Cost effective only lens for a Leica R8?

Ken Ford

Ken Ford

Refuses to suffer fools
Local time
7:15 PM
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
3,027
I just picked up and R8 which has been one of my bucket list cameras. It was an impulse purchase, but it was very reasonably priced.

I have no R mount glass at present. I’d prefer ROM, but I’m thinking a 3 cam 50 Cron is the way to go for a cost effective lens - but I’m definitely open to suggestions.

How awful is the 3 cam 35-70?
 
It's not awful, it's a good Minolta lens at its heart, but I'd rather shoot the Minolta version with an XD7 and save the money on both camera and lens.

A 3 cam Summicron R 50mm has to be the value in the prime lenses, and it is beautiful glass.
 
I don’t think there is any better value than the 50, but I really like my 35mm Summicron version 2, 3 cam. I would highly recommend it. If you don’t have any plans for the digital back and think an older R or Leicaflex may be a nice addition, then the 3 cams offer great versatility across the whole range.
 
Have a think about the the 60mm Elmarit 2.8. It is not that much bigger and is of course a macro lens too. Excellent results however you use it.

(None of the R lenses that I have used have been anything other than excellent)
 
Ken Ford said:
I just picked up and R8 which has been one of my bucket list cameras. It was an impulse purchase, but it was very reasonably priced.

I have no R mount glass at present. I’d prefer ROM, but I’m thinking a 3 cam 50 Cron is the way to go for a cost effective lens - but I’m definitely open to suggestions.

How awful is the 3 cam 35-70?
Click to expand...

I have owned everything mentioned so far. Don’t bother with the 35-70 f/3.5. The 35-70 f/4, on the other hand is superb, and a bargain at the going prices. At 35mm it is better than the 35 Cron-R, according to Puts, and I’d agree.
Others here obviously like the 35 Summicron more than I did. It’s a rendering preference. The late 35 Summilux-R is fantastic, but hardly cost effective.
For a 35 in R mount, I preferred the late, last version 35 Elmarit-R to the Cron, excellent tonality for monochrome, to my taste, and I preferred the backgrounds as well.
Bang for buck, I would think the 50 Summicron-R is easily the best bet going, either 3 cam or ROM, just due to the numbers produced.
Do some research on exactly how much the ROM adds in terms of function on an R8. It isn’t much, but they will cost more. Later might mean newer and better condition though.

Your best source of information for deciding on R lenses is the dedicated R lens thread in the “Alternative” forum over at Fred Miranda. R lenses can start out as a bargain hobby with a 3 cam 50 Summicron, but watch out. It can get expensive.
 
Great information, all!

Years ago when I first thought about getting an R it was with the thought of using one with a 135 or a 180 to complement my M. I ended up doing that with OM gear instead, and I think I’d do better with a 35 or a 50 on the R8, or maybe the 35-70/4.

Time to start looking!

Edit - after looking at the prices for the 35-70/4, I think this will need to be a basic 50. Eeeek!
 
I have two Leica reflex cameras, a Leicaflex SL and an R6.2. I had an R8 in the past. Any three-cam R lens will work fine on the R8 ... I never saw much benefit in the ROM versions, albeit that they were all the latest and last versions and are often not only in the best shape but have the very latest optical designs. They're also a lot pricier than the pre-ROM lenses.

My pick for a "one and only one lens" would have to be the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8. I love this lens for general, all around shooting as much as for macrophotography and close up work.

But of course, the most versatile all purpose single lens tends to be a normal lens and there's no way to go wrong with either a Summicron-R 50 or a Summilux-R 50. I have both: they're quite different in character, but both are excellent. The 'Cron is lighter, a bit sharper/flatter field (particularly close up), and a little handier, the 'Lux is that one stop faster and has the most delicious rendering quality from wide open to three stops down.

My choice in a wider angle view is the Summicron-R 35mm f/2. Just a great all around lens.

And for a slightly longer lens, my early Summicron-R 90mm f/2 and the even more special Summilux-R 80mm f/1.4 cannot be beat.

Personally, I don't like zooms much; I've never owned or used any R zoom lenses.

enjoy
G
 
Congrats on the R8! I have one and the R9. Pretty much the same thing.
re. lenses there is a lot of noise out there saying to skip the 35-70 3.5. It is the same optical formula as the Minolta 35-70 3.5. I use that lens on my XK and it is freakin fantastic on film. No idea on digital but who cares, you are using this on the R8.
I also have the Leica 35-70 f4 ROM, and have not noticed any difference, but I haven't looked because I don't care as they both give great images.

As for ROM - it's only used I think for the super sophisticated flash modes. Or if you ever use the digital module back. Most of my lenses for my R cameras are 3cams, and I see no issues in performance or usage. So getting a 3 cam is perfect. As well as cheaper.

I use a 3cam Summicron 50 f2 on the R8. And it is poi-fect. Get the one with the built in lens hood.
 
In the R line the 50's are good and the 90's are superb. I don't care for the later lenses in either focal length, they can give a harsher look compared to the preceding versions.

Try shooting a Summicron R 90 2? It should balance perfectly on your R8. Mine was just the right degree of soft wide open w/ beautiful bokeh. By 5.6 it was as sharp as an Elmarit w/ a classic Leica signature.
 
Dralowid said:
Have a think about the the 60mm Elmarit 2.8. It is not that much bigger and is of course a macro lens too. Excellent results however you use it.

