M and R lens Character

[peterb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Guy,

 

Decisions...decisions...decisions...but, as you pointed out, the problem (if it really is one) is that Leitz with their superb lenses up and down the line, has presented with their M8, for photographers, an embarassment of riches! Looks like ANY Leitz lens will do. If you go with the 21mm Elmarit you get an unbelievable 28mm Elmarit if you get the 24mm (which I forgot to point out) you get a really cool 31.92mm lens, which is a touch wider than the current 35mm but not nearly as wide as the 28mm (which, in my post, I shared reasons for not desiring at this time). The 19mm, if you can get a nice finder for it, would make a great superwide for the moment (save for the 16mm f4 in the Tri-Elmar) coming in at 25mm. (I once owned a Contax 137MD, great SLR with even greater lenses. Among my favorites was the Zeiss 25mm. The Leitz 19mm would re-create that lens giving you a superwide that's not too superwide but good for those times where you might need it, getting a great vista of the Canadian Rockies, for example, or capturing the ENTIRE Sistine Chapel ceiling without needing the panorama stitcher in most post digital photo software!) Finally, if the 80 has turned out to be a champ and you feel the 75 will really shine I find that really encouraging. Thanks for the report.

 

John, I'm glad my ramblings were helpful. I was speaking from my own experience with these lenses so if it provided any guidance I'm delighted. (Maybe Leitz will give me a discount for the sudden surge Noctilux and 75mm Summi interest and sales! HA1 In my dreams eh?).

 

Regards,

 

P

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I think this thread really get's you thinging about the look and your style and that was sort of what I was trying to get to

[nrj]

Just trying to get my lens selection down for the M8 and being a DMR and leica r user for some time now and noting the differences in the fingerprint or look of different R lenses. case in point the Summilux compared to the Summricrons like the 80 lux compared to the 90 apo we have the soft pleasing look of the 80 in the wide open apertures and the 90 APO having that more punch sharp clinical look. So on the R side of the house I have many lenses or had many lenses with this different character. Now i assuming the M is relatively the same ( yes after 31 years as a Pro I am a virgin to M , yes i missed a lot) between the summilux and summricrons but i have been noticing different comments on pre -asph and asph . My initial choices of lenses are sort of opposite the R because I can render a different look, case in point the 80 R lux for that nice pleasing soft stuff but get the 75mm F2 in the M for the more clinical style. Anyway the area of 35mm lens has me confused a little because of the choices , my initial plan was 24mm 2.8, 35 1.4 asph and the 75 f2. Now i decided to sell my 35 1.4 lux R lens because the M is a better one, we all know this. 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 realize the ASPH is the best you can buy and we don't need to debate that but if i went non-asph do we think I would really be missing out on anything. Now on the same token the 35mm cron F2 is like other crons in it's look. This is just one area that is tough to decide. I am still going back and forth on the 21 or 24mm. But i could use my very outstanding R 19mm with a adapter from R to M and make use out of it using the LCD as the framing tool and using hyperfocal distance when i actually need it for very wide work. basically i can cheat here until I get the 4th M lens. now having said all that i should point i am not a DMR user because i am not picky it is the very reason why i shoot the DMR professionally is because i am picky as hell and will only want the absolute best i can get my hands on. but the M8 is sort of the extra system and a little money savings would certainly keep the wife from riding my back with this purchase. Just some idea's would be helpful and some friendly thoughts. Thanks Guy

 

I should point out that i am extremely well versed in digital so we can leave that discussion off the table.

 

Hi Guy and all this is my first post. I have v3 pre asph 35 summicron which I've had for a long time. I tried v4 when it came out, then 35 asph 1.4 and also 35asph cron. If you want a less expensive lens may be for a focal length on the M8 you wont use that often v3 pre asph is a great lens. It is a little less contrasty than v4 at wider apertures but it has really good resolution, esp stopped down (ie I get 20x30ins cibachromes that look great). I found the asph1.4 lux excellent but decided I didn't need the wide open performance much. the 35asph cron didn't draw the same way as the v3 pre asph - the corners seemed to 'fly away' a bit more and look less natural, which may not matter so much on the M8 because of the crop. I also didn't did the bokeh as much, the v3 is excellent here. Hope this helps.

 

Nik

[rsh]

This has been an interesting thread. After reading all of the comments, I will stick with the lens lineup I currently have: 24, 35 Summicron Asph, 50 Summilux Asph, 50 Noctilux, 75 Summicron and 90 Elmarit.

 

As much as most of you like the 35 Summilux over the Summicron, I am perfectly happy with the Summicron. As far as he 90 is concerned, I have never used the 90 Apo, but I have never been unhappy with the Elmarit. You know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I wonder has anyone done comparative image testing of say the 35mm lux and summi. Just for visual reference.

[harmsr]

Here is a link that I did for KP from the old forum, comparing the 35 Cron Asph and 35 Lux Asph.

