Getting Started: Lens cost?

[wakarimasen]

Is that with any glass? In the UK you can pick up a mint boxed M6TTL and 50mm summicron for £950 = $1333, or mint body for £700 ish.

If I were you, I would get a 35mm CV and 50mm summicron, then shop around to get a good second hand deal on an M6 / M4p / Bessa. If you buy wisely, then depreciation isnt really a factor. I made the mistake of buying the 50mm, with a promise to get the 35mm when funds allowed.. As it is, im still without that 35mm. Make sure you budget for it initially, even if that means spending less on the body. If you like shooting with a rangefinder, you will be able to trade your film body for an M8 later with no financial loss I should imagine.

Out of interest, where does that price of £950 come from?

Best regards,
RoyM

 

[Ben Z]

A film Leica will give you a feel for the ergonomics of the camera, but it won't really tell you if you like the M8's output. Now that a used M8 is in the same ballpark as a used M7 or MP, if it were me, I'd just get one and try it out. A used one probably won't lose much if anything in a couple months of use unless you bang it up, so worst-case if you don't like it you ebay it off.

As to lenses, what's already been said: Voitlanders, Zeisses, and older used Leica/Leitzes. I have none of the latest generation Leica lenses, although I have had several ASPH's in the past, I sold them. Sure you can pick out their "superiority" in controlled comparison tests, but that's not what I'm into. In practical use, the differences rarely present themselves in such a way as to make a great shot mediocre...although differences in technique do that all the time 😉 The only bugaboo with those older and 3rd-party lenses is that, 35mm and wider, you need to code them unless you want to add a step to postprocessing and use Panotools or Cornerfix to get rid of the green corner cast caused by the [obligatory] IR-cut filters. Coding wasn't a problem for me, because I have the tools and skills to do it permanently, but there are other sources of getting it done professionally too. I'd probably use the sharpie marker method until I was sure I was keeping the camera and the lens.

 

[_goodtimez]

Hi John,

There is an excellent lens from Voigtlander in the form of the Color Skopar 28 f3.5. No longer produced though but very sharp even at full aperture. Secondly it is one of the smallest lenses available. That has a clear advantage for travelling and also it clears 100 % of the viwefinder frame.
If you are coming from a D40 and switch to an M8 no problem. I was harder and still is for me with the M8 because I have used film Ms for decades. I am still not totally relax with this camera. I prefer to shoot with the old ones.

 

[peterm1]

If you do not wish to break the bank there are any number of excellent Leitz lenses of 20 years old or more that produce wonderful results and while they may not be "had for a song" they are much cheaper than their new equivalents. (Well relatively so - Leitz glass tends to hold its value better than most other lenses.) Any of the 35 and 50 summicrons of the 1970s and beyond are great. And the he Elmarit and TeleEmlarit 90s and the Elmarit 135mm all give fine performances too. If you go older to the lenses of the 1950s-60s you will also find the lenses are excellent in the main even then. Sharp but not maybe up to the latest aspherical lenses and a bit lower contrast they have a character all of their own. You can even go into the screw mount era by using an adapter. Then you will also find other lenses that give fine results too. The Canon lenses of this era are notable - in many cases up there or exceeding the Leica equivalents and with the exception of a few rarities quite inexpensive.

Personally I would keep both cameras. Rangefinders are excellent but I think SLRs have taken over for a reason. The rangefinders are limited to lenses up to 135mm in focal length and if you want the convenience of a zoom, you are very limited to some extremely expensive glass. Each camera has their place.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger,

I have both a 35 Summicron V4 and the CV 35/2.5. I often get sharper shots with the CV BUT I love the color and rendition of the classic 35 cron. The CV is my rain/salt spray lens.

I'm basing the nearly from postings, emails and articles from Sean Reed who has tested one against the other. My nearly is 90 - 95% and based on my experience with the CV and his tests. Of course we're talking optical. Construction wise, there is no contest. Leica wins.

Of course, there is always sample variation with CV lenses. One copy might be great while another was put together on a hungover Monday morning.

Tom

Dear Tom,

Sure, and I didn't mean to demean your opinion. So much depends on what you shoot, what you care about, etc. And your point about build quality and sample variation is fully taken, though I have the cynical suspicion that the lenses I get (for review) may have been pre-checked, at least casually (this applies to any manufacturer).

Yes, I'd agree that 90-95% of the time, the CV is as good. But those remaining shots.... For me, it's worth the extra, when I can afford it. When I can't, I'll blame my own lack of ability, not any manufacturer's inferior quality. We are certainly into diminishing returns here.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Tom Niblick]

Dear Tom,

Sure, and I didn't mean to demean your opinion. So much depends on what you shoot, what you care about, etc. And your point about build quality and sample variation is fully taken, though I have the cynical suspicion that the lenses I get (for review) may have been pre-checked, at least casually (this applies to any manufacturer).

