travel & landscape

[adam_cooper2]

For the purpose of travel & landscape photography,which of the

current crop of leica m lenses do you prefer?p.s. weight is not an

issue.

[e_b7]

50mm Summicron. Others would say the 35/90 combo. Perfectly valid. If weight is not an issue, perhaps the Tri-Elmar?

[working camera]

weight is not an issue

 

28 asph cron, 24, 35,asph cron 50,lux or cron, 75 lux, 90 cron, and an old Elmarit 135 with eyes.

 

That should cover most situations.

 

seriously though a 28, the asph cron is a pretty decent performer. And a nice AoV spacing from a 35mm, which is a must (I'm not a fan of the current asph lux, but it is handy for low light)

 

50s are always handly, never leave home without one. I havent used the current models. The 75 lux has an AoV fairly close to a 50 so I see no advantage for landscape work. Nive glss but!

 

Never used one myself but the new close-up 90 sounds an appealling little number. Or the current 90 asph cron, an outstanding performer.

 

regards C.

[jorn ake]

I carry two bodies, one with a 28mmf2 and the other with a 50mmf2. For my money (and there is a lot of it in those two cameras!) those two set ups are the best that Leica does.<div></div>

[jorn ake]

Both shots with an M7 body.<div></div>

[paul_neuthaler]

50mm DR Summicron & 90mm 1:4 Elmar -- on my 1957 DS M3. IMHO, it's the best travel combo. -- "step up or step back."

[ben z]

" For the purpose of travel & landscape photography,which of the current crop of leica m lenses do you prefer?p.s. weight is not an issue. "

 

How abouta rational exam of facts, and money, in that order? Most of travel and landscape photography can be done at middle apertures, where there is no difference between the latest and prior generations of Leica lenses. (Purists will jump in with their MTF charts and prove that the latest ASPHs are better stopped down too, to which I would reply, if I were _that_ acutely tuned into such minute increments of image quality, I would just switch to medium format where the difference is huge). Where the differences are more noticeable (but still not as astounding as people who either sell them or have purchased them try to say)is at the widest apertures, and even then, mostly outside the central area of the image. In my travel photography, in fact in all my photography, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I had a shot that demanded corner-to-corner high contrast and resolution at f/1.4 or f/2.

 

I have borrowed and/or used several of the current Leica lenses: 35 Summilux-ASPH, 50 Summicron, 50 Lux-ASPH, 90 APO-ASPH, 135 APO, and the Tri-Elmar. Of all those lenses, only two struck me as ones I might want. The 35 Lux ASPH, because it is the one exception where a current lens far outperforms its ancestor at most apertures, and the Tri-Elmar for its convenience. I gave up on the idea of the Tri because at 28 and 35 it just blocks too much of the viewfinder, and composition is after all of utmost importance to me. The 35 Lux-ASPH is one I wish I could afford, however 99% of the time my Summicron (3rd version) is more than enough. I have also supplemented my Leica lens array with 4 Voitlanders: 12, 15, 21 and 28/1.9. Weight is _definitely_ an issue with me all the time while travelling, so I never go out with every lens I own at once. I try to anticipate the nature of the trip as best I can, and choose accordingly. If I expect to do a lot of low-light shooting, I've got my 21 Elmarit, 28 Ultron, 50 Lux and 90 Cron, all but the 28 are quite large and heavy compared to their slower brothers. Most of the time I prefer carrying the 21 Voitlander, 35 Cron, 50 Cron, 90 T-E and 135 T-E, but lately I've compromised by substituting the 50 Lux for the Cron. Adds a little weight but gives me one fast medium-length lens for "evening wear". For strictly a landscape outing, hate to say it on the Leica Forum, but I would probably grab the Blad while I've still got it.

[dennis_couvillion]

Years ago I didn't mind taking along an entire kit of two SLR bodies and multiple lenses, including telephoto lenses. Now, my approach to travel is different and I try to travel with as little as possible... and as light as possible.

 

I just bought an older model 50mm f2.8 Elmar which collapses into the body and makes an ideal compact traveling package. To it I would add a wide angle lens for travel. What second lens to choose would depend on your own personal taste and style. The Voigtlander wides are perfect for this... a 21mm f4 or the 28mm f3.5 would be ideal. In fact with one of these compact, lightweight lenses I might even consider carrying a second body with each body dedicated to one lens.

 

Unless you are some sort of photo assignment I find that when traveling the less you take the better. Less to carry around and less to keep track of.

[george_b1]

It might depend on where you are going. Example (1): In England and Japan, the street scenes almost demand either a 24 or 28, while a 90 TE will take care of the landscapes.Example (2): For Alaska, you'd probably get by with a 50-90-135 combination on the Inland Waterways cruises, Glacier Bay and inland. Example (3): Southwest US (Canyon deChelly, Monument Valley, Grand Canyon) A 50-135, with a 28 for closeups of the ruins. Example (4): For New Zealand, you'd need a 24 -35-50-90 combination for Fijordland and the Bay of Islands. Example (5): For Holland and its waterways and cities, either a 21 or 24 is needed, along with a 90.

