Lens dilemma

[adrian_chia1]

<p>My Leica M8 is arriving this Wednesday. I made a switch from the EOS system to the M system some time ago when I realized I just didn't like lugging around so much weight and I wanted a more discreet profile. I know it's a whole different ballgame altogether, but I'm looking forward to it.<br>

I have still yet to get a lens. This is my first rangefinder - I have never used rangefinders before, save for the old point-and-shoots. I've shot film, but that was on the Canon FD system.<br>

Having said that, I have a dilemma choosing which lens to purchase first for my M8.</p>

<p>I have a budget of about $1500. It's not very much. I'm not very much of a super wide-angle person. My most used focal lengths while on the EOS system were those of 35mm and 50mm, with the rest into the telephoto range (I shoot stage and performances, probably still need an EOS for that).<br>

Hence I've narrowed down my options to these:</p>

<p>Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2<br>

Carl Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f/2 ZM<br>

Carl Zeiss Biogon T* 35mm f/2.8 ZM<br>

Carl Zeiss Biogon T* 35mm f/2 ZM</p>

<p>I can only source the lenses internationally - there isn't an active marketplace for Leicas where I reside, but someone local is currently offering me a latest-version Cron 50 (without the 6-bit) for about $1000.<br>

I've tried searching for Summiluxes on eBay, but most are either out of my price range or in dubious conditions. Summicron-M 35mm lenses also seem to be quite expensive.</p>

<p>I'd like to know a few things. What sets the Cron 50 apart from the Planar? I've read plenty of reviews in the past few days, but I still can't seem to make a decision. The difference in price is about $350 or so. I'm tempted to get the Zeiss because it seems to be a consensus (among reviewers) that it has better contrast than the Cron, but can anyone who has both lenses lay down a few opinions? Plus, "it's not a Leica"...the whole point is to shoot a Leica with a Leica...no?<br>

The two 35mms differ only slightly in price for a whole stop of light. I'm aware the f/2 is a bit bigger, but coming from a DSLR system, it's small enough for my liking. I'm concerned about its wide-open performance and image quality in general. I don't care much for flare control, but does it have any focus issues like I so often hear about the Sonnar 50?</p>

<p>I often hear that the Cron 50 is the benchmark 50mm lens that many are juxtaposed against. Which of the above 35mm Zeiss lenses would hold such a title; if any? I'd like an all-rounder performer, not one that only excels at certain apertures and is only sharp in the center.</p>

<p>Just to keep things simple, I'm not into suggestions of other lenses by other makers right now. I don't want to further complicate my choices.</p>

<p>Lastly, a purely aesthetics question: My M8 is in black - I prefer the Silver/Chrome version, but... - and I like how the Chrome/Silver lenses look over the black ones. Does a silver lens on black camera look weird? I can't try imagining it.</p>

[roland_dobbins]

<p>Yes, silver lenses on a black body look weird. My Summicron 50mm f/2 is silver, and it looks odd (it was the only one available at the time I bought my M8.2, since changed out for an M9; I hope to swap it with someone, someday, or to sell it and buy the black version).<br>

Keep in mind the crop factor of the APS-C sensor size on the M8/8.2 when deciding which focal length you want. A 28mm lens is roughly the equivalent of a 35mm lens on the M8/8.2, a 35mm is roughly the equivalent of a 50mm, and a 50mm is roughly the equivalent of a 75mm.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Erwin Puts mentions that the Planar and Summicron 50mm lenses are of similar quality when used on the M8. The 50mm becomes an effective 65 or 67 mm lens on the M8.</p>

<p>http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/M8/M8/page23.html</p>

[eric friedemann]

<p>As you have four options, the choice you face is not a "dilemma"- a problem with two possible solutions.</p>

[adrian_chia1]

<p>Roland: Yes, I'm aware of the M8's crop factor. Input on the silver-on-black appreciated, I'll just stick to black lenses when I can.<br>

Arthur: Thanks, will take a look.<br>

Eric: Sorry! Error of semantics on my part!</p>

[williamchuttonjr]

<p>If you value status and branding, get the Leica. Otherwise get the Zeiss and save $350 without a significant sacrifice to image quality. You can create fabulous photographs with either lens.<br>

You could put the ~$350 difference towards a Cosina-Voightlander wide angle lens (say the 28/2 Ultron M-mount lens at less than $600) or a spend it on a weekend get-away to photograph someplace you haven't been before.<br>

I forgot. If you plan to be in a position where your camera bag could fall off the back of a LandRover as you travel out in the wilderness, get the Summicron. It's more robust mechanically than the Zeiss. Otherwise the Zeiss M mount build quality is sufficient.</p>

[ray .]

I have a 21 M mount Zeiss and love it- for film. I found it too heavy in contrast when used with the digital M8

where lighting within the frame had a wide range. Sun lit areas tended to wash out if you wanted to get

enough exposure into a foreground subject in shadow. And this was while using maybe the best RAW processor for shadow detail, Capture One. All of my Leica lenses worked better for that with

the M8. I still got some nice shots with the Zeiss M8 combo where lighting was softer. I like both the Zeiss and Leica lenses equally well for film.

 

Don't forget- if you're shooting color you're also going to want the lens to be coded, and Zeiss lenses don't come coded. You have to do it yourself or have it done. Make sure if you choose Leica too the lens is coded. Most of the older versions aren't.

