Please Help Me Choose a Lens

[katie_p1]

I am just starting to use a M6 and currently use a Summicron-M 50mm f/2. I am going to

be getting one more lens for Christmas (and probably the last lens for a while) but I don't

know which one I should get:

1. LEICA SUMMICRON-M 35mm f/2 ASPH.

2. LEICA SUMMILUX-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH

3. LEICA ELMARIT-M 28mm f/2.8

4. LEICA ELMARIT-M 28mm f/2 ASPH

5. LEICA ELMARIT-M 24mm f/2.8 ASPH

6. LEICA ELMARIT-M 21mm f/2.8 ASPH

 

Ok, so that's the list from which to choose. I know it's rather long, but I'd love to get

people's take on what they especially love about one and what they especially hate about

others. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I am very new to the Leica world and just

really starting to get into it. THe last two on the list need extra equiptment, right?

 

In case you need to know to help me out, I shoot a lot of just "snap shot" like stuff. Mostly

people. Some landscapes. Never use a flash. Not sure what else what help you guys out

with your suggestions/help.

 

Thanks a lot in advance.

[brambor]

You can't go wrong with any of those lenses. As far as focal length goes , that you need to know your self whether 35mm or 24mm or 28. If you don't know then you probably don't need another lens.

 

Lux is usually the largest lens of the bunch in case you wanted a smaller package.

 

IMHO the Summilux 35mm ASPH is the nicest lens from your list.

[katie_p1]

Thanks for the quick answer, Rene. From what I've looked at so far the 35mm Summilux

and the 28mm Elmarit are leading the way for me right now. But I really love the look of

some wideangle shots I've taken with other cameras so I keep going back to the 21mm.

But I also feel like a 28mm and 35mm would be much more useful in everyday shooting,

whereas the 21 is a little too "different." As you can tell I'm having a hard time making my

mind up, but after taking the 50mm camping this weekend I realized I really needed

something different in my kit.

[brambor]

Katie,

 

35 to 50 isn't a remarkable difference. I also shoot a lot with 24mm and like it a lot. If you love wide perspective then you should probably go wider than 35. Does your M6 have .72 finder?

[SCL]

I agree with Rene's comments. If you are just getting started, you really should spend several months, if not a year, exploring your current lens's capabilities. You already have an outstanding lens which excells in "people" shooting. In the long run you will make a better choice in rounding out your selection.<p>

Having said that, my first Leica lens was a 35mm Summaron (in the 1960s) which I used all over Europe. The current 35 ASPHs are terrific, although I actually prefer a non-asph for my work. The 21 & 24 ASPHs are outstanding lenses, but really need an accessory finder for framing, and do potentially introduce a distortion which you rarely encounter with a 35 or 50. Good luck with your selection & Merry Christmas.

[janne1]

It depends how one likes to shoot, for me theres a big diference between a 35mm and a 50mm. Only way to know for sure is to try one.

[dan flanders]

My first, and for a year or two only, Leica lens was an ancient Elmar 50 and it served me well. I made a fortunate trade at that time and managed to get both a 35 and a 90 Elmar in a fortunate trade. It was many years before I obtained anything wider, but I found that after I got the extra lenses I was not making as many images as I had when I owned only one lens. That was sixty odd years ago and in retrospect I believe I can posit that until one has mastered a basic lens, any extra lenses only reduce the opportunity to learn to make the most of photographic opportunities. Any of the lenses you have suggested would be more than satisfactory assuming you know just why you need them. So, select the focal length that will satisfy your needs, and buy the best you can afford.

[john_layton]

If you were without a lens and wanted just one, I'd have recommended the 35 Asph - Lux

or Cron. But since you already have a 50 - you might find, as I have, that a 28 mm can be

a wonderful compliment to this.

 

The 28 on its own is really quite versatile - while it does have its own unique character, it

can, depending on how its used, cover nicely in situations where you might otherwise

choose either a 35mm lens or a 24mm lens.

 

And the 50, likewise, can almost mimic a 35 or a 75. Head and shoulder portraits done

with a 50 at a wide open aperture can almost emulate the look of a 90. Again, much

depends on your own working experience with these lenses to get them to achieve this

range.

 

Although I do own a 90mm lens in addition to a 28 and a 50, I find the 50 much handier

than the 90 and often find myself moving in closer, as opposed to switching lenses,

especially in working with people. The bonus is that I usually have my other M with a 28

already mounted, and I often will find that as I close the distance with the 50, this distance

then becomes an ideal distance for the 28 as well - to get a more environmental feel with

the same subject.

