Best lense to start out with

M

madtomo

Newbie
Local time
7:39 AM
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Messages
5
Hey guys, I'm looking to purchase a Epson R-D1 soon and need your input. Im new to rangefinders and don't own any lenses for it. What would you reommend starting out with? 35mm? 50mm? Any input would be helpful.

Also, was thinking of purchasing this combo from the matsuiya store

http://cgi.ebay.com/EPSON-R-D1S-wit...ryZ30020QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Is the Zeiss T*2/35mm lense a good one to start with? Or is a leica lense better?

Again, any input would be greatly appreciated.
 
madtomo said:
Hey guys, I'm looking to purchase a Epson R-D1 soon and need your input. Im new to rangefinders and don't own any lenses for it. What would you reommend starting out with? 35mm? 50mm? Any input would be helpful.

Also, was thinking of purchasing this combo from the matsuiya store

http://cgi.ebay.com/EPSON-R-D1S-wit...ryZ30020QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Is the Zeiss T*2/35mm lense a good one to start with? Or is a leica lense better?

Again, any input would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...
Hi,
I have this combo (plus the Planar 2/50 ZM), both are great lenses at "leica-level"
Regards
 
Last edited:
madtomo said:
Hey guys, I'm looking to purchase a Epson R-D1 soon and need your input. Im new to rangefinders and don't own any lenses for it. What would you reommend starting out with? 35mm? 50mm? Any input would be helpful.

Also, was thinking of purchasing this combo from the matsuiya store

http://cgi.ebay.com/EPSON-R-D1S-wit...ryZ30020QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Is the Zeiss T*2/35mm lense a good one to start with? Or is a leica lense better?

Again, any input would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I bought the same combo from him. After a few days I found that a 40mm would be more accurate with the 35 framelines...and it is......besides, a 40mm is far cheaper than that Biogon....I have a Nokton I got from a member here....Noriyaki has the Nokton's too, maybe you should ask him about that....don
 
If it were me, I'd start out with a 28mm for that camera since the crop factor makes it a 43mm. Just my taste, though.
There was a test posted on RFF a year or two ago with the RD-1 and CV 28mm F/1.9 that sounded very very encouraging.
 
I have had an R-D1 for about six months, and have been slowly accruing a collection of lenses from scratch -- much like yourself -- a mix of new CV lenses (I started with a 28 f/1.9 and a 40 S.C. f/1.4) and have added a used 50 Summicron and a 90 f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

I played with a friends 35 Summicron ASPH and am now of the opinion that I should have used all the money I spent on lenses and have only bought the 35 Cron -- I think it is just that good. I would also consider a 75 of some sort leaving room at the wide end for a 21/24.

Sure it cost more than the R-D1, but it will last forever and probably keep the majority of it's value. Others here will be more knowledgable about a more affordable, suitable, earlier-vintage Cron for less money -- I hope they chime in :)

Good luck with your R-D1 -- you will most likely not put it down ever again...

* I don't mean to disparage any of the lenses I mentioned -- I have not sold them off and they are surely not "holding me back" in any way -- I have a long way to go before I reach the limit of any of my glass -- that said, there really is a marked difference between what I use daily and that ASPH Cron. It was really sweet...

Sasha
 
Edward Felcher said:
First of all, there is no such word as "lense".
Click to expand...

Welcome to class Madtomo ... and where's your note for being late? :p
 
It depends entirely on what focal length you are happiest with, a decision only you can make for yourself. I nearly always use a 35mm lens on mine, it gives me a close to 50mm FOV, which is always my first preference. But you may feel differently.

Ian
 
Sorry, but I find the widespread use of the word "lense" to be extremely annoying.

Second only to "labtop".
 
Edward Felcher said:
First of all, there is no such word as "lense".
Click to expand...
may i suggest you have a look at dictionary.com

lense is an accepted spelling in some locations, as is tyre and aluminium :) personally, like you, i find it an extremely annoying spelling.

btw i highly recommend the nokton 40 and the 28 3.5 as great starter lenses.
 
I think the 50/1.5 Nokton is a natural for the R-D1, in every way, I use it most.
That said, I dream of acquiring a 35 mm leica asph almost daily.
I also found the 28/2.8 Elmarit to be amazing on the R-D1. Good luck to you.
 
"Lense" is an archaic spelling which is no longer correct in any language. It is NOT a UK variant spelling.

The plural "lenses" is correct.

Dictionary.com is wrong.
 
I'd like to suggest the summicron 40-c which perfectly fits the 35mm framelines. I have one. I sold my ZM 35/2 in favor of it.

It's a nice LENSE, or Lens. One of my favourites, the colour is loverly!
 
ALSO, my fav 50 on the R-D1 is the ZM 50/2 and the ZM 25/2.8 is STUNNING on the cam as well.

that said, My $75 Jupiter 3 is also a gem.
 
I really like the 40mm M-Rokkor lense on my RD1. Small size, fits the 35 frame line perfectly. The CV 40mm would be your best bet if you wanted something new.

take care,
michael
 
I guess, if I have been asked the question as I was at the head of this thread, I would recommend, as a first lens on a R-D1 or any other camera for that matter, the theoretical normal lens for the sensor/camera in question, which would be the focal length equal to the sensor's diagonal.

For the R-D1 that would be a 43mm lens in 35mm format. Its no mystery the 35mm lens was prefered on the Leica M film cameras as a normal lens, as 35mm was on the short side of 43mm from the 50mm Summicron, which by the way was in fact an actual 52mm focal length. With the "crop factor" of the R-D1, my definition of a normal lens for that camera would be a 28mm lens.

My preference is the Leica M 28. The high dollars would take a Summicron, the "buy" being the pre-ASPH Elmarit. The Zeiss 28mm, next, but the 25mm is the Zeiss sweet spot. Then, there is the CV 28s that gets high marks. Stay away from the Minolta 28, due to the white specks common to that lens.

The Leicas mentioned are at their best, just one stop down from wide open on the 28s, and are in fact wide open lenses.

You will take more pictures, close to the "normal" focal length, and less at the short and long extremes. Start with a 28...
 
Where's the sens in arguing over the spelling of that glass thingy that fits on the front of your camera ... we all know what he meant! :p :angel:
 
I started with the CV 35mm P II LENS and later added a Nokton 50mm. Don't know about the Biogon 35mm but had the 25mm Biogon, great optics. The price for that ebay combo is a little bit high ...
 
Edward Felcher said:
"Lense" is an archaic spelling which is no longer correct in any language. It is NOT a UK variant spelling.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right. The Oxford English Dictionary does not have it, even as an archaism, it's always been a mis-spelling in British English. No idea about the US.

Ian
 
Last edited:
i used to have the 35 lux asph latest version until a few weeks ago. great lens in many situations, except mine was prone to flare wide open, in low light with sources of bright light (eg from a lamp) in frame. Exactly the situation i wanted it for, and the flare made it hard to work with. With or without filters, btw. I had heard this a couple of times elsewhere (including Tom Abrahamsson's post elsewhere). My Zeiss N mount lenses don't flare, nor did my Zeiss G Mounts. I am now considering either the 28 Ultron or 35 Nokton for use in similar situations....and the Nokton's resistance to flaring (reportedly) appeals...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom