 Summilux ASPH their favorite lens.  Some of them especially like the bokeh compared to the 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE). Others prefer a pre-ASPH lens, regardless of FL.  This includes the 50 Summicron v.4 and v.5. 
 

I have enjoyed the 50 Summilux ASPH v.1 for many years, on multiple bodies.  But I recently bought a 50 Summicron v.5 (after selling the v.4 decades ago), as I find it pairs nicely with the M10 Monochrom.   I sold my 35 Summilux FLE v.1, and instead use my longtime workhorse 35 Summicron ASPH v.1.

Personal tastes and use cases vary greatly.  Ergonomics and handing, hoods, etc, can be as important as rendering for many. Leica doesn’t make duds; just options. Best way to decide is to try. 
 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, grug norgy said:

Thank John, it certainly is an incredible resource, once i have identified the focal lengths, how do you think I go about trying to discover the exact qualitative, character differences between all the lenses - it's like i know more now, which makes me feel like i know nothing

 

Look at the images, and read what people write about them.  It’s also worth coming to grips with terminology that people use (coma, chomratic aberratioin etc).  You’ll get a good idea once you know what you’re looking at.  I’d suggest that you filter some advice which is not relevant to you, and identify those contributors who are of a like mind.

I would say, once you’ve made your choices, use the new lens and come to grips with it.  I’ve never really believed that there is equipment which meets all my needs - close is good enough, then work out how to make the most of the lens and move on.  The alternative is you end up with many lenses of the same focal length, and confusion 🙄

[costa43]

You will get a multitude of different answers that are all valid. The only way to truly decide on your setup is to try out a load of different options and see what you prefer. This may well take years, or maybe not, depending on your personality. My preference after trying many m mount lenses for digital, and now for film are those that have some character, these tend to be pre asph in the 35/50 focal length. 

To answer your question on which is sharper is not so easy. This is just my experience but I’ve found that as a general rule in the pre asph era, the 35/50 Summicrons have a slight sharpness advantage over their Summilux brothers. Not much in it but at wider apertures, they resolve a little more detail. Once the Summilux range went asph, I think this reversed, and they are a little sharper with equivalent aperture. There are other differences when it comes to close up sharpness/fall off etc but I am generalising. The exception in the modern era is the apo range. They render a pretty perfect image regardless of aperture and are the highest resolving lenses in their respective focal lengths (talking just 35/50)

You mention rolls so I assume you shoot film. At 90mm, there are some interesting options. I rarely shoot this focal length so have stuck with a Minolta 90mm f4 for those rare occasions but if it was a focal length I used more regularly, I would veer toward a faster option. Maybe a tele elmarit.  For 28mm it’s a little harder to decide. If you need speed with how you shoot then a Summicron is a great all round option. For me, this focal length and wider is where I lean towards more modern lenses. I would go with an Elmarit asph as the size/balance/performance is very appealing and I’m almost always in ok light and stopped down when shooting wider.

I’ve not mentioned 3rd party lenses as the options are so vast but so amazing too. I’m also really nitpicking and it’s always subjective but any of these amazing lenses will give you a great image, it’s just for us nerds where these small differences matter. Part of the fun for me is trying out all these wonderful options and comparing and discussing them. It’s all part of the journey. Best of luck in your decision making!

Edited November 11, 2024 by costa43

[lct]

5 hours ago, grug norgy said:

HEy LCT, when you speak of a harshness, what are you referring to ?

With more acutance, the Summilux asph shows more skin imperfections than the Summicron. Not the best lens for shooting mother-in-law if you want to avoid divorce

[JTLeica]

Do you like character lenses? Or optically more perfect lenses? That should be the first question.

A unique balance is something like the 50 Summilux ASPH or the first 35mm Summilux ASPH, both lenses are very sharp stopped down but have a lovely character wide open. The 35 being relatively soft and glowy, and the Lux being smooth and still rather sharp.

Older = More character

Newer = Less character

Character = Imperfections

As for the 28 I have no experience at all with them other than the latest Summilux.

90... Either older Summicron, soft and beautiful, sharp stopped down

90 APO - Similar to the above but just sharper still

75 or 90 Summarits are worth considering, small, tiny even and sharp.

[grug norgy]

1 hour ago, JTLeica said:

Do you like character lenses? Or optically more perfect lenses? That should be the first question.

A unique balance is something like the 50 Summilux ASPH or the first 35mm Summilux ASPH, both lenses are very sharp stopped down but have a lovely character wide open. The 35 being relatively soft and glowy, and the Lux being smooth and still rather sharp.

Older = More character

Newer = Less character

Character = Imperfections

As for the 28 I have no experience at all with them other than the latest Summilux.

90... Either older Summicron, soft and beautiful, sharp stopped down

90 APO - Similar to the above but just sharper still

75 or 90 Summarits are worth considering, small, tiny even and sharp.

Ahh gotcha, thank you mate.  
When you speak of imperfections - what exactly do you mean ? 

[JTLeica]

56 minutes ago, grug norgy said:

Ahh gotcha, thank you mate.  
When you speak of imperfections - what exactly do you mean ? 

Imperfections are things like soft glow around the contrasting edges, CA / Purple fringing, spherical aberrations that give the look of a spinning or swirl to the blue / out of focus areas, anything other than a clean and perfect image like a modern APO images gives.

Some of these imperfections can be added in post, but most cannot easily, like the swirl of a fast lens with spherical aberrations would be hard to mimic in photoshop.

Soft glow? Easy enough

[hansvons]

12 hours ago, grug norgy said:

this Leica glow you speak of sounds really incredible, do you have any other series of the lenses that you think achieved this glow you speak of ?

Yes. The Voigtlander 35mm Nokton f/1.4 SC Version 2 is basically a 35mm Summilux V1 Steel Rim copy that glows like hell at f/1.4. I say hell, others say famous Leica glow.

This lens is a bargain. It's of finest build quality, as compact as the original, nicely engineered and designed, and can be bought brand new. I have one and won't sell it because it's precisely what I might want when flary, super-moody pictures are on the table, preferably shot against the light. It is an absolute no-brainer for everyone who wants a Steel Rim, but feels not like shelling out serious money for a lens that’s somewhat of a speciality. 

For some reason, it renders bad on an SL2-S but terrific on film. Its optical design is a classic double Gauss, like the original from the fifties. Get one and close the vintage 35mm Summilux chapter for good

[lct]

The Nokton 35/1.4 SC v2 has almost replaced my Summilux 35/1.4 v2 but it can hardly compete with it re distortion and glow at f/1.4. Otherwise the Nokton is indeed a keeper. Just a snap on M11 here.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Diverse/n-QFBj4/Leica-M11-CV-3514-SC-v2/i-cb7xzgQ/0/LV9rK6kQDtczjZ6x6tnN4Q8gDbMcCVrD7b7w8KWDp/X4/M1000149_sips*-X4.jpg

[hansvons]

8 hours ago, lct said:

The Nokton 35/1.4 SC v2 has almost replaced my Summilux 35/1.4 v2 but it can hardly compete with it re distortion and glow at f/1.4. Otherwise the Nokton is indeed a keeper. Just a snap on M11 here.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Diverse/n-QFBj4/Leica-M11-CV-3514-SC-v2/i-cb7xzgQ/0/LV9rK6kQDtczjZ6x6tnN4Q8gDbMcCVrD7b7w8KWDp/X4/M1000149_sips*-X4.jpg

I agree on distortion. The Nokton shows a little bit barrel distortion. But otherwise, it renders faces relatively flat (like the Leica 35mm vintage lenses up to the ASPH Summicron) contrary to its sibling, the tiny colour Skopar 35mm f/2.5 that has a more “popping” look, which is too much into my face (that’s why I sold it). As it's a regular, even barrel distortion, edges can effortlessly be straigten in post. 

On the infamous Leica glow (not a massive fan of this for a daily shooter), I beg to differ. In that regards, I find the Nokton be close to the Steel Rim Reissue. Can’t say much about vintage originals, but my experience tells me that the glow has a high chance to be even more present as often the front lens coating has deteriorated due to age and cleaning. But as I said, I’m not a glow expert. 

That said, I do love how the 35mm Summicron ASPH glows at f/2. It's hard to spot and requires strong reflections. But when you start seeing it, you’ll notice it all the time. On film, it's gone or masked by the halation that any film photo exhibits, even a motion picture negative with its strong ramjet anti halation layer. The 35mm Summicron ASPH is likely the most underrated standard lens in the Leica stable.

[lct]

I have no experience with the Summilux 35/1.4 reissue but the glow of the Nokton 35/1.4 SC v2 is reduced compared to the Summilux 35/1.4 v2. Not to say that i dislike the Nokton's OoF though (on digital CL below). As for distortion, that of the Nokton is significant but easy to adjust in post (below on M11).

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 November 12, 2024 by lct

[mikeamosau]

Very hard for anyone to answer this and a question many of us have faced. My answer was to rent some lenses and find out for myself what I liked. Once I’d had a lens for the weekend and photographed like crazy with it, if I didn’t want to send it back then I knew I wanted it. 
 

I’ve rented all sorts of lenses and found I hated the 90mm but loved the 75mm. Was not much of a fan of a 24 or 28, but loved the 21mm. As for ‘best’ - so very subjective depending on the way you rank best. My optically ‘best’ lens is my least favorite and one of my favorites is least ‘best’ in every measurement! 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[RexGig0]

On 11/10/2024 at 9:49 PM, grug norgy said:

@RexGig0 thank you for the most nuanced answer, everyone’s thoughtful answers have given me so much insight in to how to think about navigating through selecting possible future lenses, I guess I go into a Leica store try their lenses on digital and then ask them what the used version equivalents might be.  I am so curious to be able to come to understand these signature looks you are talking about.  

One place to look, in an image, for character/signature, is the transitions, from in-focus to out-of-focus areas, on a subject, or any other applicable parts of an image, where this effect is visible.

Of course, bokeh is another place to look. This is the character of the totally out-of-focus areas, especially in the background. Bokeh is much more than just the “bokeh ball” effect, when pinpoint light sources are out of focus, in the background.

The Red Dot Forum Live presentations, on You Tube, have done a quite good job showing these effects. They describe these effects, while showing images with these effects. I believe that they use the term “fall-off” to describe the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus.

Edited November 15, 2024 by RexGig0

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, RexGig0 said:

One place to look, in an image, for character/signature, is the transitions, from in-focus to out-of-focus areas, on a subject, or any other applicable parts of an image, where this effect is visible.

Of course, bokeh is another place to look. This is the character of the totally out-of-focus areas, especially in the background. Bokeh is much more than just the “bokeh ball” effect, when pinpoint light sources are out of focus, in the background.

The Red Dot Forum Live presentations, on You Tube, have done a quite good job showing these effects. They describe these effects, while showing images with these effects. I believe that they use the term “fall-off” to describe the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus.

For me, this is a critical issue, while many are concerned more about coma (the butterfly shape of bokeh balls) and the hexagonal shapes (caused by the aperture blades.  These can be relevant and distracting, but a sharp fall-off between in focus and out of focus will kill an image for me - it looks like the subject has been cut and paste.

I think the lens with the nicest roll-off I’ve had was the 50 Summilux-SL.  In M mount, the 75 Summilux is very good, as is the 50 Summilux ASPH and the 35 APO Summicron.  There are others not so good, with other strengths - for instance, the FLE versions of the 35 Summilux have never worked for me.  Opinions vary.  The strength of the M lenses is in the difficult areas of wide angles (once apochromatic aberrations are sorted, telecentric lenses are easier to design than wides without distortion), and fast lenses.  That can result in a fixation on images which seem to just display image isolation and bokeh.

Ideally, the out of focus should not distract.