 

Furthermore, I find that the 28mm/M6 combo remains consistent with the dynamic of

shooting with the M6 and 50 combo, in that I can still use the camera's built in frame lines

as opposed to needing an extra finder. My M's are actually an MP and M6ttl, each with the

.72 finder, which some feel is a bit tight with a 28 but I find that it works just fine. If you

wear glasses this will be a different story as you will then likely have difficulty seeing the

28mm frame lines. There are those who claim that, visible lines or not, the separate finder

is actually desirable, even with a 28. While I personally disagree with this, the finder does

offer a viable solution.

 

As for which 28 - I have the last Elmarit f/2.8 version just before the current Summicron f/

2 version. While I do occasionally find myself in need of the extra speed, and while I

continue to hear amazing things about the newer lens, I still so love the combination of

smoothness and sharpness of the 2.8 version that I don't think I'd ever sell it. Its a

fantastic lens - as is the latest version 50mm f/2 Summicron which I also own.

 

All in all, I find the 28/50 to be an extremely versatile and powerful combo, challenging in

all the right ways, in many of the very situations in which the Leica M is notable for its

excellence.

[Troll]

If you don't know what you need, then you don't need anything. Save yhour money and enjoy the great piece of glass that you've already got.

[alan_simon]

Katie,

 

Clearly, you will get more answers than the choice of lenses on your list.

 

I think that I've tried (and owned) all of the focal lengths and most of the lenses that you've named.

 

I found that when I had the 35 and the 50 I was spending too much time changing lenses and often the 35 wasn't wide enough. I used the 28 and 50 for a while and that worked out pretty well, but I decided that two cameras with a lens fixed on each was just too much for my type of photography-mostly street images while traveling.

 

Last year I decided on the following:

 

a 50 'lux ASPH as my main lens, a 21 Elmarit ASPH - for certain obvious times, and a 90 'cron APO ASPH for a narrower field and greater magnification/compression of space.

 

I've just returned from several weeks in China-a most uinusual country with many images just calling out.

 

I used the 50 over 85% of the time; the 21 next, followed by the 90 - which I used least frequently.

 

So, it's everyone's opinion. This is mine.

 

Good luck and enjoy.

 

Alan

[.th]

bill said it!

[leslie_cheung]

Big difference for me as well between 35 and 50. Try them yourself is your best bet.

[jeff_wilson13]

<bill said it!>

 

Instead of commenting on her glass you'd think he'd try to help Katie P.

[OCULUS New York]

If you like shooting people and places, I'd suggest the 28. It's corrected well enough to photograph people in situ without distortion, yet, wide enough to serve as a landscape lens.

 

I was helped to this decision myself by reading an interveiw with the White House photographer, who says he uses the 28 far and away most often, so that he can capture the people as well as their august backdrop.

 

Cheers,

Ray Hull

[malcolm_tentt]

{katie p , sep 07, 2005; 07:14 p.m.

I'm going to a wedding this weekend and aside from taking my digital camera I'd also like to take the Leica M6 I was just given (!!!). I haven't shot film in quite some times so I'm trying to figure out what film to use for indoor}

 

{katie p , nov 22, 2005; 01:42 a.m.

What would you guys take on a camping trip (in southern california later this week). I've never been camping so I don't know what film to take. I'm shooting on a Leica M6, if that helps with the suggestions.}

 

{katie p , nov 28, 2005; 03:12 p.m.

I am just starting to use a M6 and currently use a Summicron-M 50mm f/2. I am going to be getting one more lens for Christmas}

 

Being frank, I think the last thing you need is another lens.

[james_.1]

I'd go for the 35mm or 28, the lux or cron. Personally, I shoot with a 35mm and a 75mm

(arriving in Dec.), but do like the 50mm. Good luck.

[paul_neuthaler]

If you've got the 50 Summicron, the 28 Summicron will be a fabulous "partner" with it.

[Alex_Es]

Katie, I can only speak for myself and what I would do in your case. If money is no object

(no pun intended) go for either the 35/2 Asph. or 35/1.4 Asph. Both are excellent lenses.

There is enough of a difference between 50mm and 35mm to merit using both. I tend to

use the 35mm lens most of the time. Say 80%. Since you use a 50/2, the 35/1.4 would be

a great choice, if you do not mind the price.

 

That's me. Now about you. You seem to like wide-angle as opposed to telephoto. That

being the case, you might want to go with the 28/2. It is an excllent lens. The 24/2.8 is a

good compromise between 28mm and 21mm. The bother with the 24mm lens is that it

needs an external finder and with the 28 you don't.

