CrisRose

Hi Guys, Having seen the M10-P's replacement screw where the M10 red dot is, I was wondering if anyone yet made a little body-coloured dot replacement to emulate the look? I've found people selling black and chrome blanks, but no one selling one with a screw-like groove down the middle. If no one makes them yet, I can have some made, but I wanted to check first. Thanks! Ps. my M10 is silver

I've read abbots these lenses for a while now and I'm considering adding an 85mm to my SL kit. Has anyone here been using an otus on an SL for any length of time? I'm interested to hear from those who've used this combo extensively. Many thanks!

Many thanks guys. I really appreciate the feedback. I moved from a Canon DSLR to the Leica M because the process and the manual nature of the system made me look, think and predict my photos far more. I had to try harder. With time, I got used to the throw of the focus ring for different distances, I considered light and movement more. WIth just one focal length I could frame images before I raised my camera and found my photos were better than before. The SL was chosen to compliment my M, as an alternative in low light and longer focal lengths. The auto focus lenses never appealed as I've never felt I missed images. Zooms are fine but its easy to waste time messing with framing. I don't plan to buy any SL lenses. Sometimes the SL is easier - getting a critical bit of framing on my 25mm for example - sometimes my M9 is easier - rectangle matching is still way faster than the whole focus peaking thing. Point is, they're both tools (along with my ZM lense) that are capable of far more than I can ask of them, so the real limit is me. It was getting away from AF and zooms that made me try harder in the first place

Steve Huff has featured my work on his site. Thanks Steve! http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2017/02/18/rugby-with-the-leica-sl-and-a-50mm-zeiss-planar-by-cris-rose/

It's deff larger than the black dot on my M9 - is there one that fits the SL?

I have several VM lenses and they work fine - 35/1.4 Nokton and the 15/4.5 MkII for example

Thanks everyone, really appreciate the feedback. Love my planar. I think 90% of all the shots I've taken on my M9 and SL have been with this lens

I've been using several M mount lenses with my SL over the last 3 months or so. Here's some examples with the Zeiss 50mm f2 Planar, my go-to lens on the M9 (which I also have). All taken at F2 in very low light.

I recently picked up an SL to pair with my M9 and had a great time shooting my local Rugby club to test it out. I've put up a report on Medium for those interested. I'd post some photos here, but Medium is far more suited to that kinda thing. Enjoy!

For me, this was the best thing about the ME being introduced with the M240 - the sensor in my M9 will (hopefully) still be available a decade after the ME is discontinued, which hopefully will be in a few more years, rather than from when the M9 was in 2012. Right now, if I'm still using my M9 in 2024, i'll be impressed indeed, if it gets a new sensor then and lasts to 2034, I really don't think I can argue with that. I'll have got my money's worth years before.

I just have the standard one... where would i get a different one?

Hi guys, I've been looking at the 80 Lux for a while, but the prices are a lot (for me). With many pre-APO 90 Summicron R's (E55) available for less than half what the 80 Lux goes for, in some cases, a third of the price, and with many lovely shots coming from both, does anyone have both lenses to compare between them? I am looking for a classic performing lens, that I'll no doubt end up using on future camera bodies, so this is a long term investment. If I need to save up more, to get the Lux, so be it, but if the 90 Cron will do me just as well, I'd love to find out. If I can save money, carry less weight, yet still get similar images, that would be great for me. The are both Mandler designs with the classic wide open look that brings, so I see the raw numbers comparison like this (80 Lux / 90 Cron) : Max Aperture: f1.4 / f2 Weight: 700g / 560g Length: 69mm / 62mm Filter: 67mm / 55mm Minimum focus: 0.8m / 0.7m Largest reproduction ratio: 1:8 / 1:6 Wide open DOF at 2m: 5cm / 6cm Obviously, numbers can only say so much, and the proof is in the photos, but there are similarities and trade offs. Weight and size, the 80 Lux is clearly larger and heavier. Being a Lux, it lets in twice the light, wide open, which can be a big deal when light is at it's minimum, but as I'm looking at using these as portrait lenses in good or studio light, that's not a deal breaker for me, nor an advantage, as an extra bump in ISO can also make up for it, especially on future camera bodies such as the M240. [bTW the 90 Elmarit is too slow tho, for me as experience has shown me that f2 is as slow as I'd like to go, so it's not an option - but yes, i know it's a wonderful lens in it's own right] Wide open, the DOF from both lenses are similar, plenty shallow. The 90 Cron focuses a little closer, and with it's narrower FOV, provides more magnification at closest distance, but again, they're close enough for that not to really matter - shooting portraits, I'll just move back or forward a little anyways until the framing is the same. So this is why I find myself looking at the 2 of them. Based on what actually matters to me, the 80 Lux is 3x the price and 25% heavier, but a stop better in low light and only 10% longer. The DOF is similar enough. In reality, the question is: Do I spend that much more, for a heavier lens, and an extra stop? Are the photos, wide open, that much more "special" from the 80 Lux than those from the 90 Cron in the same situation? Is the Lux far sharper wide open? Are there clear aspects to 80 Lux shots that are missing from the 90 Cron? Anything I'm missing? While I am sure there are many great insights that can be given from a photographer than owns one or the other, I am really looking to hear from those who have, or have used extensively, both. I also appreciate those with suggestions for other lenses, but I really would prefer to keep this thread as a discussion on just these two. As a closer, I just wanted to share an example from each of the lenses that have impressed me and lead me to believe that both are able to produce similar results. 80 Lux: 90 Cron: Thank you for reading!

I've personally never seen any difference between my digital and film prints. I find that the added detail in the digital ones, and the perfect post-processed black and white conversion and level balance, often give the digital ones a bit more sparkle. But I still shoot both.

Well for a similar focal length, I can recommend the 35 Biogon f2, and for wider, the 25 Biogon 2.8 is bitingly sharp on the M8. I shot a lot of 50mm with my M8 when it was my only digital M. Totally recommend a 1.4x magnifier for 50mm lenses and longer btw.

Thank you Stevie. I hope the pointers help you get something similar - what lenses do you have? It's only through a lucky situation that I have an M9, an opportunity I couldn't pass up. The M8 doesn't leave me wanting and is still used along side it.