Choices...

The 28mm f2 ultron was the most useful lens I owned for my M8. And the 90mm f2Summicron was damn sharp and came in handy every so often when I needed distance. I don't think any lens is rally essential. It's having the options to switch between different focal lengths that's key.
 
swoop said:
The 28mm f2 ultron was the most useful lens I owned for my M8. And the 90mm f2Summicron was damn sharp and came in handy every so often when I needed distance. I don't think any lens is rally essential. It's having the options to switch between different focal lengths that's key.
Click to expand...

LOL! Swoop it was your signature that prompted this question I posted. Swear!
 
Is the OP asking for purposes of conversation, or as suggestions for himself? I very much appreciate the importance of cost as a qualifier, but I'm puzzled by the lack of specificity regarding subject matter and focal length. Personally, I want the broadest range of focals I can get. So if I were limited to only 3 lenses for my M8 I would choose the CV 12mm on one end and original-style 135 TE on the other. That would leave me a horrendously large gap in the middle, which I'd rather fill with 2 or even 3 lenses. But if I had to go with one it would have to be a 28. I agree with Jaap the type-III Elmarit is a great lens and cheap by virtue of being under appreciated. In my case I just happened to stumble on a Type-IV for $600 or $650 (I forget exactly) because it had a tiny scratch on the front coating. Otherwise I would have stayed with my Ultron. For $199 it was truly a bargain. From f/2.8 I put it neck and neck with the Type-IV Elmarit.

In truth if I had a $1000/ea limit on 3 lenses, I'd call it a $3000 limit and get 5 or 6 lenses, probably all CV.
 
Under a grand each. that means you have $3k to spend.
I'd search until i found a 28 summicron for about $2,400.
Then add a used 50/2 Zeiss planar for about $500.

Set the remaining $100 aside until you find another $100 to go with it and buy a used CV 75/2.5.

Basically, if you have $3,000 to budget for lenses, I don't see why you'd divide that up equally, when it's very unlikely that your use of lenses will be divided equally I would bet that most people end up using a single go-to lens for 50-80 percent of their shots. Figure out what lens is going to be for you and get the one you want. Then with whatever money you have left, get the extras.
They may not be quite as good as your main lens, but they'll be awfully close.
 
Yep. My main lens was the Sumicron C 40mm, because it was the only one I had (Sobs).

But now I have the 25mm Voigtlander. This is now my main lens. Each cost around £250 pounds each.

So I would blow the remaining £2500 on a beat-up Harley Sportster or high mileage BMW R1100GS.

Uhmm . . . now where's that box of tissues?
 
zeiss 25/2.8 35/2 50/1.5 for me (M8)

tim, btw, i love your portrait work with the planar and M8. lighting, composition, feel - great stuff. inspirational.
 
Last edited:
It's a real reality check of what we are about when we talk about spending "only" $3,000 for three camera lenses. We are truly our own demographic. ;)
 
Thanks for all the input. Very interesting suggestions/choices.

In retrospect, maybe I should not have limited it to 1000.00 each. But I was thinking a wide-standard-tele.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom