Which lens to buy?

[tgj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone,

I currently own the 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm ZM lenses, and I’m considering upgrading them to Leica lenses one by one. I’m also exploring the idea of adding a zoom lens to my kit, so I can have a versatile one-prime-plus-zoom setup for traveling. I use the SL2S is I usually do travel photography with this camera.

While my budget isn’t huge, I’ve come across a few options that are within reach

Leica Summarit-M 35mm f/2.5
Leica Elmarit-M 28mm (3rd Generation)
Leica R 35mm f/2.8 Elmarit
Leica R 35-70mm f/4

I tend to use 35mm the most, but I also shoot with 28mm, especially when traveling (though my Ricoh GR III often covers that focal length).

If you were in my position, which lens would you prioritize or save up for instead? I’d love to hear your thoughts on these lenses, their performance, and how they might fit into a travel setup.

Thanks in advance for your input!
 

[jankap]

ZM lenses are excellent products, so why change? M and R lenses on an L-mount camera are not the optimal solution. You could have a look at Panasonic and Sigma too, if you want to optimize your equipment electronically.

 

[tgj]

Thank you for your reply. I really enjoy the manual experience so I try not to use the Sigma / Panasonic lenses at the moment. I believe the SL systems have in body correction for the Leica lenses, and I want to take full advantage of that, but I am not sure how much improvement that will bring it to me. 

[jaapv]

Although I agree that replacing modern ZM lenses by vintage Leica ones would be more like a downgrade than an upgrade in a technical sense, there is a lot to be said for exploring the rendering and character of older Leica lenses. I would see it more as an additive process than a replacement. 

[tgj]

Thank you for your post. Maybe I should keep my ZMs and add them, or just add a zoom lens. I believe the Summarit is fairly new. Will you say that lens is better than the Biogon 35 2.8 that I have in a technical sense? 

[DigitalHeMan]

38 minutes ago, jankap said:

M and R lenses on an L-mount camera are not the optimal solution

Why do you think this? I'm very happy using both my M and R lenses on the SL.

[BrettWayne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Vario-Elmar-R  35-70mm f4 is a great lens. As it’s a ROM lens it requires the “LEICA R-ADAPTER L” to get your SL or CL camera to set the correct lens profile. You still won’t get the aperture value in the EXIF but it doesn’t bother me. In my opinion, it probably deprecates the need for the other 35s bc IQ is superb. As a bonus you can focus down to 26cm in Macro mode. 

[Steadimann]

I think I can chime in  

While I did not shoot with vintage Leica lenses, but during my two years of love for Leica i have purchased a number of lenses but in the end the first thing you have to consider is - do you want modern, clean rendering lenses or would you like a vintage style lens, like current reissues for 35, 50.

I use both, I love both and I choose them accordingly in different situations. According to what you already have, it seems like you prefer modern looking lenses, so I would suggest you start from 35 Summilux reissue - it's a very different lens. Wide open it's glowy, at 2-2.8 it's vintage looking, at 4+ you have modern lens rendering. This makes it unique as you basically have 3 lenses in one, I love that.

Second think I would consider is do you shoot colour or bw? I have noticed that I prefer sharper lenses on my M11M, so with it I usually go with 28, 50 etc. On M11P i use all lenses depending on situation - if go shooting my kid, I take reissue lenses - soft, classic looking, If i go shoot event, i use modern lenses, so it all depends.

Anyways, it's a good question to ask what are you looking to gain by going Leica glass. If you ask a question 'is it worth it?'. Not it's not, because there alternatives which are good, similar or even better in some aspects, but I love Leica, I enjoy the lenses, I enjoy the look, feel, heritage, etc. I purchase the lens with the idea to keep it forever. Why sell? It will still be same great lens 20 years from now. 

If i were you, I would go only for M lenses (btw, I use M lenses on GFX in addition to other lenses too because I just love the way they render) and better opt for less lenses but the ones that are fantastic, great and which you would cherish forever instead of buying 5 lenses which you would think of relpacing with some version which you can afford.

If you want great verstile lens with character - go with 35 steelrim reissue (quite cheap compared to other Leica lenses ) you will have a number of lenses in one. If you prefer modern rendering - I could not stop without getting modern 35 Summilux.  Rendering is just amazing of this lens - it does have spatious and three dimensional rendering and unlike vintage reissue lens, this one has the same character from 1.4 to the end, meaning if you're in low light, you can use it at 1.4 and have same look like at 5.6, which is not possible with Reissue lenses. And you can get modern 35 Summilux previous version (FLE) without close focus quite cheaply too. I almost never shoot anything closer than 0.7m with rangefinder anyway...

It would be nice if someone would do a write up of how Leica lenses differ, what's the idea behind each series etc, because there is sooo much more than it looks by the first look - aperture , weight or size. Okay, enough for me, this is a never ending story...

Edited January 3 by Steadimann

[Ko.Fe.]

+1 to no point to switch to Leica M/R mount lenses for camera like this. Zeiss is just as good optically. 

Just get standard AF zoom in L mount. 

[Ko.Fe.]

3 hours ago, tgj said:

Thank you for your post. Maybe I should keep my ZMs and add them, or just add a zoom lens. I believe the Summarit is fairly new. Will you say that lens is better than the Biogon 35 2.8 that I have in a technical sense? 

I have 35 2.5 Summarit-M. As the only Leica lens I find worth to keep. It is not any better than Biogon optically. 

The only real difference is in ergonomics on certain bodies. ZM lenses line up is build for slow photogaphy. Which is fine with SL large and heavy bodies. 

