1 40mm or 35mm plus 50mm ?

[lawnpotter]

I will get either the r2a or the r3a but not sure about my future lens needs. For sure I will get the heliar 75mm and I may get a 21 or 25mm, but I am not sure if I should get the 40mm on its own or get the 35mm and the 50mm together. Is the 40mm the best of both worlds or is it the jack of all trades but master of none? Thanks

 

[back alley]

not really all that much difference between a 35 and a 40.
if you are thinking about a 21 or 25 you might want to look at the r4* also.

many like the 40 and see it as a 'tween 35 and 50 lens, i think i prefer the 35 if i had to have only one.
actually the 25/35 is a great combo.

joe

 

[dazedgonebye]

I went with the 40 instead of 35 and 50 for my R3a.
I've settled on that and a 21mm as getting pretty much all of the work. I do think I'll add a 15mm though.

The 40 is a natural on the R3A.

 

[lawnpotter]

back alley

back alley

I thought of the r4 but I really want the 75mm and I feel it would be easier to focus the 75mm using th cameras internal viewfinder. if I got the 21mm, I could guess the focus and framing easier.

 

[lawnpotter]

dazedgoneby

dazedgoneby

do you where glasses? I do and I looked at the r2a at the store but they wont have an r3a for a couple of weeks.

 

[BillBingham2]

I tell folks to use the Anchor Lens approach when building a system. Start with the lens you want to build the system around. It might be world class glass or a lens that has a particular look you like or want. Once you have that then go in different directions. For my S3-2000, it's the 50/1.4 Millennium. I really like the 25/4 CV so that's my wide and going up is easy, the 105/2.5 Nikkor (an Anchor Lens in SLR world). I have a 35/2.5 CV but it stays in the bag a lot unless I am in a house.

Part of picking your spread is understanding who wide a jump do you want to go. On the M system I started out with it was 21/35/90. When I wanted a bit more speed it became 15/40/105 with a 25 on a second body (Bessa L). Carrying a 4th lens in RF world is no big shakes unless it is super fast so 4 lenses is not out of the question for a person wanting a 3 lens kit for size.

What do you take pictures of mostly? Perhaps the answer is a two lens kit with a R2A, a 75/2.5 and a 35/1.4. The 35/1.4 is going to be a great lens, CV doesn't come out with bad glass. Can you zoom with our feet to give you a 50 (in with the 35 and out when the 75 is on)?

For your third lens you could then jump to a 15mm. While I had a 21, it just never was wide enough for some stuff or two wide for others. Perhaps for you it will be perfect. Find some folks on RFF near you and barrow or try a few.

I'd go R2A, 35/1.4 and 75/2.5 as my two lens set and stay there for a bit. Burn some film and see how it feels. If I were to start over in the Leica space again (from scratch now) the new 35/1.4 would be my anchor. I would probably go with the 75, either the CV 2.5 or the 'Cron at f2 (if I got rich). On the wide side I think I would try the 15/4.5 because of the price, but the 18/4 sounds interesting.

B2 (;->

Best thing to do is to barro

 

[dazedgonebye]

do you where glasses? I do and I looked at the r2a at the store but they wont have an r3a for a couple of weeks.

I wear reading glasses only, so nothing while looking through the viewfinder.
Actually, that's a bit of a pain 'cause they go on for adjustments and come off for picture taking.

 

[lawnpotter]

Bill

Bill

The anchor lense is a good idea. I had a grd2 for a month but I hardly used it. I think I had a hard time with the 28mm focal length. About 20 years ago I used a 50mm for a while and I like it. but now I am drawn to longer focal length pictures on flickr like the 75mm. So I think the 35mm or the 40mm with the 75mm could be a good combo. I wish I could actually look at the r3a before 2 weeks so I could decide. Bye the way was it you who sugested using my feet with the 35mm to zoom in, I would love to but is it really the same as having a 50mm. I tried using my feet with the 28mm but it created a whole diferent perspective which could be interesting, but at times I found it frustrating. I would get the r2a tommorow but I am still wondering if the view finder on the r3a is amazing like some people say.

 

[Ronald M]

40 is a nice carry do all lens. Matched with a 75 or 90, it is nearly perfect. Add a 25 or 28 and you can cover almost anything in RF land.

One of my fav`s is a 28 on the Nikon D200. It is just like a 40 in film. Small. easy carry, does a lot and is not a zoom. Also have the 24 and 35 for it, but again, they take up space, get heavy, and slow me down changing lenses which is worse with digi because I have to be careful of dirt.

Rollie 35`s all used 40`s. So did Leica CL. Many still try to use the 40 `cron from it on M ser. It does not match the frame line though no matter how you file the lugs.


why not get the camera, walk around without a lens and change the frame lines to see what happens? I will guarantee there is no perfect solution unless it is a small zoom, 1.4, that does not distort,. Sadly that does not exist.

 

[oscroft]

I thought of the r4 but I really want the 75mm and I feel it would be easier to focus the 75mm using th cameras internal viewfinder. if I got the 21mm, I could guess the focus and framing easier.

