Leica M lens - current offering. What should I buy?

[offshore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I keep hearing that Leica is a small company unable to take on the mighty Japanese so I was surprised that:

> Leica currently offer 22 lenses in the range wide angle to 135mm compared to Canon's 17 prime focus lenses in this range.

> Leica seem to have higher aperture lens options in the wide to 50mm range where the standard lens is f2.8 at Canon.

> Canon do not offer a 75mm at all.

 

The bad news is that:

> Leica have no 14mm, 15mm (Fisheye)...the nearest equivalent being the 18mm !

 

I am now intrigued about what is the Leica positioning strategy with respect to the needs of typical Leica users, and in particular myself.

> I guess a pro would just buy the lot. (all 22 lenses)

> A new Leica fan would buy the Summarit series of lenses (35mm, 50mm, 75mm, and 90mm all at f2.5) which would be a cost effective entry solution.

> Others would consider the 16mm/18mm/ 21mm Tri Elmar but to my eyes having read a separate thread this is used by most people as a 16mm lens with difficulties to fit the filter. ..so using a prime focus 18mm is likely to yield better pictures, is easier to use, is physically smaller...and is £800 cheaper. [The old TriElmar (28mm / 35mm /50mm) which I have makes much more sense in my view] This £800 saving could go towards buying a 15mm from Voigtlander (£400) or at somewhere between £2500 and £3000 a Zeiss lens

 

I am looking at upgarding my lenses to the new Asph. and I need a kit for travel, tourism and family photos .....This suggests:

> 18mm Super Elmar Asph........Yes for dramatic wide angle shots

> 21mm (f1.4) ..........................Yes for wide angle at large aperture (M8 = 24mm)

> 21mm (f2.8).......................... No if f1.4mm is available

> 24mm .(f1.4 and f3.8).............No

> 28mm..(f2 and ff2.8)...............Maybe as this offers a standard wide angle on M8 (35mm)

> 35mm.(f1.4)............................Yes, this effectively is a 50mm large aperture standard lens on M8

> 35mm (2.0, 2.5).......................No if f1.4 is available

>50mm (f0.95)..........................Yes....superb low light lens. This has to be a huge differentiator for the Leica offering overall. I have the f1.0 Noctilux and it is fantastic.

> 50mm (f1.4, f2.0, f2.5) ............No if Noctilux is available

> 75mm (f2.0)............................Yes. This is a great portrait lens as the depth of field is just right at 75mm on an M6 and 90mm on M8. I have the older version but people suggest that the ASPH is much better.

> 75mm (f2.5).............................No if f2.0 is available.

> 90mm (f2)................................Maybe...it is an APO type lens and expensive so I guess is a superb lens, but 135mm on the M8 does not seem very useful as I rarely used my 135mm on the M6 as it was not good for portraits due to the tight depth of field, and it is not a serious telephoto either.

>90mm (f2.5 and f4, and f4 Macro set)...No....

> 135mm (f3.4)...........................Another APO lens that is reputed to have superb optics. However on an M8 it is about 180mm and how you use that on a range finder camera is I guess a challenge. [it is intriguing that Leica do not offer what undoubtedly is a superb optic with the viewing attachment they once offered for the 135mm (f2.8mm) Elmarit ...].

 

I would welcome any feedback on my comments above and what makes sens for the type of photography I have in mind. It is a pity that Leica do not have the super wide angle lenses and maybe the 15mm Zeiss makes sense

 

Finally does anyone have any idea what is Leica's positioning strategy of all these lenses?

Oh god you're back.

[SJP]

> I guess the 15mm is the Voigtlander or Zeiss ...please let me know?

> I am not sure about the 90mm as it is 135mm on a M8 and I have too many bad experiences with my 135mm (f4) Tele Elmar on a M6 trying to frame and focus this on a rangefinder. The 135mm on a M8 without the goggles accessory must be a nightmare isn't it?

> I can relate to the 18mm and probably a 28mm a 50mm (Noctilux as a standard lens?) and a 75mm as being where I am headed.

I am thinking about the CV15. I have a 90mm tele-elmarit from 1966 which works fine for me on the M8 (exept for its tendency for flare & low contrast). I once tried a goggled 135 elmarit but that did not work properly, it could have been the lens actually as others seem to be able to use it succesfully.

