M and R lens Character

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree too. Unless you need the extra f-stop, a Leica M is more convenient to use with a smaller lens. I sold the 35/1.4 ASPH for the 35/2 ASPH the second it came out.

Of course, this is not an absolute rule: for instance, I prefer a 90/2 to a 90/2.8.

 

What about the 28/2 ASPH vs 28/2.8 ASPH?

 

Is it worth the extra stop? Is the Summicron too big and heavy?

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Yes small is good but i did want one 1.4 in the selection . For me anything is smaller than the R glass. LOL

 

The M8 will be in Phoenix on Oct 6 and i will go down to see it along with all the lenses and meet Ray with his so we maybe will get a chance to play a little and see what work nice.

 

Sean the idea of a Bessa is a good one an d also i really need to see what my eye likes

 

Thanks for all the help folks.

[pascal_meheut]

What about the 28/2 ASPH vs 28/2.8 ASPH?

 

Is it worth the extra stop? Is the Summicron too big and heavy?

 

I do not know yet but I already own the 28/2 so I do not intend to change. The summicron is not too heavy for my taste. And when I do not want it to be too big, I simply remove the hood.

[sean_reid]

Yes small is good but i did want one 1.4 in the selection . For me anything is smaller than the R glass. LOL

 

The M8 will be in Phoenix on Oct 6 and i will go down to see it along with all the lenses and meet Ray with his so we maybe will get a chance to play a little and see what work nice.

 

Sean the idea of a Bessa is a good one an d also i really need to see what my eye likes

 

Thanks for all the help folks.

 

The 35/1.4 and 50/1.4 are pretty small. Maybe that shop in Denver will let you work with a used M6 or something like that for a couple of hours and then you can try out the various lenses on film and see what you like from the prints or trannys.

 

Cheers,

 

S

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Film ,man i gave that up 12 years or more ago. LOL

 

Your right it would be nice to just run a couple rolls of slde film again. need to drag out the light table:D

[jlm]

the new 28 and one of the 75's is looking good to me

[peterb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had an M6 with the 35mm and 90mm combo. (I say 'had' because, like an idiot, I sold everything on Ebay when Leitz announced that it was impossible to build a digital M given the demands on the sensor at the time...well enough beating myself up about past misstakes.)

 

That combo, recommended by Leica lens book writers was good in that the 35mm lens was kind of nice 'extended' normal lens for me, giving me 'normal' with a little added room to tell the story of the subject, while the 90 was for when I wanted a portrait (rarely was it used for telephoto work since I felt the rangefinder just didn't have what I needed and what was offered (like the 135mm Telyt) was so hard to frame and focus as to be not worth it (I figured that lens would spend most of its life in my particular camera bag, thus making me question the wisdom of such a purchase).

 

Now we come to the subject at hand. The new M8 and what possible lenses to mate with it. Given the 1.33 crop factor and the fact that the sensor, in effect, takes the 'filet mignon' of the Leitz lens circle many interesting possibilities arise.

 

First off, ALL the lenses are going to be awesome (as evidenced by the jaw-dropping DNG image posted on another thread and Sean Reids initial mumurings). So while center focus will be the star, because of the crop, we should see some pretty outstanding 'corner' focus as well. With the Kodak design solution of the sensor problem and M rear lens elements (a brilliant brilliant solution to what was the chief reason for Leitz' dismal predicition of the viability of the M system in the digital age several years ago), vignetting is minimalized and what is captured should be evenly lit and quite sharp (that is until we do hear from Sean and his tests).

 

Second is the 'new' lenses created from existing ones (as we are used to them). For example, with the crop factor a 28mm lens becomes an all new 37mm lens, etc.

 

Looking over the lens line-up, I concluded the following.

 

I will probably like the 24mm, 50mm Noctilux and the 75mm APO Summicron.

