New to Leica-M and need advice

[craig_dumesny]

This is my third attempt to post my questions (just found out about

yesterdays server probs) so please excuse any others from me

yesterday (if they ever turn up.

 

I intend on buying a 0.72 M6TTL like in the next week. Its purpose

will predominatley be for hiking/camping. I currently shoot MF and

Eos 1V's as part of my studio business, however, both these rigs are

way too heavy for me during extended hikes and I really want to go

the minimalist approach, not to mention returning with the very best

chromes possible from 35mm (for stock).

 

As this will be my first Leica I ask your wealth of knowledge on a

few things, mainly lens choice. As I want to keep things pretty

simple I would prefer to keep to just one lens to start with. Here

in Oz they have a deal for M6TTL and Tri-Elmar for a whopping

discount of AUS$3,000 making the deal AUS$4999 all up new). I am

tending also towards the 50mm f/2.0 Summi purely for its low light

speed advantage and its perspective for portraits, etc (as I'll

probably take it on weddings with me, too), but those nice vistas

with something wider (28-35mm) brings the E3 back into play.

 

I guess where I'm coming from is what would be a good first lens to

learn the RFing and the M. Also, is buying seocond hand lenses a

good way to go with Leica's.

 

Looking forward to your replies.

 

Craig.

[david enzel]

A lot depends on what you want to do. My main lens is the 35 summilux. I enjoy street photography and zone focus and the M is ideal for this with a wide angle lens. I use the 35 most of the time and sometimes use a 28 and 50. The 90 I find difficult to focus and prefer a reflex camera at this focal length.

 

You said you want to hike with the camera. This suggests to me that you will have time to focus. If that is true I would pick your favorite focal length for hiking to start.

 

I would add that if I were hiking I would take a lightweight reflex camera and a zoom lens with a range of 28 to 85 or so. Speed would be less important than weight. But that is just my point of view. You would also save a lot of money. Nikon and Canon offer excellent choices.

[chip l.]

Well no matter wghat you'll enjoy it. Not sure what the value of the M6TTL and Tri Elmar is when you convert (meaning not sure what the incomes are like there). The Tri Elmar sounds like a perfect choice for what you want to do.

 

You could always hunt a used 50/2 or a 35/2 for a speed lens. If you want a really light weight kit you could also get the 50/2.8 and get something that is small also.

 

In regards to buying second hand. By all means on the single focal lengths. Myself I would like a longer warranty on the Tri Elmar. Also make sure that you get the latest Tri Elmar with the 49mm filter and depth of field markings.

 

Hope this helps....

 

Chip

[bob soltis]

Welcome to the Leica M world. The Tri-Elmar is a nice lens, but

consider a 35 Summicrom and a 90 Elmarit -- a light, compact outfit

for hiking that you could use for weddings.

 

Second hand lenses from reputable dealers are a good way to start at a

lower cost.

 

Best wis

[Troll]

Since you're already shooting Canon, if you want to cut back on weight, why not get a Rebel and use the lenses you've already got?

[craig_dumesny]

Bill, my Canon lenses are ALL �L-series� hence they are inherently large and heavy. One of the reasons for wanting an M is that it will enable me to take it everywhere I go and be much more unobtrusive than a Canon, too.

[fotografz]

Even though I don't fancy it myself (prefering fixed focal lengths), the

Tri-Elmar sounds perfect for your minimalist needs. Couple it with a

90/2.8 and you'll be all set. For weddings, you could get a SF20 to make

up the speed difference. Used as fill with a diffuser, and shooting the

Tri-Elmar wide open will give you some very nice, almost ambient light

looking film.

[craig_dumesny]

Guys,thanx so for all the responses thus far. I guess I would be better off with say a 50 f/2 to start with and then add a coouple of fast wide / short teles as my finances allow. Is the latest rendition of the 50 the one to go for if I decide to go that way.

 

Cheers.

[kens]

Yes - the current 50 Summicron has a great short-throw and easy focus, latest optics & coatings, but without the harsh ASPH/APO signatures. I also like the handy build-in shade.

[silvergull]

I'd second the 2/50 Summicron as a first lens. For light weight, the 2.8/50 is a great

lens. In 1966, I got a M-3 with a 2.8/50 collapsible Elmar which I still have and which

makes great images. The 90 is a very useful focal length for the M series and mine is

the most used lens. A 35 and 90 pair would make a great hiking kit.

 

AUS$ 1.00 = US$0.56 for those interested.

 

Cheers,

 

Jim

San Diego

[chip l.]

So that would make it $2900 for the M6TTL and a Tri-Elmar?! I say do the that setup by all means, and look for a 50/2 used!

 

Chip

 

PS - Wish we had deals like that here in the States

[craig_dumesny]

Chip, would you say that that equates to a pretty good deal? Or, would it be better to buy a new body and then second hand lenses, OR is the Tri-Elmar too good to pass up at this price??

 

Regards.

[ralph_barker]

While the Tri-Elmar gets good reports from those who use it, I'm not sure it's really a good "minimalist" fit with your objectives. You might be happier, and more flexible, with a 35mm Summicron (or, even a Summilux) as your first lens, and a 90mm Elmarit-M later.

 

If at all possible, I'd suggest that you handle the camera with each of the lenses to get a better personal sense of the comparitive size and weight of each - then make your decision.

[albert knapp md]

Craig:

If your main interest is travel photography, the tri-elmar is your

beast. You can always purchase primes latter but secure this

gem first. A word of caution: make sure you have the second

version of the tri-elmar.