 

Bill has a point. But you sound like a lady who wants another lens. And if you want one

you ought to have one! Seems the question is how far do you want to go with wide-angle?

 

You might also consider the new Zeiss M-mount lenses. Their 25/2.8 is considerably

cheaper than the 24/2.8 and quite good. I think it is also a tad lighter. The Zeiss external

finder is very expensive but you can get a cheaper and good alternative thorugh

Cameraquest. If it is a 28/2.8 you want you have scads of 28mm lenses to choose

from--as Bill pointed out to someone in another posting a while ago. You might as well

go with the Zeiss 28/2.8.--but see if you like the ergonomics first.

 

A confession. My 35/2 Asph. is now being serviced by Leica, Japan because the ring

holding the hood is loose. I thought I'd be utterly lost without it. But am now shooting

with my Voightlander 28/1.9 a lot more and my old flarey 'lux 35/1.4 after dark. The

28/1.9 has its virtues--besides being cheap--it's old 'cron-like glow being one. But the

28/2 Asph is better in terms of ergonomics, build quality and optics, especially wide open.

As a second lens it is well worth the money.

 

If you go for a 35mm lens don't compromise. For some reason, great 35mm lens that are

f2 and above are few and far between. Either the Leica 35/2 asph. or 35/1.4 asph and

nothing else--unless it is a late pre-aspherical Summicron 35/2. The latter does not have

the edge quality of the 35/2 asph wide open but has a "glow" that many people love. The

35/a asph. has a clinical sharpness to it--that I like but some people hate. I get my glow

fix from the 28/1.9.

[katie_p1]

Malcolm, did you come out of the womb bearing a Leica, a couple of lenses, and your

favorite type film? Wow, that's very impressive. I, on the other hand, am trying to learn

from the experience and recomendation of others, on top of shooting on my own. But

thank you very much for being a huge jerk when everyone else was nothing but kind

with their suggestions. Some of us are not as fortunate as you in our ability to know

everything without learning (beit from ourselves or from others) so we ask questions.

You're really lucky to be so talented.

 

Everyone else, thank you so much for the suggestions and comments. I haven't fully read

each response (just skimmed) because I'm at work, but when I get home tonight I'm going

to go through everything. And in the coming weeks I'm going to rent different lenses and

decide which (and if) lens I'd like to get.

[john_boyle3]

Katie, save your money for now and just get to know your 50 Summicron.

You can get a lot of fine shots with the 50, but eventually you will want another for a wider view for landscapes or a small telephoto for portraits. Right now you don't NEED another lens. The type of photography you move into will dictate which lens to get. You can't go wrong with any of the Leica lenses and there are also many fine ones available used. Try to acquire pictures, not gear.

[Robin Smith]

If you want to "get more in" and have a greater jump compared to the 50mm then I recommend the 28mm (particularly good for interiors). If you want another variant on the standard lens which will be superb for portraits and groups of people too then I would go for the 35mm. It really depends on what you want to do with it. The 28mm is a less happy combination with a 0.72x Leica, although fine if you don't wear glasses - unless you don't mind using an external viewfinder. A 35mm works very nicely whoever you are, and definitely does not require an external finder whether you wear glasses or not.

 

Personally, if it was me, I would pick the 28/2, but I'm not you so you have to decide. I have both 28 and 35/2s and at the moment I use them about equally, but I rarely take both lenses out with me at any one time.

[al_kaplan1]

I've got a nice selection of Leica lenses from 21mm through 135mm but I'm going out again with just my 15mm f/4.5 Voigtlander Heliar because it's such a fun lens.

[paul_ebbe]

I shoot a lot of just "snap shot" like stuff. Mostly people. Some landscapes. Never use a flash.

 

Based on this, I would suggest either one of the 35's. The 50 probably won't be used much but it isn't very expensive to hang on to and gives you a little more closeness when needed. Good luck.

[scott_mcloughlin]

I also believe that a 28mm lens is a perfect complement to a 50mm lens. Very versatile, like the 50. My own basic 2 lens shooting kit is 28/50 (with a CV 21/4 and Leica 90/2.8 to round out the edges).

 

There are many good ones out there. I have the Leica 28/2, but there are also the CV 28/1.9, CV 28/3.5, Leica 28/2.8, ZI 28/2.8, and so on.

 

I have a CV 35/2.5 of which I'm fond, but the 50/28 lens pair gets a ton more play time.

 

Scott

[Troll]

Katie, looks like you're gonna fit right in.