What Leica M lenses to get to build a system?

I'm wondering what lenses experienced Leica shooters would recommend

when building a Leica M system - which lenses are considered

mandatory for universal application, i.e. travel, landscape,

exsisting light, people, B&W and E-6 shooting?

What are you going to shoot mainly? It's hard to go wrong with a 35 or 50 for the primary lens, and a 28 added to the 50 or a 75 added to the 35.

Allan, there's no rule about this in the great Leica book, kept under seven locks and multiple seals in an undisclosed location, possibly Solms... In fact, as Alan said, that only depends on what you like to photograph.

 

Since Leicas were meant for journalism, I'd associate a nice, not so wide-angle lens, like the 35mm, and, in addition to a "regular" 50mm, I'd get a long lens, like a 90mm. But that's me, and I like doing street (poorly), architecture and building details. How about you?

Focal lengths are very personal and I have no idea which will be right for you. Since Leica lenses are very expensive I suggest you buy yourself a Nikon FM plus 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses and use them for a year. When you know which two or three are right for you then sell the Nikons and buy the equivelent Leica glass.

28/2.0; 50/1.4; 90/4.0 Macro-Elmarit, should get just about

everything.

35/2 Summmicron, 85/2 Nikkor, 21/3.4 Super Angulon

You'll probably find that, armed with a 35-50-90 combination, you'll very rarely need anything else. Some people would condense that still further and recommend just 35 and 75. If you expect to be shooting often in low existing light, you can either use flash, of course, or make sure that the lens you're most likely to be using is fast. Ideally, choose Summilux or Summicron for the 35 and/or 50; if you feel like splashing out and size/weight doesn't bother you, you could also get the 90 Summicron and even consider a Noctilux for the 50.

"You'll probably find that, armed with a 35-50-90 combination, you'll very rarely need anything else."

 

Unless you're like me - I mainly carry and use a 21-35-135 combo (with a 90 and 15 in reserve).

 

Which isn't to contradict Ray's choices - just to point out that there IS no "ideal" universal set of M lenses.

 

About all that's "mandatory" is that you will probably want a 50 or 35, f/1.4 or f/2.0, at the core of your set.

 

Dave Harvey of Magnum and the Natl. Geographic hits almost everything on your list (except B&W - and he may do some of that, too) using one 35 f/1.4 ASPH for at least 80% of his shots, with a 28 and 50 in reserve. Definitely his shots include: travel, landscape, candlelight/nightime hand-held action, people and Velvia/Provia.

 

So how far you'll want to go beyond the single "core" lens is up to you.

 

Certainly the 35 f/1.4 ASPH is one of THE all-time greatest lenses ever designed, based on what it can produce at f/1.4. But even it isn't "mandatory".

<<which lenses are considered mandatory for universal application, i.e. travel, landscape, exsisting light, people, B&W and E-6 shooting?>>

 

All of them.

I'm surprised nobody has asked you what you are currently using amd what you like and dislike about those focal lengths. If there is a way you "see the world" with your current camera, it would be silly to ignore this unless it is outside the capabilities of the Leica system. With the addition of the current crop of Voigtlander/Cosina lenses and new/used Leitz glass, there are a wide variety of good lenses out there to choose from.

 

Having said that, of my Leitz lenses, the one you'd have to pry from my cold, dead fingers is the 50/2 Summicron, closely followed by the 35 Asph. The way these lenses render the world is close to how I see the world photographically.

 

Will this be your only camera? Reason I ask is that while the Leica M's are great cameras, they are not the right tool for every photographic task. When my daughter was learning to walk I reached for, you guessed it, an autofocus camera -- she just motored too fast for my rangefinder-focussing skills.

 

Oddly, one of Leica's real advantages is the non-retrofocus design of its wide-angle lenses -- you don't see that many people (myself included) who take advantage of this.

 

So to answer the question, when I'm out and about -

 

Camera + 1 lens: most often a 50

Camera + 2 lenses: 50 and 35

Camera + 3 lenses: add the 28 or 24 to the above.

 

My last big trip to a place I was unlikely to return:

2 cameras + 15, 24, 28, 35, 2x50's and a 75. Oh, and a LOT of film.

 

Good luck, with the amount of good used and aftermarket equipment out there you can't really go wrong.

Personally (is that one L or two)? I think leica and range finders in

general are designed for wide angle -close up pictures.

I can't understand why anyone would want to go long useing a R.F.

In my opinion, you must have a 50 F/2 and a 35mm or 28mm, to start with. Longer, mean you need a SLR, and wider, as a first len's would mean

your going to shoot some art'sy stuff.

Me Thinks.

Unless you're a wide angle junkie, start with either a 35 or a 50 as the first lens, depending you how you shoot.

 

Then move down to a wider lens like a 21 or 24, which are both significantly different in perspective from a 35 or a 50.

 

Then move longer and get a 75 or a 90.

 

When I went Ireland last summer for 10 days, I took a CV 21/4, 35/2 Summicron, and 90/2.8 Elmarit-M, and never really missed any opportunities, IMO. All the lenses were very different from each other. If I needed a 50, I just walked forward a few steps in most situations.

 

Skip

28 Summicron, 35 Summilux, or 50 Summilux, and 90mm Summicron or Elmarit

My ideal M lens kit contains a 21mm, 40mm and 75mm. In lieu of the 40mm, either of a

35 or 50 will do nearly as well. Same for the 21 ... a 24mm does nearly as well.

 

Specific lenses: Elmarit-M 24 f/2.8 ASPH, Summicron-M 50 f/2, Summilux-M 75 f/1.4 are

all great. The Summicron-M 35 f/2 ASPH is extraordinarily crisp, but the pre-ASPH a

couple of generations prior to that is much smaller and I feel has nicer imaging qualities,

albeit a little softer. As much as the faster 35s and 50s would be nice, I always liked the f/

2 versions more. The 75 has really beautiful imaging; it's a bit on the heavy side but worth

it.

 

Godfrey