[chip l.]

Craig,

 

Since you said that you wanted it for hiking and camping, in my experience I like having between a 28 and 50 available for shooting. Add a thin Tele-Elmarit and you'll have a very small and light weight kit. In situations like what you ask about I don't think the f/4 would be too slow. For speed you could always add a 35/2 which is very small too.

 

But for hiking I think a single lens solution like the Tri Elmar is king. And with the deal that they are offering it is hard to pass up.

 

BTW what is the body alone price?

 

Chip

[david enzel]

Craig,

 

I don't mean to discourage you from buying a Leica. It is a great camera for unobstrusive photography. And I appreciate (and share) your appreciation for fine optics. But for hiking have you considered a Rebel and a good Canon prime lens. You would have a lightweight kit, good optics and save a lot of money. When you are hiking you don't need to be unobtrustive. Now if you want to do street photography or need an exceptionally quiet camera, the M is the way to go. The M is not, however, especially light IMHO.

[pete_su]

I'd agree with the suggestion to get a Rebel.

 

Combined with a 24-85 zoom or some such, you'll have something that is lighter and more flexbile than the Leica, and you can buy 4 outfits for backup.

 

If you are mostly doing landscape, bringing a small light tripod along will make you more sharp pictures than spending $4000 on a Leica+lens.

[michael_kastner]

Some of you keep talking about the weight. For me, personally (yes, like me myself) it's not the weight, but the volume that's interesting.

[craig_dumesny]

Guys, I can't thank you all enough for all the advice that's been forthcoming. I still intend to order an M6TTL this week.

 

Chip - the body alone is about AUS$3,750, with the E3 being packaged with it at AUS$1,000.

 

David E. Peter Su - I will also be using the M for weddings and portraits as per my original post. I can understand your theory for going with a light body and zoom, but frankly, I've been down this path before and the optics are not up to what I wan or need. I have used an M before (briefly) and the chromes leapt off the light box. I have the best zooms/primes made by Canon in their 'L' series range and they are very, very good, but heavy.

 

When I said lightweight, I really meant minimalist, so sorry for any misinterpretation. I presently use an Olympus OM10 and 50/1.8 and don't notice its weight on my shoulder. If I didn't have any sense at all (LOL) I'd pack my EOS 1V HS and a bunch of L-glass (probably end up looking like big Arnie!).

 

Anyway, I guess it comes down to the fact that as a pro I want to get back to the basics and bring fun and enjoyment back into my photography. I want a camera that I 'want' to take everywhere with me.

[chip l.]

Craig,

 

As a serious amateur photographer (hoping to do some pro work); I can understand the wanting to get back to basics. That is why my FM2n kit with five lenses was sold to get the first M6TTL body. And thats why the N70 kit with three lenses and maybe the Xpan kit with three lenses are next to go on the block.

 

I have never had so much fun shooting as I do with the Leica. The RF finder has opened my eyes to what is going on around my intended image, and the size and layout make it easy to carry around. I find myself now paying more attention to the depth of field scale, not even bothering to focus like I did with SLR's.

 

Maybe next year Leica USA will offer us such a deal....

 

Chip

[david enzel]

Craig,

 

I now understand better your goal. The M is the answer. I suggest you give serious consideration to buying a 35 mm lens. I love this combination. I can easily zone focus and still fill the frame. I try to shoot at F8, bring the camera to my eye, compose and press the shutter. The camera is a joy to use this way and nothing competes with it in terms of the simple joy of photography. IMHO, the 35 mm lens is the only lens you really need.

[craig_dumesny]

Guys I owe you big time! I just rang the dealer offering the M6 and E3 package and he says that the E3 is the OLD model - phew - thanx for the advice on the 49mm filter and DOF markings. I also priced a new 35/2 and this now puts this in to the get down and beg to my wife scenario.

 

That being said I'll go with a S/H 50/2 Summicron.

 

On a final note, an M7 here is only about AUS$500 more - should I get one of these instead of the M6TTL?? Last question - honest!

 

Craig

[msitaraman]

Craig, yet another vote for that $250 Rebel and a $100 50/1.8 lens (in US Dollars). It is lighter, and is smaller, if you measure the distance from the top of the shutter release to the bottom plate...

[david enzel]

Craig,

 

I would encourage you to get the M7 because AE is nice. Also, the viewfinder is clearer and less prone to flare. The price difference is modest in comparision to US prices. You also get "in between" shutter speeds which is nice if you shoot chromes.

 

The 50 summicron is a great lens but the M with a 35 is the ideal combination. If I were you I would buy the M7 and the 35 summicron. You may not want anything else and even if you do I bet that will be combination you will use the most.

[kens]

Don't go with a 50 Summicron just because the price of a new 35 Summicron ASPH is too high. There are lots of good deals on used 35 Summicrons (pre-ASPH). And many people prefer them because they are less harsh than the new ASPH version. Choose the focal length you want, not the one you have to settle for.

 

Consider also that many RF users are surprised about the usefulness of the 35mm lens. This length is not as popular in the SLR world, but seems to be ideal for the RF Leica.

 

There are many varying opinions about older 35's. Many consider the 4th version (7-element model #11340 with rectangular hood, serial # above 2974250) to be the best pre-ASPH 35. Some think the 3rd version (6-element with round hood, serial # above 2461000) just as good but less expensive. For all practical purposes any of these will suit your purposes.