[tim_barker1]

<p>I shot with both a 50 summicron and 50 planar. I ended up selling the summicron, which seemed to flare easier than the planar. If the summicron is a better lens, it's not better in any way that's going to matter to 99.99 percent of us.<br>

Before I spent anything, I'd ask myself which FL I'm going to use the most. Then I'd find the lens for that. If you like 35mm, you could find a 35 pre-asph cron (v.III) for $900 or so. Great lens. That would leave you $600 or so to pick up a 50 (used planars can be found in that range easily) or a 75/90.</p>

<p> </p>

[adrian_chia1]

<p>Where would I be able to pick up a Cron 35 for $900? I've searched eBay - no such deals.</p>

[ray .]

A very affordable and good option would be a 40mm M mount Rokkor or Leica (same lens

different names) if you can find one. They go for $250- $350 or so and are very much up to Leica

standards in every way.

You could send it out to get coded. You might check though on that first to make sure someone can do coding for that lens. Pretty sure it can be done though. I don't remember off hand the guy who does permanent coding but you can probably find it with a search. Or someone here will know.

 

50 Summicrons are less money than 35's, but to me that's sort of a long lens for an M8.

 

Voigtlander lenses are actually a viable option. Good quality and middle of the road in contrast, if not quite

as sharp as Leica or Zeiss. I know some pretty good photographers though that use them.

[ray .]

Tim, did you shoot the 50 Planar with the M8? That's a key question in this discussion. Also, I could

be wrong but I think the pre-asph 35 Summicron is actually version 4. I got mine for about $900 8 years ago,

but they've gone up in dollar price since then.

[ray_cutting]

<p>Adrian<br>

I have both the cron 50 and planar 50 zm, i recently did a comparison test with my m9 on all my 50 lenses, including a summicron,planar,elmar,summaron,summarit,summilux,jupiter and sonnar.<br>

Im attaching a couple pics, the full frame shot and shot from the 50 summicron and the 50 planar, both center and edge.<br>

The crops are about 300%, my original crop i did was about 250 pixels and when i sized to the 700 max for this web site it makes it about 300%.<br>

I also have a Sonnar which i love, it does have the focus shift inherit to the 1930 design but is easily compensated for once you get used to it. I love it for its bokeh, and small size for a fast 1.5 lens.<br>

As far as the 35mm zeiss lenses, i don't have any of them, i have a 35 summicron asph and a 35 nokton f1.4, the test results are similar to the 50's, meaning center sharpness is similar but edge sharpness is always better on the Leica lenses.</p>

<div></div>

[ray_cutting]

<p> </p>

<div></div>

[ray_cutting]

<p> </p><div></div>

[ray_cutting]

<p> </p><div></div>

[ray_cutting]

<p> </p><div></div>

[adrian_chia1]

<p>Thanks for the images!</p>

<p>From what I can see, it seems that the lenses are basically similar in terms of image output. I can't tell any difference in between the center crops. The Summicron looks as if it has a very, very slight edge in corner sharpness though, but it's really negligible to me.</p>

<p>Once again, thanks!</p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>Ray, the edge image sample made by the Planar, where the headlamp has a reflection; notice the secondary lateral chromatic aberration. (The green/magenta artifact) The Leica <strong>clearly</strong> doesn't exhibit this flaw.</p>

<p>Is that moire visible in the truck grill coming off of the M9 sensor?</p>

<p>In any case, I kind of agree with William. The 28mm focal length fits the crop factor for an M8 beautifully. (37mm Equiv) You can currently acquire a Leica one for a little more than $1,100. Plus eventually if you go full frame, a 28mm lens is a very nice focal length that's usually viewfinder accommodated.</p>

[tim_barker1]

<p>Regarding the 35 summicron: I bought mine, a pre-asph version 3 in near mint condition (though without a hood) for $900 from Igor's Camera late last year. The much-hyped version 4 would cost several hundred more.<br>

I do use my planar on my M8. I use it almost exclusively for portrait type work. I have more than a 100 images here on my flickr feed: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tbarker/tags/zeissplanar50mmf20/</p>

<p> </p>

[adrian_chia1]

<p>I don't reside in the States, so where is it I may be able to buy online with such competitive prices as stated? My only current resource is eBay, which don't exactly have such good prices.</p>

<p>Adorama doesn't seem to be willing to ship to Malaysia, too.</p>

<p>EDIT: Checked out Igor's Camera, pretty good prices. Sent an email inquiring about shipping to Malaysia, but no reply yet.</p>

[ray_cutting]

<p>Gus<br>

Good eye!, the grill actually has vertical and horizontal lines, if that what you are refering to, but it may have moire, im not that familiar with that.<br>

Im attaching a center crop of a 50mm elmar 1939 uncoated lens, not even cla'd yet.<br>

Mind you the elmar is at f3.5 but still wide open , the others are at f2.0,<br>

Im pretty impressed with it's center sharpness, just goes to show you almost all lenses are center sharp.<br>

Even the edge sharpness is surprising.</p><div></div>

[ray_cutting]

<p> </p><div></div>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Try and get a good used Summicron 35/2 Asph. It will be about like a 47mm lens on a 35mm camera. You'll love it. </p>

[steve_levine]

<p>Take a serious look at the Voigtlander/Cosina glass. Their 28/F2 Ultron is an amazing lens! It gives the Elmarit 28/f2.8 a run for it's money at 1/3rd the price.</p>

<h4 ><br /></h4>

[fred_c1]

<p>Adrian, I'm gonna turn your quadlemma (or is it tetralemma?) into a pentalemma: get a 35/1.7 Ultron (available used only.) Can't beat its bang-for-the-buck.</p>