(None of the R lenses that I have used have been anything other than excellent)
Click to expand...

Agreed, the 60/2.8, although slow, is one of the best R lenses!
 
Steve M. said:
In the R line the 50's are good and the 90's are superb. I don't care for the later lenses in either focal length, they can give a harsher look compared to the preceding versions.

Try shooting a Summicron R 90 2? It should balance perfectly on your R8. Mine was just the right degree of soft wide open w/ beautiful bokeh. By 5.6 it was as sharp as an Elmarit w/ a classic Leica signature.
Click to expand...

A 3 cam 90 Summicron-R would be my choice for the most cost effective 2 lens setup for an R body, if the first lens was the 50. Color signature and rendering style on these two is very similar, and what most people associate with the Mandler look.
The 60 Elmarit-R Macro, mentioned here, while a very capable lens in its own right, and something of a bargain in Leica land, has a very different rendering style. Don’t assume it’s like a 50 Cron with a narrower FOV and macro capability, because it’s not. It’s sharp and less “characterful” than the aforementioned 50 and 90. Which many like. I had the 60 Elmarit along with the 1:1 extension simultaneously with the 1:1 version of the C/Y 60 Makro Planar, and a Zeiss ZF.2 50 Makro Planar. The Contax and the Zeiss were both sharper than the 60 Elmarit and with less busy backgrounds. The Zeiss was easily the nicest of all, both in sharpness, pop, and (eek) bokeh. Sold the Elmarit.
Sorry for the digression. My main point is that it is advisable to look at a lot of results from the lenses you are considering, and pick one that suits your style, because they all have signatures.
 
Huss said:
re. lenses there is a lot of noise out there saying to skip the 35-70 3.5. <snip>....
I also have the Leica 35-70 f4 ROM, and have not noticed any difference, ...
.
Click to expand...

I thought those two were like chalk and cheese, but maybe my 3.5 was the proverbial bad copy.

But for a one lens setup, cost effective, I’d still go with a 3 cam 50 Summicron anyway.

Signed,

The Noise
 
Larry Cloetta said:
A 3 cam 90 Summicron-R would be my choice for the most cost effective 2 lens setup for an R body, if the first lens was the 50. Color signature and rendering style on these two is very similar, and what most people associate with the Mandler look.
The 60 Elmarit-R Macro, mentioned here, while a very capable lens in its own right, and something of a bargain in Leica land, has a very different rendering style. Don’t assume it’s like a 50 Cron with a narrower FOV and macro capability, because it’s not. It’s sharp and less “characterful” than the aforementioned 50 and 90. Which many like. I had the 60 Elmarit along with the 1:1 extension simultaneously with the 1:1 version of the C/Y 60 Makro Planar, and a Zeiss ZF.2 50 Makro Planar. The Contax and the Zeiss were both sharper than the 60 Elmarit and with less busy backgrounds. The Zeiss was easily the nicest of all, both in sharpness, pop, and (eek) bokeh. Sold the Elmarit.
Sorry for the digression. My main point is that it is advisable to look at a lot of results from the lenses you are considering, and pick one that suits your style, because they all have signatures.
Click to expand...

Heresy alert

I preferred the R8 over any M I shot. Fantastic handling and tough as nails
 
Larry Cloetta said:
I thought those two were like chalk and cheese, but maybe my 3.5 was the proverbial bad copy.

But for a one lens setup, cost effective, I’d still go with a 3 cam 50 Summicron anyway.

Signed,

The Noise
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the ROM isn't better, it's just I've never been anything but delighted by the Minolta 35-70 3.5.

Anyway, my 'mint condition Ex++++' (if I describe the way Japanese ebay sellers would) R8 w/ suitable 'Cron

 
Ken Ford said:
How awful is the 3 cam 35-70?
Click to expand...

Ken, there are three 35-70mm R lenses. There is a Vario-Elmar-R f/3.5; a Vario-Elmar-R f/4; and a Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH f/2.8. Are you interested in a particular one? I have all the Erwin Puts write-ups and I could look it up for you.
 
Rob-F said:
Ken, there are three 35-70mm R lenses. There is a Vario-Elmar-R f/3.5; a Vario-Elmar-R f/4; and a Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH f/2.8. Are you interested in a particular one? I have all the Erwin Puts write-ups and I could look it up for you.
Click to expand...

aka 'cheapish', 'a bit pricey' and 'spit-take'
 
emraphoto said:
Heresy alert

I preferred the R8 over any M I shot. Fantastic handling and tough as nails
Click to expand...

Sadly, until it will invariably fail and remaining parts were sold off to Boris Jamchtchik at Photo Arsenal, now based in Hong Kong. What he plans to do with them remains a mystery.

The R8 was over-engineered along with the R9 making their complexity, and repair, its downfall.

Best R prime lenses?

16 FE, 19 Elmarit v.2, 28 Elmarit v.2, 35 Summilux, 50 Summilux E60, 60 Elmarit, 80 Summilux, 90 AA, 100 Makro AA, 180 Telyt APO, 180 Elmarit APO, 280 Telyt APO. The finest and/or last iterations of the species. Don't scrimp on glass. Some dross in between. Choose a pair that fit your needs and they will not disappoint. These lenses will serve you well if you decide on, say, a Sony FF mirrorless or Leica SL in the future. Their resolving power remains relevant 20-40 years after their introduction.

(absolutely) Astounding, really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom