standart lens for M6?

Hi @ll,

 

need some help in choosing the right standart lens for my M6! I need

a lense for allround pics, I'm considering of buying a 35'cron asph.

Is it good option or would you switch to 50 'cron?

Further on I'd like to know whether there're visible differences

between asph and non asp`?

Thanks in advance for all comments!

 

regards

cris

3 words:

 

search

 

the

 

archives

As you might have guessed, Cris, these questions have been discussed extensively on numerous occasions. See the archives for the details.

 

Personally, I think the 35mm 'Cron makes an excellent "standard" lens as opposed to the conventional 50mm. But, it depends on how you, individually, "see" things. Lots of people have both, and may supplement that further with a 50mm Summicron DR. The performance differences between the current ASPH and the last pre-ASPH 35s are generally thought to be minimal.

The 50 has the most natural perspective when compared with

our own eyes but the world looks more natural through a .72

mag finder with the 35mm frame - depends how you take

pictures - do you see a picture independent of your camera and

then put it to your eye to capture it or do you look for the picture

through the viewfinder?

This is an often asked question that has as many answers as the number of people replying. My feeling is two fold. First, you can't be wrong in choosing one of these two lenses. Second, if you stay with Leica long enough, you will probably have both of these two optics in some vintage. I believe the Leica M is at the top of its operational / ergonomic form with these lenses. They are not too big. You don't need auxiliary finders. These lens' angle of view and speed lend themselves to fast intuitive shooting... just what the M series was famous for.<P>

 

Here are a couple of shots from my two lenses. The 50mm is the next to last version (same optics, but with external differences), and the 35mm Summicron is the last non-aspheric. All of these shots are at full aperture, and in the case of the old 35mm Summicron, I included a shot used at the worst case scenario... back light and wide-open in the extreme close-up range. If the lens is weak, this is where it will be shown as such.<P>

 

Flip a coin and go for it.<P>

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=824725&size=md"> 50mm Summicron @ f/2.0</a>, <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=824749&size=md"> 35mm Summicron (pre-aspheric) @ f/2.0 </a>, <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=824755&size=md"> Bokeh of pre-aspheric 35mm Summicron @ f/2.0 </a>

35 lux.

How could anyone know what's best for you ? When I think of all

around, I think of an canon with 28-70 zoom. Someone else

might say a 4 x 5 field camera. It depends on YOU. Rent or

borrow the things that you are interested in and find out for

yourself.

I'm not sure about this, but I don't think a Canon 28-70- zoom will

fit on an M6. Is there an adapter I don't know about? (just

kidding).

Cristjan - I used the 50mm for years on a IIIc- - before I had both the camera (M4) and the lens (35mm) to branch out. I learned that the 50mm really does "take in" what your eye sees without fluttering from side to side. If you need to frame, you step forwards or backwards - - or move around. The 50mm really forces you to think - - and to produce better photographs.

 

Start with the 50 - - - really learn to use it, and then move up or down. In the long run, you won't be sorry!

 

Just my three ancient cents. Best, George

Leitz M6, Elmar-M 50mm 1:2.8, B+W KR1,5 MRC, Fuji Sensia II 200:

<IMG SRC="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=825268&size=lg" WIDTH="600" HEIGHT="400">

Cristjan,

 

The tone of your question suggests that you already have an M6. If that's the case, what lens do you use now? Also, have you tried flipping between the 35mm and 5mm framelines, using the preview lever, to see what view best suits your needs?

Hmm, I think you should drive a ford. They feel better to me.

 

You'll get a lot of useless and irrelevant responses to this type of question. You gotta pick the focal length that suits you, and then if you're concerned about which lens to get in that focal length (cron, lux etc) you can get performance opinions from others. But you can't get the correct answer for which fits you best. Only you can decide.

 

For me, the most flexible thing to shoot with is a Canon with a 50mm 1.4 USM, but maybe that's just me.

 

I also tend to be one who doesn't care for dead centered framing (as per the above posted image) for portraits. I like to see dynamicism displayed that works with, or even counters the apparant person's disposition and appearance, depending on whichever can result in a more powerful image.

hi @ll,

 

thank you very very much for all your answers!

I think I'm gonna buy a used 35'cron pre asph, later a 50!

 

regards

I tend to be able to compose better with a 50mm .72 viewfinder as I can see the immediate surroundings. But if I only had 1 lens I would most likely go for a 35mm, as sometimes a 50 is just not 'wide'enough. Have you thought of getting a 35 summilux? money no object of course!

George; How dare you promote such a radical idea as to "teach you how to think".The current "boomers" and younger are told to react not think.

I thought that I'm the oldest person on this forum but I guess not. I wouldn't have the guts to expound such a political incorrect idea.

TOLD to react, not think...well I don't listen very well to what others would say. I try to independently analyze, I find more success that way. : )

Ned - I'm an engineer by training - - - with a lot of science thrown in. I started with a Brownie and graduated to an Argus. Given all that, since 1945, for 52 years I've just looked through a Leica viewfinder and pushed the button. Looking at the results is where you validate your personal viewpoint. I used a Leitz 50mm 3.5 Elmar for 23 years before attacking a 35mm, and later a 90mm. I now use a 24, 35, 50, 90 and 135. The 50 still is my favorite. It's what a normal human being sees with his or her eyes at first glance. For me, that "first glance" is what my type of photography is all about.

 

I still subscribe to Arizona Highways, where you will find, month after month - - and year after year - - some of the most gorgeous pictures in any magazine, the NG included. However, these photographs were shot using MF or LF cameras, after days and days of studying the light and waiting for that magic moment. Charles and David Meunch and the rest of those photographers truly deserve our admiration and respect. However, you might notice that many of these photographs (other than those of the Grand Canyon and Lake Powell) appear to have been taken with a "normal" lens. It's what you see at first glance.

 

For most of you who have not lived in the Southwest, please forgive the ramblings of one who lived in the Sonora Desert for a very large chunk of his life. Mea Culpa. George

Again, an old story (so read the archives): 35mm or 50mm is not only a case of how you see things and/or how you want to see them, it's also a case of what hood-type you prefer and whether or not you even like tabs. Me, I like a detachable hood and a tab. Here, 35 is the winner. Or get yourself a late issue of the penultimate 2/50.