 

George (The Old Fud)

[marco_hidalgo]

35/1.4 Lux Asph as my all around M lens

 

90/2 Apo Asph , 180/2.8 Apo for the tele lenses on the R8

[jim_jeblee]

For short trips more than 2 lenses are more trouble than they are worth. Day trip 28 elmarit & 50 2.8 collapse. IF it goes on into evening, 50 lux instead of 50 2.8. If any events may be encountered then I add a 90 usally the AA cron. I like the 50 2.8 new model as a daylight general purpose lense a bit better than the 50 lux esp in the 2.8-4 range & it's smaller which is good because I usally have a wife & two kids along. Long trips I usally bring lots of stuff (2Ms R8 & 28mm-180mm lenses)if I think extra stuff that Im not carrying will be safe left at the hotel. I say go w/ your own style but don't carry too much stuff at one time.

Jim

[jerry_lehrer]

Adam,

 

For my long term assignments in Japan, the UK and France, I took a

fairly light weight group; 21mm Super Angulon, 50mm Elmar f2.8, and

90mm Tele Elmarit. I never felt that I needed longer or faster lenses. Did scenic, landscape and street stuff.

 

Jerry

[richie chishty]

My standard travel photography kit is a Leica M6 TTL with a 35mm Summicron ASPH lens. I can carry it all day long without getting tired! But I do have Leica 21, 28, 50, 90 and 135mm lenses in my camera bag. Sometimes I carry the bag around with me. Sometimes I don't. It depends on my mood and the subject. If I am stranded on a deserted island, I will be a happy camper with just my M6 and 35mm lens. :-)

[jerry_lehrer]

Adam,

 

Ooops! I left out my most usefull lens on those assignments, the 35mm

f2.8 Summaron.

 

After that outfit got stolen, the lenses were replaced by 35mm Summicron, 50mm Summilux, 90mm Summilux and 135mm f2.8 Elmarit; all

heavyweights. I haven;t yet found a good 21mm Leica lens, so I will

use my 20mm Nikon SLR lens with a Gandy adapter

 

Jerry

[mrivers]

A month in Australia last summer was shot with a 24, 35, and 75 with good results from lots of Sensia and Provia. I have since switched the 75 for a 90 for an even lighter package that fits into a bicycle courier bag.<div></div>

[dave_chadderton]

Sat on holiday in Turkey, I can say that the only lens I've used so far has been the Tri-Elmar. For me, it's performance and convenience outweigh the intrusion into the Vf. It's great for anything but lower light photography.

 

I sat at an open air concert last night and just 'metered' the scene with my Handheld meter ... I discovered that with 800 film I could easily handhold f2.8 and 1/60th ... any darker and I doubt the shot would have been worth taking.

 

My next addition would be the 75/2 and 35/2 crons for portraiture and low light (I don't believe I need f1.4) - for now I have the CH 75/2.5 and a CV M40/1.4 (I love the results, but find the lack of frames for the 40mm a real pain - yes I can estimate using either 50 or 35 frames, but it's never really the same). Strange that I don't find the TriElmar intrusion into the 28mm frame annoying? Don't know why - I guess the other 3 corners allow for better estimation than 'no frames at all'

 

 

If I was buying again, money no object, I'd probably start with a 0.72 MP with a new Tri-Elmar II and the 75/2 cron. (The 75 came after my dip into Leica straits, then maybe add the 35/cron later.

[alan_simon]

Adam,

 

I must confess that over the past six or so years that I've tried the following:

 

2 M bodies and a bag of lenses-21 Elmarit, 28 ASPH 'cron, 35 ASPH 'lux, 50 'cron, 90 Elmarit. Too much stuff and TOO heavy. Spent too much time changing lenses.

 

1 M body and the 35 'lux ASPH. Light, sufficient for the majority of images, but sometimes (too often) I wanted something wider or longer.

 

2 M bodies-one with a 28 f2.0 ASPH and the other the 50 'lux-film and extra batters in my pocket-no case. A great combo, but I felt like a pro rather than a amateur travel photographer.

 

This year, I have slimmed down and it seems to have worked out just right. I have one body (an M7) with the new 50 ASPH 'lux mounted. I have a small (Fogg)pouch fitted for the 21 ASPH Elmarit and the 90 ASPH 'cron APO. Film and extra batteries still in my pocket. It's light and covers all the necessary angles. I can crop and enlarge when necessary and I don't seem to miss the intermediary focal lengths.

 

Sorry-a long answer. But a kit that really works for me.

 

Make great images.

 

Al