[Advertisement]

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

[michael_b_elmer]

The bad news is that:

I am looking at upgarding my lenses to the new Asph. and I need a kit for travel, tourism and family photos .....This suggests:

> 18mm Super Elmar Asph........Yes for dramatic wide angle shots

> 21mm (f1.4) ..........................Yes for wide angle at large aperture (M8 = 24mm)

> 21mm (f2.8).......................... No if f1.4mm is available

> 24mm .(f1.4 and f3.8).............No

> 28mm..(f2 and ff2.8)...............Maybe as this offers a standard wide angle on M8 (35mm)

> 35mm.(f1.4)............................Yes, this effectively is a 50mm large aperture standard lens on M8

> 35mm (2.0, 2.5).......................No if f1.4 is available

>50mm (f0.95)..........................Yes....superb low light lens. This has to be a huge differentiator for the Leica offering overall. I have the f1.0 Noctilux and it is fantastic.

> 50mm (f1.4, f2.0, f2.5) ............No if Noctilux is available

> 75mm (f2.0)............................Yes. This is a great portrait lens as the depth of field is just right at 75mm on an M6 and 90mm on M8. I have the older version but people suggest that the ASPH is much better.

> 75mm (f2.5).............................No if f2.0 is available.

> 90mm (f2)................................Maybe...it is an APO type lens and expensive so I guess is a superb lens, but 135mm on the M8 does not seem very useful as I rarely used my 135mm on the M6 as it was not good for portraits due to the tight depth of field, and it is not a serious telephoto either.

>90mm (f2.5 and f4, and f4 Macro set)...No....

> 135mm (f3.4)...........................Another APO lens that is reputed to have superb optics. However on an M8 it is about 180mm and how you use that on a range finder camera is I guess a challenge. [it is intriguing that Leica do not offer what undoubtedly is a superb optic with the viewing attachment they once offered for the 135mm (f2.8mm) Elmarit ...].

 

I would welcome any feedback on my comments above and what makes sens for the type of photography I have in mind. It is a pity that Leica do not have the super wide angle lenses and maybe the 15mm Zeiss makes sense

 

Firstly let me underline that I agree with you that Leica should make a super wide angle lens. eg a 16 mm/3.4 or 2.8 asph. I do use the WATE as a 16 mm lens, but this solution is not satisfactory in a longer perspective.

 

I find the 18/3.8 asph superb with its finder and will keep it even if it might later be complemented by a 18/2.8 asph and/or perhaps even a 18/2.0 asph, in which case I will also get the faster lens.

 

The 21/1.4 asph is a great lens, but heavy and more difficult to handle than the 21/2.8 asph. You should consider very carefully whether the lighter and cheaper, but also very good 21/2.8 asph would suffice and in practice be more useful. My choice was to sell the 2.8 in order to get the 1.4 and I haven't regretted it, since I do not use this focal length often enough to have both lenses.

 

I would never build a more or less complete set of modern Leica M-lenses without the 24/2.8 asph. I have this lens which I regard as an absolute gem and among the very best Leica lenses. Alternatively, one might consider the 24/1.4 asph, which I haven't tried, as a fast super wide angle (also instead of the 21/1.4 asph), although judging from the MTF-curves I doubt that this lens can compete with the extraordinary pictorial qualities of the 24/2.8 asph. The 24/3.8 asph is said to be of the same high quality as the 18/3.8 asph, but why bother with such a slow lens for such a practical focal length when you can get a gem like the 24/2.8 asph?

 

Many people are very happy with the 28/2.0 asph. I am less impressed. I do not use this focal length very often and could probably live without it or with a 28/2.8 either asph or non-asph (3rd or 4th generation).

 

The 35/1.4 asph is the most versatile M-lens and should be part of every set of Leica lenses. This focal length is most important in connection with the M8, and having the 'Lux asph should not prevent anyone from also having the 35 'Cron asph and/or non-asph 4th generation (the 'Bokeh King').

 

I do not understand your choice regarding 50 mm lenses.The 50 'Lux asph is Leicas best lens and simply a must have! I had the non-asph Noctilux, but found it so heavy and impractical to work with that I sold it again. The extra stop over the Summilux 50 is not important in the digital age where you can instead manually or automatically change to a higher ISO. I liked the look (bokeh) of the non-asph Noctilux, but the same look (bokeh) is present in the non-asph Summilux 50 which I also have and use with great joy along with my 50 Lux asph. So instead of using a whole lot of money on the Noctilux asph or non-asph, get the Summilux asph instead and, if you want the soft look (bokeh) of the old non-asph Noctilux, then also get a 50 Summilux non-asph.

 

The 75/2.0 asph is a wonderful lens which is (almost) as good as its its little-sister, the 50 Summilux asph. I have not regretting switching to the 75/2.0 asph from the heavier and less practical 75/1.4 with which I was also quite happy, and with which one could also do well. In this focal length, there is no reason to have both lenses in the bag, as with the 35 and 50 mm lenses.