 

When I shot with the 35mm lens I really got used to the field of view. I felt anything tighter was not as magical (unless you went really tight) but, often (and again this is my shooting style) I wished that I had a tad more field of view. I'd rented the 28mm lens and while it was superb, I often felt that in my day to day usage, that field of view was too wide. I felt this briefly when I owned the Ricoh GR Digital (which I've subsequently sold and am currently just using a Panasonic LX1 which allows for 28mm but whose DC Vario Elmarit offers variable focal lengths up to 112mm). The 28mm lens which would become in essence a 37mm lens might seem a touch cramped. (I know this is splitting hairs since the difference between the FOV of a 35mm lens and a 37mm lens is probably negligible at best). I am opting for the slightly wider view from what I was used to with the 35mm lens with an option to move in as opposed to a slightly closer field of view with an option to move back.

 

I know much has been said of the 'normal' lenses. The 50mm summicron, which for decades reigned supreme (only to be supplanted by the 50mm summilux for crispness) was, while fantastic, sold off in my kit in favor of the 35mm and the 90mm lenses. I found the FOV to be a little bland for my liking (not the lens quality just the field of view). I liked when lenses would enhance what it was you were seeing so you could present what you saw to others more clearly). In the M8 world the existing 35mm lenses would be the new normal in that with the crop factor they become 46.55mm lenses, which, for me, is a little too close to the human eye and perhaps a little TOO normal. That said, the 35mm ASPH Summilux while an extraordinary lens, is not going to find its way into my initial kit. Others may delighted, I for one, would probably not use it as much as I'd like in my shooting style. I may get there eventually, but for now, if I didn't use the 50mm before I won't be using the 35mm later.

 

The current 50mm lenses, however, do create a new possibility for me. They become 66.5 mm lenses which might make them the most popular lenses around. As a slightly telephotic human eye it could bring new possibilities. First and foremost a slightly enhanced telephoto that may prove supreme for group people shots and general shooting. With the widish field of view still available in the new M8 viewfinder, it's easy enough to focus but still providing sufficient crop of a scene (at least perceptually speaking through the viewfinder, anyways) that, in minds eye, one might picture the crop and the effect. Here there are two fine choices and I'm on the fence about both. The current summilux which is, perhaps, the finest lens period in terms of contrast and sharpness or, the noctilux whose powers of bokeh may afford it new desireability among afficionados given the crop factor of the M8. While the Summilux for me is a slam dunk, I have stronger leanings toward the Noctilux as a specialty lens since, with the 24mm lens as my primary standard lens, I could pull out the Noctilux with its dream-like bokeh, for special portrait occaisions and low light photography.

 

For a third lens (and I am comfortable with 3 lenses to keep the kit somewhat contained) the choices are the 75mm Summilux, the 75mm APO Summicron and the 90mm APO summicron (and I suppose the Macro although I had little occaision for that capability and now the LX1 can easily fill that bill).

 

With the M6, the frame lines on the 90mm were tiny. On the M8 they'll be even tinier. Why? Because with the 1.33 crop factor, the 90mm becomes a 119mm lens. A step up from the warnings we used to get trying to accurately focus the 135mm M lenses but tinier in comparison to the current 90mm crop on an M6. That leaves the two 75mm lenses.

 

Now here is something that's quite interesting. I don't know about the rest of you, but these two lenses were for me, like the short kids playing schoolyard softball. They were always the LAST to be picked. While they offered, arguably, a very good FOV (Leitz and Puts et. al. spoke highly of them for their portrait ability), standing between the legendary 50mm lenses and the 90mm one, they were often passed over in favor of the 90mm lens which was close enough yet telephoto enough for the typical M user. And I suspect that among many (but not all of course) who did take the plunge and purchase the fast 75mm f1.4 that the lense rarely saw the light of day in comparison to others in the M camera bag.

 

In my opinion, however, the M8 may give serious interest in the 75mm lenses as the short telephoto of choice. With the crop factor, they will be like 99mm lenses. And while the frame lines within the viewfinder are tinier they are not nearly as tiny as the frame lines for the 90mm lens. Plus, at the 99mm equiv. field of view, the 75mm lens would remain a superb portrait lens while offering up perhaps a little more telephoto opportunities than the old 90mm for the 'film' M ever did. Which 75mm? For me, the hands down winner would be the APO ASPH Summicron. It's powerful. It's compact. And with the gigundous pixels of the M8 which, to me, translates into very low noise at higher ISOs (RAW processing notwithstanding) telephoto shooting in low light could be quite fun.

