According to someone I know at Leica, their best lenses right now are the following:
28 F2
90 F2
135 F2.8 APO
But as I usually telll people who ask which ones to consider...most any Leica M lens is going to be better than most anything else out there that the question of 'which is the best' is usually moot.
While I don't disagree with the praise for these lenses, I would invite you to try to find a really good quality Elcan made 35 1.4 summilux. There is a magic about this lens that is hard to dexcribe. Also you should look at the 50 1.4 summilux. Read Erwin Puts take on this lens and from 2.0 up it beats the summicron and then you have the extra light gathering for those occasions when there is no other alternative.
Basically there is no "bad" leica m lens. In many cases the "right" lens is in the eyes of the beholder and what he or she values the most.
Actually Woody, the old 35 1.4 Summilux (non asph) was a bit of a dog. That thing was really soft wide open. So even Leica is capable of some dogs every once in a while.
Now that the digital M is back in interest, what do people consider to be the best money vs. performance compromise in the Leica lens lineup to match the old 35/50/90 (or 75) classic lens lineup? Are the Summicrons competitive with the Summiluxes, as in the R system?
The best price/value lens is probably the 35/2 asph. The best fast lens is the 50/1.4asph. I have a 35/1.4asph and its pretty good also, although a bit too big (the hood blocks off 1/5 of the m7 finder ).
Okay, so the M8 version of the M7 35/50/75 lineup is 28/35/50/75? :) The 75 Lux would make a 100mm f/1.4 which is pretty cool, and probably a good focal lens with an M. From what I hear, the 90 Apo is physically a bit long, and the 135 is really border-line with an M, even with the 0.85 finder.
I still believe the M lenses are best appreciated on film, or at least in addition to M8, but in any case, the current line up of asph lenses are all excellent, and I would choose 21/2.8asph, 28/2.0asph, 35/1.4asph, 50/1.4asph, and 75/2.0asph. In fact, I did...
Thanks for the info. I have very little experience with the M lenses although I am trying to get more educated. Strangely I found the little 35 lux from Canada quite a performer although I must admit it was the overall look and feel that captivated me. I did no testing to see about ultimate sharpness and corner to corner performance etc. I have spend many moons doing those kinds of experiments with the R system
I dearly love the Rangefinder Leicas and will ultimately have the best lenses for the Digital M. I suspect this will be the Lux family from 21 onwards to at least 75mm. When I start thinking long I start thinking R. I have coverage there through 280 plus 1.4 and 2X extenders. I have 35 asph cron, 50 asph lux etc for the M series but no modern 35 lux. I also have the 21 and 24 asph lenses for the M so what I need most is the new 75 (and probably 90) APO/ASPH lenses. I can then go into the field with an M system that covers all but the real telephoto world which I believe is best left to the R's
carstenw wrote:
Now that the digital M is back in interest, what do people consider to be the best money vs. performance compromise in the Leica lens lineup to match the old 35/50/90 (or 75) classic lens lineup? Are the Summicrons competitive with the Summiluxes, as in the R system?
Carsten, the best bang for the buck lens has to be the 50mm Summicron-M. I have a couple in the latest optical formula and I don't think I paid more than $500 for either of them.
In film times I spend a lot of time just with 35 and 90. Later I added 21. SO I used 21-35-90. Then I started to use 21-35-75.
Honestly I thinhk f 1.4 is nice to have but really not a must. The 50/1.4 might be THE best 50, but the 50cron is not bad at all. Also the older 50/1.4 (eventhough have a little too much distorsion at small distances) is a nice lens IMO.
With all the focusing issues with digital cameras (which I have/had with Epson rd1 and also with the DMR) I think its critical anyways to use f1.4.
I would think that the 28/2.0 (even if its expensive) and 50 or 75 could be a nice combo on the digital M. Would be like 35-100
Or-if you like 50 in film times- maybe 21-35/2.0 (asph or older) or 50/2.0 and 75.
Would be like ff 28-50-100 or like 28-65-100.
Hard to say. I think it depends a lot on what you like shooting.
On the rd1 I use 21,35 and 50 a lot but would use 75 more if I had the right frame in the viewfinder.
Woody, sounds good to me. I also plan to use the digital M a lot instead if the DMR when shooting wide angle up to 90mm and use DMR mostly for Tele, macro or when doing more the kind of planned composing photography.
I just like the small weight, size and spontanious photography with M.
I might sell some of my R-lenses (now 15,19,35lux,60macro, 80200/4.0, 105-280 and 180/2.0) maybe just keep 19,60 and the telelenses.
The good thing is that I allready own many M lenses. Glad I never sold them.
I am considering however to sell my 50cron and the recently aquired Noctilux and get the 50/1.4asph instead.
Overall I am still having too much gear and try to find out what I really need/want. Usually I try to never bring more than 3 lenses with me.
carstenw wrote:
That is a lot more money though, I expect. I was looking for an affordable way to build a decent sized system. Later I can switch lenses.
The M50 'cron is only a little better than the R50 'cron. Since you already have the R, why not try a 35/2 asph or save up for the 50asph? Here's a demonstration by someone from another forum of how sharp this lens is wide open.
Some of these decisions on what lens will best suit the digital M might have to wait until we get to shoot with it. For example, my latest version 50mm Summilux-R was a nice lens on film, but when I mounted it on the DMR it seemed to be a stellar lens. I guess what I am saying is some lenses might improve on digital, while others may not perform as well.
It is probably a little early to decide what lenses to sell and which to buy. I am sticking with my Noctilux/Summicron 50mm combo until I get a chance to shoot them on the digital M. I am hoping the Noctilux will surprise me on digital and perform very well. The 50mm Summicron should perform well on the Digital M, as it is still supposed to be better than the current 50mm Summilux-R, which is a great lens on the DMR.
Rob,
the Noctilux I have picked up few weeks ago hasm serious front focus (on rd1). With all the focus issues on DMR and rd1 (and some other cameras as well) I doubt that it will be possible to focus at f1.0 accuratly.Maybe if one sends in the combination of a certain M and a Noctilux for fitting body and lens together.
).