 

The photos have no artistic merit and were developed at Walgreens vs. Tempe Camera, but show some of the difference between the two lenses under identical conditions at various apertures and with both ends of the spectrum in lighting (shadows and bright AZ sun). They were from the Chandler mall, just before I shipped off the cron that I had sold because I like the Lux better.

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/discus_e/messages/11/216336.html?1148912883

 

Ray

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks Ray the Lux looks a little sharper at f2 than the cron but it also seems to have more depth or 3rd effect , might have to do with softer OOF area's

[philipotto]

When I purchase the M8, I plan to start off with one lens, a second hand summilux ASPH, what focal lengh would you reccomend?

Do you think the 50 would be a good choice?

Is it too long on the M8 to be an "only" lens?

[peterb]

Phil,

 

I don't know if you read through my rather long ramblings above but if you're going with a summilux 50, I think you'll be very happy. It'll be like a 66.5mm lens which should give you a nice slightly telephoto-ish normal lens. That's where I'd go, personally.

 

Of course, if you do like normal (the focal length that matches the way our eyes see stuff) then I'd recommend the 35mm. For me it'll be a little too normal for my tastes. But different lenses for differnt folks.

 

The 75 Summilux would be like an extraordinary f1.4 99.5mm lens. A telephoto for low light for sure. The frame lines in the finder will be a touch tinier than the conventional M6 90mm frame lines. Doable, but if you've only got one lens in your kit not my first choice.

 

I say go with the 50.

 

P

[sean_reid]

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

 

It's included in a different review, see:

 

Epson RD-1 Lens Report

 

Newer reviews of the 21s, 24/25s and 50s are on the RR site.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Canon, Nikon and the rest are all that same look.

 

Hi Guy,

 

That's not true for RF lenses. The M system opens one up to a lot of other excellent non-Leica lenses as well: CV, Zeiss, older LTM lenses, etc. There's a huge variety and not only the Leica lenses are appealing.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[philipotto]

Thanks Peter,

Yes I read your contributions, and enjoyed them thoroughly.

The 50 looks like the way to go. A 75 or perhaps a 90 will definately be in the future, but the 50 sounds good to start with.

I also like that that as the 50+75 frames come up together, the 50 frame is on the outside of the two ( less confusing to me =) )

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Actually that is what i meant was besides just the leica lens charactors than you have the Zeiss and the VC and such , so there is just so much to go with. Nikon an canon make nice glass but in general they have there same feel in there line except for the very old ones and Nikon has many of them which is nice the D200 can use some of the old glass.

[nryn]

It's a 24 Elmarit ASPH and a 50 'cron for me. I'm in the market for a 35 summicron ASPH at some point. I might get the 90 macro as well next year. I like the character, size, and weight of the summicrons. Sure, I toy with the idea of a summilux of any length, but my goal with the M8 setup is small and lightweight (having lugged around a 1DmkII for almost 2 years, emphasis on the lightweight).

 

You should tell me which bank you intend to rob so we don't end up at the same place

[sinwen]

Guy,

 

As many here I have R and M lenses. All of them are beautiful and in practice you wont see any difference. ASPH or not is another story well discussed here, there was an English photographer (I forgot the name) who died not very long ago who didn't like any of these new lenses, he was looking for the 1950/60 production considering the grey tonal range to be wider, less contrast and very progressive bokeh. All this is a matter of taste and use or result aimed at.

To my point of view you can take any one without fear, it is more a matter of bank account, size and weight, convenience with the viewfinder, extra stop needed or not, most angles used and opportunity if you buy second hand ; it is not a matter of quality !

 

In fact don't scratch your head too long, all these lenses are different and one needs them all :-))) .... just draw a cheque !

 

Michel

[roberth]

I shoot with a Minolta CLE, 28mm f2.8, 40mm f2 and 90mm f4 Rokkors. My choice is easy after I get an M8, the bank account will be depleted. I will shoot with the same Rokkors.

[geoffreyg]

Was just glancing at this long-dormant thread. There are some pretty good lens comparisons here.

 

FWIW, I started with the 28 Elmarit, for size and economy. One other thing to note - focus on an f1.4 lens will be trickier with a digital back - I thinking that the Summicron's might be just fine, and give a touch more forgiveness in the focusing with a wee bit of DOF.

 

So the 28 f2.8 to start, them probably the 50 f2 (classic, short tele on the M8) and for a wide, go with either the Leica 21 2.8, Zeiss Flektogon, or perhaps Voigtlander ? And there is the new Zeiss 18 coming in soon....

 

Geoff

[blakley]

I don't find focus an issue at all. I'm using a 1.25x magnifier now, but even without it my results were good. I took this shot last night with the 50/1.2 Noct ASPH wide-open at f/1.2, at 1/30 sec. on ISO 640 (with 486 filter, btw). It was (obviously) really dark, but I had no trouble focusing. Clicking on the photo will take you to a larger version, where you can see that the focus is essentially exactly correct (I focused on the bridge of the subject's nose).

 

By the way, the picture is cropped more than 50% from a landscape-format original; no sharpening or noise reduction were applied.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear