Starter lens for a user M4-2 (new Leica user)

[rgeorge911]

Hi - this should get some good opinions going - I just purchased a

user M4-2, and need to know what lens I should be thinking of. I'd

like a 35 or 50mm I think for starters. Also, I don't have much

money to spend, so think low end, but with classic Leica imagery. I

see the Voigtlander lenses look great, but don't think I can bear to

pass up the chance to get some old Leica glass on it.

 

BTW - what's with some lenses with eyes, etc.?

 

I'm thinking maybe a Summarit would be a good budget way to go?

 

What does everyone think?

 

Reed

[michael s.]

Reed - Not to complicate matters, but there's another possibility: the 40mm lens.

 

If you're open to the 40mm, you might consider (i)the Leica Summicron-C version, which is 40 f/2.0, or (ii)either of two Minolta Rokkor 40 f/2.0 lenses. They're excellent lenses. All were designed for long-discontinued "joint venture" Leica and Minolta cameras, but all are still available used in great shape typically in the $200 - $350 range.

 

You're evidently aware of the just-introduced Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4, but it doesn't sound as though you want to go that route.

 

I can't help you with the older Leica lenses, but others here can.

[paul a. roid]

A collabsible 50mm f2.8 Elmar might be a good pick, <br>

if you're after a small package...

[melvin_bressler1]

Hi Reed:

 

Two questons: How much do you want to spend, and roughly what

percentage of your pictures will be taken closer than 10 feet?

 

If you shoot mostly close up, go for the 35 mm, if not, then the 50 mm.

 

Which depends on the answer to the first question.

 

You didn't ask, but I'll offer this advice: whichever lens you get, stick with it for

at least 20 rolls so yu get used to both the camera's capabilites, and your

style. Then you'll know what else to get.

 

My prediction: you will love that camera, and next year this time, you will own

at least 3 or 4 lenses and be able to give others advice.

 

Happy snaps.

[rgeorge911]

Melvin,

 

At this point, I expect to do a combination of street photography (>10') and informal people pics (sometimes <10'). But it seems like the 50mm may be best for both.

 

Thanks to everyone so far! Looking to hear others thoughts also. Now to go look for that Elmar...

Reed

[ka_ho_wong]

Get a JUPITER-8 and let the fun started.

[mozart 2]

Reed:

 

As an old - both in years and in Leica photography - I would opt for a very good to excellent DR (Dual Range) Summicron as a good starter lens. I've had mine (M-4 with DR Summicron) since 1967 and have been more than pleased with the results.

 

I'd forget about the other "options" posted here for a number of reasons. For one, I think that the DR-Summicron focuses better and offers a better hand grip (if one wishes to use that word) than the rigid version. Secondly, I'd never opt for a 40mm lens, simply because you wouldn't have any "frame" reference in the viewfinder. As for using other lenses made by other manufacturers, I wouldn't waste my time and money. Ditto for the older 50mm lenses with the possible exception of the Elmar, etc.

 

The only exception I've made for an "older" lens was the purchase of the 135mm Hektor F/4.5 and I wouldn't part with it for the world. At F/4.5 through about F/6.3 it suffers from a little residual curvature of field - which makes it nice for a soft portrait effect and the wider aperatures. Since I also use the lens head on my Visoflex III and Bellows II, this lens head gives a little extra depth of field, i.e. at the F/32 aperature. One of these days, I'll probably add a very nice 135mm Elmar F/4.0, but even then, I wouldn't part with the old Hektor.

 

As far as explorations go, I'll pass on the advice of Walter Heun, who many years ago used to conduct the two day Leica Photographic Seminars around the country. Instead of purchasing additional Leica lenses right away, he suggested that you move closer, bend your knees, open the lens wide open, explore different viewpoints, etc to fully explore the equipment you have on hand. And then fully consider what lenses you may wish to add to your collection.

 

Best wishes in your new adventures with the Leica!

 

Bill

[bill_marshall1]

A 40mm lens will work fine with 35mm framelines.

[jim_a]

George, You can't go wrong with either. One nice thing about an M4-2 is the framelines are more accurate for the 50mm lens since Leica didn't downsize them until sometime in the M4-P run.

 

Lenses with eyes are for the M3's which only have 50mm framelines at its widest.

 

I would start with a 35. It's a great all-around lens to use. A summaron is a nice lens. I have one. I think a 50 is a harder lens to use. Did you see this - The Best Lens for a Leica - at - http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-dec-04.shtml

 

There was a thread a few days ago here discussing that article.

[jorn ake]

I'll second the motion on the Summaron 35 f2.8 - great lens with nice depth of field, good detail and plenty fast. The popularity of Summicrons keeps the price of this lens down. Quite a few well known photographers have used this lens as their steady.<div></div>

[roger_michel]

late summaron 35/2.8 is a great choice. but it's not as sharp or

as fast or as cheap as a rokkor 40mm f2.

[ronald_moravec1]

Based on what others have said, 35 lines cover a 40 at distance only. they loose image area closeup. A handicap of the rangefinder system. A slr compensates for increasing focal length up close.

 

If you plan on using filters and lens shades, the leica glass is pretty standardised on 39mm. The cl, rokor, and older leica glass tends to use odd accesories although the optical quality is fine.

 

The 2.8 35 mm summarons are about $700. The 35 mm summicrons are a better value for a few dollars more.

 

Current 50 mm is a good value used as is the 1969-79 version.

 

CV lenses require less initial investment and seem to be decent performers.

[travis1]

or the summaron 3.5 for $200 or less on a very good day. $500 or so less for a stop.

[ben z]

"The 2.8 35 mm summarons are about $700. The 35 mm summicrons are a better value for a few dollars more.

 

Current 50 mm is a good value used as is the 1969-79 version."

 

Agreed. I have a early 70s 35 Cron and the 1969-type 50 and they are everything I could ever want from a lens. They are the least expensive of their kind in Leicadom, save for the early chrome 50 Crons and DRs with messed up coatings that are sharp but extremely flare prone.

[stephen_w.]

I got a LTM 2.8 Summaron from Luigi via eBay recently, and a ver.1 'cron for $400 CDN in 1992. Patience pays.

[stephen_w.]

Summaron was $400US, now where's my coffee.