The only reason to switch to modern M Leica lenses is with M bodies. Especially film ones. Light M body and how focus tab, helicoid and aperture ring is made (Summarit-M 35/50 2.5) allowing fiddling (adjusting shutter, focus distance and aperture) by the same time in couple of seconds. The entire kit (film M body, lens) are allowing this and it makes sense. While even with digital M it is not as sufficient due to too many shutter speeds on the dial of digital M. With film M and Summarit-M I could select shutter speed, aperture and focus distance without looking at camera and very quick, 

SLs are not for this. Nor fiddling is really needed or possible. Plus tunnel vision of EVF slows framing anyway.  

So, Zeiss's more resistant aperture, focus rings and next to non existing focus tab are better match for SLs. 

Edited January 3 by Ko.Fe.

[jaapv]

Although the 35-70 R is a great lens which I occasionally use - optically excellent and a semi-macro function- Sigma offers zooms that are very good to superb f2.8 and AF. 
The Biogon-C 35 is a high-contrast lens that is as good as any Leica lens and a first choice lens on my M9M. 

[pedaes]

4 hours ago, tgj said:

Will you say that lens is better than the Biogon 35 2.8 that I have in a technical sense? 

The Zeiss is a truly excellent and under appreciated lens. Proven so in detailed tests by Sean Reid for one (pay site) https://www.reidreviews.com/articleindextable.html

To answer your question - only a Leica or Zeiss 35mm APO in M mount.

[tgj]

Thank you everyone for your comments. It sounds like many do not think it is worth replacing the ZM lenses, and if I should go I should go with Leica I should go with more expensive ones. I also like how some advocated for the 35-70 f4, and I heard good things about them.  @jaapv and @jankap mentioned about Panasonic and Sigma, do you have any recommendations for standard zooms that are not too heavy? 

[jankap]

There exists a complete list of all L-mount lenses. I cannot find it at the moment. Perhaps not all of them, but the most ones.🫠

I use lenses of the 1960er and 1970er years: LTM, R, M and Canon-mount. Sometimes I miss autofocus, finding the correct adapter in the field is somewhat irritating, very irritating is the point of the missing EXIF data of the picture.

Edited January 3 by jankap

[jankap]

Here is a list of L-mount lenses, that I found in Photo Rumors. At the moment, 84 items from 4 brands.

https://lensfinder.org/lenses/mount/leica-l-mount

[JimmyCheng]

your zeiss lenses are better.

[Erato]

16 hours ago, tgj said:

Thank you for your post. Maybe I should keep my ZMs and add them, or just add a zoom lens. I believe the Summarit is fairly new. Will you say that lens is better than the Biogon 35 2.8 that I have in a technical sense? 

I’ve got a few suggestions for prime lenses and zoom lenses that would be great for your Sls with a M mount adapter.

Prime Lenses(M Mount):

- Leica Summarit-M 35mm f/2.5: This lens is a classic choice for M mount cameras. It’s known for its sharpness and versatility.
- Leica Summarit-M 35mm f/2.4: If you prefer a slightly faster aperture, this lens is a great option. It’s also a bit lighter than the 35mm f/2.5.

 

Zoom Lenses:

- P. Angenieux 35-70mm F/2.5-3.3(R Mount, SPEC here😞 This lens is a popular choice for R mount cameras. It’s versatile, outstanding image quality and has a wide range of focal lengths.
- Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm F/4(R Mount, SPEC here😞 This lens offers great image quality.
- Yashica ML 35-70mm F/4(C/Y Mount, SPEC here😞 This lens is a budget-friendly option. It’s lightweight and has a good range of focal lengths. Image quality close to Contax lenses.

Ref. Photos with the P. Angenieux 35-70mm F/2.5-3.3 on Flickr, FYR.

 

Alternatives:

• Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/35 ASPH.(M Mount)
  • If you can get your hands on one, the Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/35 ASPH. is a must-have. It’s a lightweight, versatile lens with a sharp and pleasant image quality. The MDF is at 0.3m, which is great for close-up photography in some occasions.
• Summicron-Ms or Summarons
• Other Leica Thread Mount, LTM alternatives

 

Let me know what you think!

Edited January 4 by Erato

[BernardC]

18 hours ago, jankap said:

Here is a list of L-mount lenses, that I found in Photo Rumors. At the moment, 84 items from 4 brands.

https://lensfinder.org/lenses/mount/leica-l-mount

If you filter for L-Mount at B&H you'll get 200 lenses (today). That's not counting discontinued lenses, or brands that B&H doesn't carry.

[tgj]

Thank you, everyone, for posting! The P. Angénieux 35-70mm is an interesting choice! I’ll definitely look into it. The 24mm Elmar-M ASPH is also quite intriguing, though it’s a bit out of my price range. I think this is as wide as I’m willing to go, so I might save up for this lens in the future. The idea of color matching was exactly what I had in mind, as I don’t think I prefer the Zeiss rendition compared to Leica. A few Flickr images and YouTube videos influenced my thinking on this, and I’d like to try at least one Leica lens as a starting point.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lee S]

On 1/3/2025 at 10:24 AM, tgj said:

Thank you for your post. Maybe I should keep my ZMs and add them, or just add a zoom lens. I believe the Summarit is fairly new. Will you say that lens is better than the Biogon 35 2.8 that I have in a technical sense? 

I highly doubt the Summarit outperforms the C-Biogon. I have that lens and it’s incredibly sharp. Only the VM/Leica APO’s beat it.