 

So there's my dream kit: the 24mm Elmarit (32mm equiv), the 50mm Noctilux (66.5mm equiv.) and the 75mm APO Summicron (the new improved '90' with it's 99.75mm equivalency).

 

I'm not ruling out the possibility of the other lenses it's just that based on past experience with usage and field of view, until I truly get my hands on them, this is how I'd personally go.

 

Just another opinion.

 

Regards,

 

P

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Thanks Peter great comments. i luckily have been using the 1.37 crop factor from the DMR now well over a year and as i was reading your comments i was figuring out my usage on what lenses i really use the most. I am a huge fan of my 80 r so the 75 f2 really fits there for me becuase i could get 2 different looks the 80 for the softy look and the 75 for that APO look . Than thinking further i use my 19mm and 28mm a great deal, than the 50 1.4 lux the new one which is great. i won't talk of the 180 f2 since it is not part of this but the 35 1.4 is probably my least used and like you said it is TOO normal looking, agreed. My other issue with my lens is it is stiff to focus and maybe i shy away from it a little because of that, but if i use the M8 for event work for my corporate clients which if you shoot there advertising you wind up doing the PR work also. LOL You really need the mid wides for that stuff. The 24mm is really good at this stuff and the 35mm would also be very useful just need to shoot it more. Hmmm

 

The probelm is there all very good and it makes lens decisions harder. i guess i should not complain about that one , i have been on the other side were the lenses are not so good:D

[mwilliamsphotography]

Guy, I've shot with M and R for 30 years, and can safely say corresponding focal lengths aren't always of the same character. The M 75 Lux is a better lens wide open than a 80/1.4 R. Same for the M35/1.4 ASPH and the R 35/1.4 which is an older design. I own and shoot with all of the mentioned lenses, and have owned different one over the years.

 

I've generally been an available light M shooter using primarily ISO 400 B&W films. Since ISO 400 will most likely be an optimal speed for the M8 (similar to the DMR/9 ), I'd strongly advise going for the fastest aperture lenses in the system. Focusing a M in low light is much easier than with a R camera, so shooting wide open is much more acurate.

 

My waiting lens arsnal includes a 24/2.8 ASPH (which is essential for my kind of fast paced work since it doesn't require an aux. finder), a 28/2 ASPH, 35/1.4 ASPH, 50/1.4 ASPH, 75/1.4, 90/2 AA. I generally carry a set of 3 lenses at any given time depending on the job needs. When it's a 2 lens kit I use the 35/1.4 and 75/1.4 ... which I will substitute a 28/2 and 75/1.4 when using a M8 because of the lens factor.

 

For weddings I take all the lenses.

[grober]

Sean,

 

Thanks for making your review available.

 

My only angst was that you didn't include the 35/2 Summicron ASPH in the mix too.

 

-g

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Thanks Marc i was going to sell my R 35mm since it does not compare against the M 35mm 1.4 and get the 75 f2 since it would be different looking than my 80 and yes your correct the 80 is not a good 1.4 lens just a little to soft i shoot it at F2 down but now you got me thinking of the 75 lux on the M.

 

I just love fast glass, really is a disease

[harmsr]

Guy,

 

Keep your mind open on the 75 until this Friday. I predict that you are going to like the 75 Cron more than the 75 Lux. To put it quickly the 50 Lux ASPH is probably Leica's greatest lens ever and the 75 Cron ASPH is based off of this same design (probably their #2 lens ever).

 

Talk to you later in the week, so we can set-up a time for Friday.

 

Ray

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Great Ray thanks

[johnbuckley]

Guy, thanks for starting this, and I want to thank Peter B. for his clear-eyed analysis which has helped me rethink my plans. I have the 28 Elmarit, the pre-Asph 50 Summilux, the 75 Asph Summicron, the 90 Asph Summicron, and the 135 Tele. Originally, I thought I'd get the new Tri-Elmar, and admittedly one shouldn't make decisions like this without seeing the damn thing in action, the viewfinder seems just too big and bulky to keep handy, and thus I wouldn't use it. But I do need to adjust to the M8's crop.

