ADVICE NEEDED on what to think about with wide / longer lenses

[pgh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 6/26/2025 at 4:49 AM, Dave Lynch said:

 

I’m been mulling over an M11 purchase.  I’m looking for a full frame camera system that’s light weight (my R5 & lenses weigh a ton) for travel. I had the loan of a M11 & summicron 35mm for 2 weeks and enjoyed it.  Am now trying to decide on lenses. My concern is the handling of the rangefinder at wider and longer focal lengths. I’ve the opportunity to go into a store, but I’d like to know what to look for before peering through the camera. TIA

 

IMO if you’re going to shoot outside the 28mm-75mm window often enough, an M isn’t the best solution. A 90 is usable enough, but it’s something I keep at home for projects not that I would ever want to travel with. For travel it’s 35 and 50 or just one of them. 

[Advertisement]

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

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, pgh said:

IMO if you’re going to shoot outside the 28mm-75mm window often enough, an M isn’t the best solution. A 90 is usable enough, but it’s something I keep at home for projects not that I would ever want to travel with. For travel it’s 35 and 50 or just one of them. 

Lenses wider than 28mm are certainly very usable on M11, and 28mm already requires an external viewfinder for many with glasses.

[pgh]

I find the external viewfinder and moreso the need for live view significantly detract from the core of what the M is good at but if others don’t then yes it is technically a system that goes much beyond 28-75. Just for me, I’d rather use something else. I came to Ms because 98% of what I do is at 35 and 50mm. 

[jaapv]

I find that quite a few M users, especially those new to the system, don't go beyond the basics of rangefinder focusing. There is more for precise and easy focusing. 

Quote

The M works the same way as any rangefinder camera, the central patch in the viewfinder is your focusing tool.

It is important to look through the viewfinder in the optical axis. Looking into the camera skewed will result in inaccurate focus.

The first thing to do is to ascertain that you can see the rangefinder patch properly. A correct match between the rangefinder and your eye is even more important than it is using an SLR or EVF.

Leica sells corrective diopter lenses. Determining which one you need - if any- can be done by going to your optician and holding his try-out lenses between your eye and the viewfinder. The one that allows you to see the rangefinder patch and framelines sharply is the correct one. Order the nearest value from Leica. In a pinch you can use over-the-counter reading glasses for this test. If your eyes need special corrections, you can use your spectacles, provided you can see clearly at 2 metres distance ( the virtual distance of the rangefinder patch). Note that the background will be at background distance,so your eye should ideally be able to accomodate over the distance differential. However, there is some tolerance here.
WalterLeica offers custom-made diopters, also a model to accommodate astigmatism.
He also offers contrast-enhancing screw-in glass. 
https://walterleica.com

For special cases there are viewfinder magnifiers. They can help, especially with longer and fast lenses and they can give confidence, but they can also be not very useful; they cannot correct errors in the focusing mechanism or your eye, in fact they magnify them.
Basically, for an experienced user, magnifiers are not needed and will only lower contrast, brightness and reduce field of view, but some users do like and use them.

Leica offers a 1.25x one and a 1.4x. These need diopter correction like the camera, but often of a different value than the camera viewfinder.

 

Once the viewfinder is corrected optimally, there are three methods of focusing, in ascending order of difficulty aka training.

1. The broken line method. Look for a vertical line in the image and bring it together in the rangefinder patch to be continuous.

2. The coincidence method. Look for a pattern in the image and bring it together to coincide. This may lead to errors with repeating patterns.

3. The contrast method. Once you have focus by method 1. or 2. a small adjustment will cause the rangefinder patch to "jump" into optimum contrast. At that point you have the most precise focussing adjustment.

 

Side remark:

If you try focusing on a subject emitting polarized light like a reflection it may happen that the polarizing effect of the prism system in the rangefinder will blot out the contrast in the rangefinder patch, making focusing difficult. In that case rotate the camera 90 degrees to focus.

 

[vkdev]

I use 21mm glass and use live view to compose the frame. in live view mode and I never tilt the horizon line.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, pgh said:

I find the external viewfinder and moreso the need for live view significantly detract from the core of what the M is good at but if others don’t then yes it is technically a system that goes much beyond 28-75. Just for me, I’d rather use something else. I came to Ms because 98% of what I do is at 35 and 50mm. 

External viewfinders were always part of the core M experience.

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

45 minutes ago, vkdev said:

I use 21mm glass and use live view to compose the frame. in live view mode and I never tilt the horizon line.

Even of you tilt it by accident, the tilt angle is stored in the DNG and can be used to automatically correct the tilt. Of course, it is better to avoid needless corrections.

[pgh]

3 minutes ago, SrMi said:

External viewfinders were always part of the core M experience.

For you. Lol. 

I’ve used Ms for 20 years. Never once mounted one on my camera. I know the experience through trying others but it’s not for me.
 

Part of the beauty of them the thing itself. different for everyone but I do not like accessories, every one of them gets me a step closer to “why aren’t I using a different camera?” - no thumb rests, no half cases, no external viewfinders for me. 

Edited July 1 by pgh

[jaapv]

46 minutes ago, vkdev said:

I use 21mm glass and use live view to compose the frame. in live view mode and I never tilt the horizon line.

The framelines are your reference for the horizon. They won’t be tilted in an optical viewfinder either. 

[jaapv]

3 minutes ago, pgh said:

For you. Lol. 

I’ve used Ms for 20 years. Never once mounted one on my camera. I know the experience through trying others but it’s not for me.
 

Part of the beauty of them the thing itself. different for everyone but I do not like accessories, every one of them gets me a step closer to “why aren’t I using a different camera?” - no thumb rests, no half cases, no external viewfinders for me. 

I’ve been using them since 1926…🤣

[pgh]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

I’ve been using them since 1926…🤣

Well then I suppose the local newspaper will be doing a story on you quite soon! 

[DadDadDaddyo]

All lenses require special handling and considerations unique to the focal length. 

It aligns with my own experience that the range of 24mm to 90mm covers the vast majority of my general requirements.

In a small bag I generally carry the 24mm, the 35mm, the 50mm, and the 90mm. These, and the M11 and M11M, and I'm good to go. Two bodies with lenses, plus two lenses. There's still room for a couple of extra batteries and the Tri-Elmar MATE.

The most salient consideration in my choice among these focal lengths in a given situation is not any technical matter related to focusing or handling, but rather, finding the balance between "Inclusion" and "Selection". 

Whether semi-macro, portrait, or even landscape, I find there's usually a "Subject" and its "Surroundings". 

A wide lens pulls more into the frame, in many cases, much more, than just the Subject, unless "Everything" is the Subject (as sometimes happens in landscapes). This is what I mean by "Inclusion". So, a wide field of view presents the task sometimes the challenge, of dealing with all that stuff in the frame. 

There seems to be a widespread convention suggesting that this is what one wants for landscapes: the sweep, the vista, and maybe that's so, but not always. 

I find it unfortunate when there are elements included in a shot simply because they happen to be there, especially when they're pulled into the scene without thought only because they fall into the field of view of the lens that happens to be on the body.

I find plenty of call for the 90mm in landscapes situations. Often in a scene there's something that draws the eye. A longer focal length permits one to "Select" that element, making it the Subject.

By "Select," I don't necessarily mean "Isolate." But by "Select" I do mean something more intentional than simply including every single thing in the scene that's visible to the eye. Many such wide shots end up looking like a salad bowl. To "Select" an element and make it the subject gives you the chance to offer a presentation, like a perfect filet mignon posed gorgeously on a plate surrounded by a few well-chosen bits of garnish. 

These considerations, in my view, far outweigh the minor differences in handling presented by these focal lengths. 

[lct]

Who said external VFs are a new thing? HCB in 1932.

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!

[pgh]

43 minutes ago, lct said:

Who said external VFs are a new thing? HCB in 1932.

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 don’t think anyone said they were new, but I haven’t read the entirety of the forum. 

It should be noted that 100 years ago, you had to make do with less good options in some circumstances. 

[VanDooglz]

On 6/26/2025 at 1:49 AM, Dave Lynch said:

 

I’m been mulling over an M11 purchase.  I’m looking for a full frame camera system that’s light weight (my R5 & lenses weigh a ton) for travel. I had the loan of a M11 & summicron 35mm for 2 weeks and enjoyed it.  Am now trying to decide on lenses. My concern is the handling of the rangefinder at wider and longer focal lengths. I’ve the opportunity to go into a store, but I’d like to know what to look for before peering through the camera. TIA

 

I love Leicas and love rangefinders, and I will be the first to admit that modern Leicas with 0.7x finders can handle just two focal lengths: the 35mm and 50mm. 28mm and 75mm are already mildly uncomfortable, and anything wider or longer is unusable. Sure you can force yourself into pretending it's not true, but life is too short IMO for such pointless mind games.

In fact, I'd go further and say that Leicas aren't really interchangeable lens cameras. Each viewfinder type is perfect only for one focal length. The 0.7x finder is for 35mm, 0.8x for 50mm, and 0.5x for 28mm. So even my earlier statement about the 50+35 pair is a generous assesment of rangefinder usability. Personally, I have two bodies with different finders. One for 35mm and another for 50mm. I never change lenses.

Edited July 9 by VanDooglz

[lct]

9 hours ago, VanDooglz said:

I love Leicas and love rangefinders, and I will be the first to admit that modern Leicas with 0.7x finders can handle just two focal lengths: the 35mm and 50mm. 28mm and 75mm are already mildly uncomfortable, and anything wider or longer is unusable. Sure you can force yourself into pretending it's not true, but life is too short IMO for such pointless mind games [...]

 

Fortunately, life has been long enough for me to do it comfortably for half a century. Shooting 90mm lenses has never been a problem since my first M4 in 1971. Was common practice to have 3 lenses in the bag then, 35, 50, and 90. 135mm lenses are less handy in RF mode admittedly.

[pgh]

11 hours ago, VanDooglz said:

I love Leicas and love rangefinders, and I will be the first to admit that modern Leicas with 0.7x finders can handle just two focal lengths: the 35mm and 50mm. 28mm and 75mm are already mildly uncomfortable, and anything wider or longer is unusable. Sure you can force yourself into pretending it's not true, but life is too short IMO for such pointless mind games.

In fact, I'd go further and say that Leicas aren't really interchangeable lens cameras. Each viewfinder type is perfect only for one focal length. The 0.7x finder is for 35mm, 0.8x for 50mm, and 0.5x for 28mm. So even my earlier statement about the 50+35 pair is a generous assesment of rangefinder usability. Personally, I have two bodies with different finders. One for 35mm and another for 50mm. I never change lenses.

I find this a bit extreme, and I think that's saying something given that I don't like dressing up my cameras with any accessories.

I've never found a .7x finder lacking for a 50mm lens. Never even thought about a different finder, never an issue with it, including shooting 1.4 when I need. It's at least plenty good for the two focal lengths of 35 and 50. Anyways, there are dozens of 35s and 50s, so it's definitely an interchangeable lens camera! 

Edited July 9 by pgh

[charlesphoto99]

11 hours ago, VanDooglz said:

I love Leicas and love rangefinders, and I will be the first to admit that modern Leicas with 0.7x finders can handle just two focal lengths: the 35mm and 50mm. 28mm and 75mm are already mildly uncomfortable, and anything wider or longer is unusable. Sure you can force yourself into pretending it's not true, but life is too short IMO for such pointless mind games.

In fact, I'd go further and say that Leicas aren't really interchangeable lens cameras. Each viewfinder type is perfect only for one focal length. The 0.7x finder is for 35mm, 0.8x for 50mm, and 0.5x for 28mm. So even my earlier statement about the 50+35 pair is a generous assesment of rangefinder usability. Personally, I have two bodies with different finders. One for 35mm and another for 50mm. I never change lenses.

I've shot, comfortably I might add, everything from 18mm to 135mm with my Leica M's. Never once thought I was compromising its usability. Sometimes I'll even forego an external optical finder (esp when using flash) for my 18 and 24, just because I know the camera and what the lenses 'see' like the back of my hand. The M is not a 'smart' camera - it's you that has to be smart with it. I have 18, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 and 135mm lenses. Sometimes I'll bring a half dozen on a shoot. That would be a lot of bodies to hang off my shoulder if I was to dedicate a body for each lens... 😏

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[RF’sDelight]

Am 26.6.2025 um 10:51 schrieb Loop Skywalker:

My favorite travel setup is 35mm and 75mm. If I also need something wider, I add a 21mm.

+1

My current vacation setup…

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!

[marchyman]

I find the 0.73 magnification on the M11 to be adequate for 75mm.  That wasn't the case with the 0.68 magnification on my M 262.  With that camera I added a 1.25 magnifier.  Now the magnifier sits on a shelf, unused.  I wear glasses with a progressive lens if it makes any difference.