Discussion in 'Mirrorless Digital Cameras' started by lieven_van_meulder, Jun 26, 2013.
which are the best ,cheapest leica lenses for sale on ebay or somewhere else for a Fuji x-pro1
Good, cheap, and Leica. Pick any two. Or actually, pick any two except cheap.
Very cheap and not bad:
The best and cheapest lens is the one that you use use a lot and for a long time. Can be a Leitz lens or any other.
Lieven, you need to answer a few questions before the solution could be provided. What are you looking to do with the lens and how cheap is cheap. Leica glass would always be more expensive than anything else out there. Is it worth it? Yes it is for the discerning photographer who can afford it. The Soviet copies of Leitz and Zeiss lenses in working conditions are wonderful lenses to have for the money. Once you get used to it they are just as good as any other lenses provided that you have a good lenshood.
Can i thrust these lenses , because they are REALLY CHEAP.
Why are they So cheap.
They are sovjet lenses and produced in a time and place without meaningful quality control. You may need to buy 10 before you
find a good one.
There is no such thing really as a cheap Leica lens. Leica M mount lenses can be had from Voigtlander and Zeiss
(Cosina) ZM and the Voigtlanders are reasonably priced and typically very good. The Zeiss lenses are more expensive
but generally excellent. The 50/2 Summicron, not the latest but one back is a very good and reasonably priced lens
Older screw mount lenses are buyable by mere mortals, but you will probably do better buying late model Voigtlanders or
Zeiss ZMs if you can afford them.
Another thing to consider is that these mirrorless cameras can generally use almost any kind of lens with an adapter so
you might be able to find some interesting lenses cheap so you might want to investigate this possibility. For instance my
NEX with an adapter can mount my old Contax RF lenses, my old Contax SLR lenses, my Leica M lenses, my Leica
screwmount lenses, my old Minolta MF lenses, and my newer Sony/Minolta AF lenses, including the very fine 18-80
You might get further asking here:
As for M39 mount, which I suppose is adaptable to the Fuji
There is argument on the compatibility of Soviet Zorki/FED M39 lenses and Leica cameras: e.g, http://www.dantestella.com/technical/compat.html
You also need to make sure that the M39 Soviet lens is one made for the Zorki or FED rangefinders, since the same mount was used with a different register/flange distance for Soviet SLR cameras.
Otherwise, the optical quality of the Soviet-made lenses is often remarkable. People have discovered this, so they aren't quite so cheap as they used to be, but they cost chicken-feed by Leica standards. Even if they wouldn't work on a real Leica, you could buy a FED-2 to shoot them on also very cheap.
Niels expresses a common dismissal of these lenses, but I have at least a couple of dozen Soviet-made lenses and they are very good to excellent at worst. This experience is not unique to me. It is true that quality control was not the top priority in socialist production, but it was not absent altogether. In the USSR "mass production" was also production for the masses.
I believe that most of the people who repeat this meme of "1 out of 10" have tried very few Soviet lenses or cameras - or else they have been exceptionally unlucky.
Or, as the Stella link above suggests, they haven't used the lenses on a truly compatible mount, if that is the case. I don't know how that would work out with a M39>whatever adapter, although I've had good luck with M39>Canon EOS adapters in this regard.
Why are they So cheap.
There seem to be stocks of vast numbers of Industar 61 lenses in the former Soviet Union - I bought 5 or 6 a while back for £10 each. Even at today's higher prices, they are unbeatable value. The low price is just the relationship between supply (apparently very large) and demand (moderate - limited to owners of LTM cameras who have no lens AND are not prejudiced against anything non-Leitz).
Really, if you want pretty darned good quality at reasonable prices, for lenses designed to work on Leica-type (rangefinder) cameras, Voigtlander is the way to go--especially as they offer a large range of focal lengths. Most of them aren't quite as good as the authentic Leica equivalents, but you'd be hard-pressed to see any real differences, in most cases, in real-world output. There is a difference--but whether it's worth the cost or not is debatable.
Now, for dirt cheap but often quite good, in addition to the Industars mentioned above, you might look around for the Soviet-made Jupiter 8. I used one on a Leica M3 before I could afford a Leica-made lens, and it did a great job--especially since it cost all of about 20 dollars.
For the best bargain in the Leica kingdom, you might see if you can find a Minolta 40mm M-Rokkor. They're much cheaper than Leica lenses, simply because they say Minolta on the front of them. But optically they're pretty much identical to the Leica Summicron 40 (possibly a little better even, especially the final version with its improved coatings) and build-wise are every bit the equal of the Leica lenses, which is one complaint against the Voigtlanders and most definitely the weakest point of the Soviet lenses. I've got an M-Rokkor, the version for the CLE, and it is spectacularly good.
A final option would be the Zeiss line of M-mount lenses. They're more expensive than the other options I've mentioned, but half the price or less of new Leica lenses at equivalent focal lengths and maximum apertures. Many of them are reputed to be brilliant performers, although I can't comment definitively, as I've neither owned nor used one--although I'd certainly like to one day.
By Leica lenses I assume the man wants those made by Leitz. Here is an extended parctical suggestion.
While the old screw mount Leitz lenses can be on the cheap, depending on the lens, they can have much that needs
service, like cleaning out the fog caused by the animal oil used. That costs. Adapters also cost.
Try to stick to M mount.
Most cost effective are 135s, f4 and f4.5.
Next: Summaron 35s, f2.8 and f3.5.
Then: the 90s: f4, f2.8, and some older f2s.
And do not forget the Summicron 50s. The older ones are not horridly expensive.
By Leica lenses I assume the man wants those made by LeitzI think the assumption is unwarranted; but the advice is good otherwise, depending on how 'cheap' cheap is.
Patrick S's initial response IS highly warranted. By Industar-61 standards I can't think of any Leitz lens that is cheap in the usual sense of the term.
Lieven, as Starvy has already said, it would help to know what you hope to get from a "Leica" lens. I have no experience of the Fuji X-Pro1 but would imagine the lenses which Fuji offers for this would be of high quality and give results very similar to modern Leica lenses (except that I would expect the Leica lenses to be more expensive). If you want a sort of classic 1950s look to your pictures, you need a 1950s (single-coated) lens. The ideal choice would be a Summicron Mark I, VERY hard to find in really good condition and VERY expensive if you do find one (approx. $600 and up). The next best thing would be a Canon Serenar, somewhat easier to find in good condition and a bit cheaper (let's say $300 and up). If your main priorities are a good lens in a Leica fit and cheap, my recommendation is still an Industar 61, but in terms of image quality it might give images which look too modern (higher micro-contrast) compared with 1950s glass. Which is not to say that it wouldn't be a good idea to buy an Industar for the very little money being asked and simply try it out. Another idea would be a Russian copy of the Leitz f3.5 Elmar from the 1940s/1950s.
The word cheap is not in the Leica Dictionary, neither is good. Excellent, Superb and Astounding are though. I am considering a Fuji X Pro 1 with an M adapter so I can use my Wonderful Summicron M Optics. If I were to pick my favourite it would have to be my chrome 35mm Summicron ASPH. which would give you a beautiful 51mm, in 135 terms lens which suited H. Cartier- Bresson. I do however applaud your lens choice, after all, it is all about the glass
Separate names with a comma.