That makes a lot of sense. I'd much rather have an internal 75mm frame and use an eternal finder for the 21 than the other way round. As well as focusing being far more critical with a 75, parallax is a big problem too, and an external finder can be very inaccurate as closer distances.

 

[dazedgonebye]

That makes a lot of sense. I'd much rather have an internal 75mm frame and use an eternal finder for the 21 than the other way round. As well as focusing being far more critical with a 75, parallax is a big problem too, and an external finder can be very inaccurate as closer distances.

This was my thinking as well. Using an external finder for short tele is far more cumbersome than using it for wide.
Then, of course, I found I don't like tele on an RF and 40mm is my longest lens. :bang: 😀

 

[kalokeri]

I tell folks to use the Anchor Lens approach when building a system. Start with the lens you want to build the system around.

B2 (;->

Great advice! So, lawnpotter, start with a 75mm.

If you are drawn to longer focal lenghts you just have to look for a good companion. If you´re able to see the framelines of the 40mm in a R3A I would suggest the 40mm lens. If you´re able to see the framelines of the 35mm in the R2A the suggested 1,4/35mm might be a good deal, too.

In my believe it´s a very personal decision. As far as I think you don´t need 35mm AND 50mm if there will be a 75mm soon. Never used a 40mm though I don´t know how big the difference between 35mm and 40mm is, but assume that it´s not that big.

Good luck.

Thomas

 

[tripod]

I have the CV40 because it is a modern, sharp, and fast lens. It is much cheaper than the Summilux and only a few mm longer. I also have a Summaron which is a vintage and slower lens.

 

[Al Kaplan]

There really isn't much difference between coverage of the 40 and the 35. The built in frame lines on M bodies are a bit undersized anyway. The 40 is a better match. The marked focal length is really just a nominal focal length. The "target" focal length of the 50 Summicron was supposedly 51.9mm, and the lenses were measured and matched up with mounts with the correct cam to match the actual focal length. My guess is that the 35's and 40's aren't all that "on the money" either. You might have a 35 that is really a 36.5 while your 40 turns out to be a 38.

 

[Rhoyle]

I got the 40mm lens as I feel that it covers most of what I want to use an RF for. I also got a 25 for my wide angle. I've been itching to get a 50 ZM Planar, but every time I seriously consider it, I can't seem to think what I'd use it for that I can't use the 40 (which I love) for. So I built my kit around the 40. Never regretted it for a minute. Great all around length.

 

[ferider]

There really isn't much difference between coverage of the 40 and the 35. The built in frame lines on M bodies are a bit undersized anyway. The 40 is a better match. The marked focal length is really just a nominal focal length. The "target" focal length of the 50 Summicron was supposedly 51.9mm, and the lenses were measured and matched up with mounts with the correct cam to match the actual focal length. My guess is that the 35's and 40's aren't all that "on the money" either. You might have a 35 that is really a 36.5 while your 40 turns out to be a 38.

It can be the other way around: in the case of the Nokton 40 means 43.

Also, I found 35mm framelines to match 40 well for the M6, but not the M2.
They are significantly different.

 

[BillBingham2]

Zooming with your feet works provided you are not too far off where you want to be. Getting a 28 to a 50 is almost impossible without getting some special perspective issues (e.g. heads into footballs).

While it's hard, I would suggest waiting the week and a half or so till you can look through each viewfinder. You're locked on the 75, a great lens. So the question is how wide can/do you go. We know you're not happy with 28, so for now we will skip everything wider. I think a 50 is too close to the 75, so that leaves us with the 35 or 40 question.

Roland brings up an interesting point. On my old M6 the 35 frame lines were great for the 40 and the 90 were full frame (Nikon Fish) on the 105. Can anyone out there comment on the 40mm frame lines on the R3A (or M) and coverage vs a 35mm lens?

I love the 1:1 finder on my Nikon rangefinder, so I would nudge you towards the R3X (A or M) but that is me. Would the camera store let you run a roll of film through the R3X to test the 40mm frame lines to see how accurate they are with both a 35 and a 40 mm lens? While the price of the old 35/2.5 can not be beat, I would hold out for the 1.4 if you can swing the bucks. My gut tells me it's going to rock. Also, fast glass is very handy some times.

Let us know what you think.

B2 (;->

 

[ferider]

I did test this once, B^2, and - if I remember right - found the 35mm framelines on the R2* to be even more conservative than on the M6 (in other words matching 40mm even better), and the 40mm framelines on the R3* close to the 50mm framelines on M2 and M3.

Best,

Roland.

 

[lawnpotter]

Thanks Bill

Thanks Bill

The shop will phone me when the r3a comes in. I am interested in the 40mm and the r3a finder may be intersting, but I really liked the r2a with tha small 35mm pancake lens, it fit nicely in my jacket pocket, the 40mm was a bit bigger but still doable(barely) Too many decisions, I might just have the salesman hold both cameras in each hand behind his back and I will just choose one with my eyes closed. Bye the way, I like the 28mm FL, but not as my primary lens.

 

[Trius]

Let me get this straight ... you are coming to RFF, a major source of greenhouse, er camera GAS and asking for advice on choosing between lenses? Clearly, you need them all.