 

For a complete set of Leica lenses, you should also have the 90 Apo-Asph. However, in practice you might find that lens rather heavy to drag around and work with. So a 90/2.8 or 2.5 could be considered instead or as a practical supplement to the 90 AA.

 

I have no experience with the 135/2.8 on the M8, but one should not expect to find much use for it in practice, and the 135/3.4 cannot be used on the M8.

 

Just my 2 (euro)cents.

[jaapv]

Eh- Why can't the 135/3.4 be used on the M8:confused:

[marknorton]

Did somebody say this looked to be another long thread?

[Fotomiguel]

I agree with Mark and Jaapv. The 24mm f1.4, the 50mm f1.4 and the 90mm f2 seem to be perfect and incredible lenses for the M8. The 24mm f1.4 may show us a new and unknow universe. Should I break my moneybox for the M9? The summer weather in Mallorca is not so nice: This humidity and hot temperature are killing me.

Regards.

Miguel

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Firstly let me underline that I agree with you that Leica should make a super wide angle lens. eg a 16 mm/3.4 or 2.8 asph. I do use the WATE as a 16 mm lens, but this solution is not satisfactory in a longer perspective.

 

I find the 18/3.8 asph superb with its finder and will keep it even if it might later be complemented by a 18/2.8 asph and/or perhaps even a 18/2.0 asph, in which case I will also get the faster lens.

 

The 21/1.4 asph is a great lens, but heavy and more difficult to handle than the 21/2.8 asph. You should consider very carefully whether the lighter and cheaper, but also very good 21/2.8 asph would suffice and in practice be more useful. My choice was to sell the 2.8 in order to get the 1.4 and I haven't regretted it, since I do not use this focal length often enough to have both lenses.

 

I would never build a more or less complete set of modern Leica M-lenses without the 24/2.8 asph. I have this lens which I regard as an absolute gem and among the very best Leica lenses. Alternatively, one might consider the 24/1.4 asph, which I haven't tried, as a fast super wide angle (also instead of the 21/1.4 asph), although judging from the MTF-curves I doubt that this lens can compete with the extraordinary pictorial qualities of the 24/2.8 asph. The 24/3.8 asph is said to be of the same high quality as the 18/3.8 asph, but why bother with such a slow lens for such a practical focal length when you can get a gem like the 24/2.8 asph?

 

Many people are very happy with the 28/2.0 asph. I am less impressed. I do not use this focal length very often and could probably live without it or with a 28/2.8 either asph or non-asph (3rd or 4th generation).

 

The 35/1.4 asph is the most versatile M-lens and should be part of every set of Leica lenses. This focal length is most important in connection with the M8, and having the 'Lux asph should not prevent anyone from also having the 35 'Cron asph and/or non-asph 4th generation (the 'Bokeh King').

 

I do not understand your choice regarding 50 mm lenses.The 50 'Lux asph is Leicas best lens and simply a must have! I had the non-asph Noctilux, but found it so heavy and impractical to work with that I sold it again. The extra stop over the Summilux 50 is not important in the digital age where you can instead manually or automatically change to a higher ISO. I liked the look (bokeh) of the non-asph Noctilux, but the same look (bokeh) is present in the non-asph Summilux 50 which I also have and use with great joy along with my 50 Lux asph. So instead of using a whole lot of money on the Noctilux asph or non-asph, get the Summilux asph instead and, if you want the soft look (bokeh) of the old non-asph Noctilux, then also get a 50 Summilux non-asph.

 

The 75/2.0 asph is a wonderful lens which is (almost) as good as its its little-sister, the 50 Summilux asph. I have not regretting switching to the 75/2.0 asph from the heavier and less practical 75/1.4 with which I was also quite happy, and with which one could also do well. In this focal length, there is no reason to have both lenses in the bag, as with the 35 and 50 mm lenses.

 

For a complete set of Leica lenses, you should also have the 90 Apo-Asph. However, in practice you might find that lens rather heavy to drag around and work with. So a 90/2.8 or 2.5 could be considered instead or as a practical supplement to the 90 AA.

 

I have no experience with the 135/2.8 on the M8, but one should not expect to find much use for it in practice, and the 135/3.4 cannot be used on the M8.

 

Just my 2 (euro)cents.

 

Thanks for this ..it really is very informative, and gives a lot of food for thought. Much appreciated.

[Guest BigSplash]

Oh god you're back.

 

It is nice to feel missed......I have been travelling quite a bit and will do so again shortly.

 

That said I am not sure what your contribution is to the debate on which lenses you suggest I get for the kind of photography I do. Above there is a lot of useful (for me at least) information ...........I am assuming that you do have an input?

[lars_bergquist]

I built my first M lens kit back in the previous century. My mainstay lenses then were 35mm (Summilux ASPH when it came out) and 90mm. I did use a 21 occasionally for its special look, and 125 when I knew I needed the reach, but these were special optics, and I would gladly have travelled around the earth with the 35 and the 90 only. Oh -- a 50mm Summilux (lately an ASPH) was for the times when I wanted to carry one lens only.

 

Came the M8 and I had to rebuild the stable. The 21 was replaced with a 18mm (sshh, a Zeiss ...), a 28mm Summicron became my new '35mm' while the 35 'lux is now for walking around with all my gear in a Luigi Crescenzi full case (we have something called 'weather' up here in the far north. It is instead of climate.) My new long standard became a 75mm, today a Summarit. And the 90mm Elmarit-M is still there for the reach.

 

But the Summilux 1:1.4/50mm ASPH is so damn good that I simply cannot say farewell to it. And I may after all live to see a full frame digital M.

 

So you see that my basic knee reflexes are still unchanged. One body and three lenses in all is still my maximum kit. And those two or three lenses always tend to be the same ones. Your selection could vary -- but think hard about the number. If you have to carry five lenses plus to assuage your Angst, then your problem is not optical but psychiatric.

 

The old man from the Age of Roll Film Folders With One Lens Firmly Screwed To Them

[Ecar]

Did somebody say this looked to be another long thread?

I did... Right on the money it seems;)

[Guest BigSplash]

I did... Right on the money it seems;)

There clearly is a lot of interest in this subject and I am seeing general agreement on what constitutes a great Leica kit.

The trend seems to be towards:

BASIC KIT

> Two lenses seem to be the £3905 ..24mm (f1.4) widest viewfinder frame available and the £ 2219.....50mm (f1.4) as the basic kit .....giving an effective 28mm and 70mm respectively on the M8

> A basic kit for travel should really be simple and be two lenses only ...possibly three.

 

EXTENDED KIT

> A third lens seems to be either the £1849...18mm (f3.8) and /or the £2239....90mm (f2) and/or the £2059 ....75mm (f2)

 

> Several people mentioned the 50mm Noctilux at £6795 for the new f0.95 or about £3000 to £3500 for the older version (f1) secondhand

 

> Several people clearly want to see a 15mm lens and some people like the idea of a 135mm with a goggles attachment

 

> I am left with the impression that all people seem to like the high luminosity lenses as what differentiates a Leica user, and that the old lenses each have a special character and should be valued, and used.

 

> The new ASPH lenses are best for sharpness, contrast and colour ...the old ones have these qualities but suffer from some flare at high apertures in bright sunlight.

 

SURPRISES (FOR ME AT LEAST)

> There was very littel said about the £3629 ...Tri Elmar 16-18-21mm except that those that have one use the 16mm only (one user uses both the 16 & 18mm).

 

> The discontinued Tri Elmar (28-35-50 mm) was mentioned by some people...I have one of these and like it very much for travelling.

 

> That leaves by my reckoning roughly 13 lenses in today's portfolio that did not get a mention in this thread (or only a brief mention). They are typically the cheaper f2, f2.8 types. I wonder if this is reflected in the buying patterns that Leica themselves see or whether people have a differet view when getting out their cheque book?

[Nicoleica]

Hi Frank,

 

I use an Elmar 24mm f:3.8, and a Summarit 35mm f:2.5, and I find these produce great results. I hope to add a 50mm Summicron to this when funds permit. (At present my 50mm needs are covered by a Jupiter 8 )

 

I know that my choice in lenses may not appeal to many, as they are not the fastest lenses on the planet, but for my purposes they fit the bill perfectly. They also have the great advantage of being compact (Very useful if travelling.), and by Leica standards, quite inexpensive.

 

I shall now prepare myself to be burnt at the stake for heresy.

[SJP]

Heretic indeed!

 

Anyway - I think Leica know very well what they are doing in terms of their lens portfolio and they do not need any advice on that from any of us. If that is the intention of this thread I suggest we call it a day.

[giordano]

Frank,

 

Like Nicole I don't have any exotic new lenses for my M8 and don't really feel the need for them. The ones I use most are a v4 Summicron 35 and a Summarit 75, followed by a Voigtlander 15mm. Those three form my travelling kit, unless I know I'll want something longer or wider or zoomier - in which case I gird up my loins and take a Nikon. The image quality from these is good enough for me, and I almost always want more depth of field than f/1.4 would give, so I don't feel any particular lust for the fast ASPH lenses (except for the 24mm Summilux).

 

I feel that the lesson from this (if I can presume to draw one) is

• If you have particular reason to be dissatisfied with the performance or handling of some of the lenses you already own - then set about finding replacements that you like better (e.g. a current 21/2.8 or 21/1.4 in place of your old f/3.4.
  
• If you don't have a particular reason to be dissatisfied with any of the lenses you already own - keep using them until their flaws start to vex you.
  
• But if you just can't feel satisfied until you have a set of new ASPH lenses - well, it's your money. I'd start with a 24mm, then maybe an 18.
  

[dcoombs]

Heretic indeed!

 

Anyway - I think Leica know very well what they are doing in terms of their lens portfolio and they do not need any advice on that from any of us. If that is the intention of this thread I suggest we call it a day.

 

FWIW, I don't think that was the intent of the OP. He was looking for advice on lens choices; at least that's how it has evolved, and it's actually proving to be rather interesting. Some of the contributions have been quite worthwhile.

 

Cheers, Doug

[Guest Lotw]

So your reasoning is that the APO 90 is expensive and the Noctilux 0.95 is a must-have. ????? Considering DOF the decline of sharpness into the depth is about the same, the APO 90 is quite cheap. Besides, the smallest object field is much smaller with the 90, it's a severe drawback for such an expensive lens that the Noctilux's closest distance is only 1m.

[enty]

I've got a 50 cron and plan to get the 28 cron soon. that will be it for me, the whole point of using Leica (for me) is to reduce the bulk of the gear, so don't want to over-complicate it again (as I did with Canon).

 

Plus, I'm still learning how to use the new system, so need to keep it simple from that perspective too.

[Guest BigSplash]

Heretic indeed!

 

Anyway - I think Leica know very well what they are doing in terms of their lens portfolio and they do not need any advice on that from any of us. If that is the intention of this thread I suggest we call it a day.

 

I personally would not presume to advise Leica on the 22 lenses they currently offer, other than maybe to say we need many more so that we can pick and choose,like a kid in a candy shop. I do feel we need a fisheye and 15mm, and a goggled 135mm maybe ....but that is echoed by many on this thread.

 

In my view we do not have the data to advise Leica on their lens portfolio as we do not know if they make more profit % , and more importantly for Leica actual profit on a £6795 Noctilux ...that they have had difficulty making at all, or on a 50mm Summarit at £849.

 

We also have no idea about the production volumes of the Summarit lenses compared to say the high cost Summilux ASPH lenses.

 

Without this data any advice to Leica is pretty meaningless in my view at least.

[jaapv]

 

We also have no idea about the production volumes of the Summarit lenses compared to say the high cost Summilux ASPH lenses.

:confused:We do.. 2 Summiluxes to every Summarit.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest BigSplash]

Frank,

 

Like Nicole I don't have any exotic new lenses for my M8 and don't really feel the need for them. The ones I use most are a v4 Summicron 35 and a Summarit 75, followed by a Voigtlander 15mm. Those three form my travelling kit, unless I know I'll want something longer or wider or zoomier - in which case I gird up my loins and take a Nikon. The image quality from these is good enough for me, and I almost always want more depth of field than f/1.4 would give, so I don't feel any particular lust for the fast ASPH lenses (except for the 24mm Summilux).

 

I feel that the lesson from this (if I can presume to draw one) is

• If you have particular reason to be dissatisfied with the performance or handling of some of the lenses you already own - then set about finding replacements that you like better (e.g. a current 21/2.8 or 21/1.4 in place of your old f/3.4.
  
• If you don't have a particular reason to be dissatisfied with any of the lenses you already own - keep using them until their flaws start to vex you.
  
• But if you just can't feel satisfied until you have a set of new ASPH lenses - well, it's your money. I'd start with a 24mm, then maybe an 18.
  

 

I agree with your thought process and am following this. I find myself using my old lenses one at a time...spending a day or two with each of the main ones that I like. This is helping me to relearn the character of each in the new (for me) cropped digital era compared to years of use with film.

 

I have discovered for example that the 21mm (f3.4) is it seems to me showing washed out colours compared to more recent lenses....although the current hot weather producing muggy horizons, dried out grass and sad flowers may have a role to play. On the other hand the 90mm f2 is performing very well on the M8.

 

This thread has really been helpful in defining where I am going .....essentially it will definately be for the high luminosity glass and I will get a super wide angle. I suspect this will be a 24mm as this viewfinder is in the M8...however the 21mm (F1.4) is on my wish list also. It is not obvious to me that a viewfinder is a key need at this super wide angle. I doubt that I would buy both the 21 and 24mm.

 

I like your kit at 35mm, 75mm and 15mm ...makes sense.