 

I think the 75 Asph Summicron is the finest lens of the lot I have. I do love that 28 Elmarit, and so I'm going to trade it in on the 24, in order to get the same effect. I was planning on getting the 35 Summicron, but Peter has convinced me of what I suspect: I probably wouldn't use it. I will absolutely use the 50 -- but I've now been persuaded to get the Noctilux.

 

So, I am going to sell/trade in my 135 (won't be using it), my 28, and current 50, in order to buy a 24 Elmarit, and the Noctilux. Anyone who wants to talk me out of this, feel free. This would leave me with the 24 Asph Elmarit, 50 Nocti, 75 Asph Summicron, and the 90 Asph Summicron. For my needs and uses, I venture that's the right kit.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

John thanks , I do believe after all the years shooting digital and film for that matter that what it comes down is the look of the file and image your trying to achieve. the one thing leica does better than anyone is give you different looks. Canon, Nikon and the rest are all that same look. leica with the summricrons, elmarits and summiluxes they all have different character and depending on what you are after than you can pick that lens to do that. this is the part that has fasinated me since going to leica and has really helped my images and more important gives you a choice

[lct]

...The question really comes up with non asph. and really is there that much difference in area's like CA and flare that i need to be concerned about...

I don't see CA problems on the R-D1 but a few pre-asph lenses show more flare than their asph counterparts obviously.

Now choosing pre-asph or asph lenses is mainly a matter of personal tastes of course as their character is indeed different.

Depends also upon the dynamic range of the M8 sensor.

On the R-D1, some asph lenses exceed the dynamic range of the Sony sensor so i must reduce contrast a lot through the raw converter to avoid blown highlights for instance.

I guess that you shoot raw ad i do, Guy, so it should not pose any problem to you but some jpeg users could well have some surprises from this viewpoint, even if the dynamic range of the M8 is wider that that of the R-D1.

[stunsworth]

How good is the Noctilux stopping down?

 

Stopped down it is excellent. I can't imagine anyone not being very pleased with the results.

[ptomsu]

John thanks , I do believe after all the years shooting digital and film for that matter that what it comes down is the look of the file and image your trying to achieve. the one thing leica does better than anyone is give you different looks. Canon, Nikon and the rest are all that same look. leica with the summricrons, elmarits and summiluxes they all have different character and depending on what you are after than you can pick that lens to do that. this is the part that has fasinated me since going to leica and has really helped my images and more important gives you a choice

 

I cannot say I have seen all that out of my experience, simply because I lack lot of experience here, but what I have seen and compared I have to back completely what Guy says.

 

I must say I tried hard to get to the same level of image and file quality with D2X and high end Nikon lenses as with my R9/DMR and Leica lenses, but I can't, I do not know why, I tried all possible things, different sharpening, contrast, also different post production SW as CO Pro and PS2 but always my Leica files look better from the very beginning (I am exclusively comparing DNG and NEF here !!!!)

 

SO maybe it's the lenses, maybe the sensor and the camera SW, but Leica wins in almost all cases.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Peter part of that is the DMR is just damn good out of the box and not a lot of post processing is really needed. Be it color, saturation or contrast it just comes out great, hard to argue with and when i did my big test with the 1dsMKII that was the thing that was obvious i had to work the canon files much more. I really think Leica worked there tail off to get a slide look in digital

 

LCT i think we are going to see even more DR in the M8 over the DMR which is exceedingly good.

[rvaubel]

............... the one thing leica does better than anyone is give you different looks. Canon, Nikon and the rest are all that same look. ...........

 

That's not true of the older Canons and Nikkors. My Canon 50mm/1.2 has a signature that is as unique as any Leica glass. What has changed, over the years, is that most of the non-Leica glass has evolved into a kind of sameness that makes it hard to distinquish one from the other. The older stuff (ie. the M mount stuff) is a lot of fun to play with. Even the Russian lens have potential if you can find one that works.

 

Thats the beauty of the M system...tons of glass spanning 75 years and two dozen manufacturers. Enough for a lifetime in the optical playpen.

 

Rex