Yes, I'd agree that 90-95% of the time, the CV is as good. But those remaining shots.... For me, it's worth the extra, when I can afford it. When I can't, I'll blame my own lack of ability, not any manufacturer's inferior quality. We are certainly into diminishing returns here.

Cheers,

R.

No problem here. Leicas are a passion and in times like these it is often hard to justify the expense. Still, I'll find a way to add another Leica lens or two this year. And, if and when the full frame M9 comes out, I'll get one as well.
I've been shooting with Leicas since 1970 and they were always a stretch financially. But when you consider that I still shoot with my original M4 and 50 Summicron, the cost per image is minimal.
As for my LLAS (Leica lens acquisition syndrome), I'm currently trying to decide between the fourth version 28 Elmarit because it matches the color and sharpness of my 35/2 IV and my 90/2.8 M or to go with the slightly crunchier 28 ASPH - talk about ever so slight difference. On one hand matching my current lens set has its advantages. On the other hand, since I can previsualize the type of photos the newer lens will produce, I can use it to create a new body of work. Because, after figuring in the coding cost, the price difference is so small that it becomes a hair splitting choice.
This is also the reason why I don't have a problem recommending the less expensive CV lenses. They are great values. If you buy and use one for a year or so until you figure out the "perfect lens" or "perfect lens set", then you're only out a few hundred bucks. In the mean time, you're learning the rangefinder and probably learning to shoot better images than you were getting from your autozoomnonvibratingbutshakingsensor wonder.

Cheers

Tom

www.kauaisprintmaker.com

 

[Roger Hicks]

...This is also the reason why I don't have a problem recommending the less expensive CV lenses. They are great values. If you buy and use one for a year or so until you figure out the "perfect lens" or "perfect lens set", then you're only out a few hundred bucks...

Dear Tom,

Couldn't agree more! And your point about cost per exposure is absolutely unanswerable.

Cheers,

R.

 

[gfspencer]

I am considering getting a M8 used or otherwise but still doing some research. I presently shoot with a Canon 40D and have a decent lens investment. What price range can I expect to see for M8 rangefinder lens? For starters, I'd like something in the 24mm - 50mm range. Are there good non-Leica brands available?

A Leica lens can cost you about the same to more than a Canon "L" zoom. It depends on which grade of Leica lens that you buy. ($1,000 to $15,000) (The $15,000 lens is the Leica 50mm f/1.0 Special Edition Noctilux M Manual Focus Lens. It's just a little out of my price range. 🙄)

While i have you, did you totally convert from a DSLR to a rangefinder or keep both?

I have a 50D and three "L" zooms. I plan to keep everything.

 

[jpmac55]

Now that I added the $15,000 Leica lens to my must have list, where is a good source for a CV lens?

 

[Al Kaplan]

Try Cameraquest.com Great prices and fantastic service.

 

[Jim Evidon]

Never, but never part with your excellent SLR. There are different cameras for different situations. Even after I bought my M8, I upgraded my DSLR to a Nikon D300.

The M8 or my M4P for that matter, can't be beat as a walk-around camera when traveling. They are small, light and discreet. The DSLR gets a lot of use as well for my more adventurous photography such as macro, or HDR and the like. But it is so very heavy for walking around! So, by all means, keep the DSLR.

As for lenses, you can't beat several of the Cosina Voigtlander lenses for price v. performance. If you haven't shot with a rangefinder camera before, buy a CV 35mm lens such as the Skopar (very inexpensive) or the f1.8 or f2.0 35mm CV Ultron. If you decide you like the experience, then there are all sorts of good lenses you can buy by Leica, Zeiss or CV. Some of the older Leica or Leitz lenses such as the Summicrons can be had at a reasonable price in the used market.

My favorite is the CV 35mm f1.2 Nokton, and as heavy as it is, it's hard to beat.

I also suggest that you subscribe to Reid Reviews http://www.reidreviews.com, and read and research to your hearts content. That is what I did, and i never regretted any of my purchases. It's a really good source and it saved me from some potentially expensive mistakes.

Happy shooting.

 

[ben@btwhite.org]

Does your workflow include a scanner?

Yes, I have a Nikon V-ED dedicated film scanner. I used to use an Epson multipurpose scanner which gave supprizingly good results, but the dedicated scanner does a better job. I develop my own B&W, but don't do any printing except digital

I am always drawn to the simplicity and feel of rangefinder images, especially black & white results. I never mastered Photoshop and seldom like the long term results once I get by the wow factor. I invested in Aperture and a plug in or two, that's it.

I feel the exact same way, and that is what brought me to the rangefinder world. I am fairly facile with Photoshop, but I prefer doing as little to the photos as possible. I use Lightroom for contrast adjustment, cropping, color balance. I still use Photoshop occasionally, but only occasionally.

Cheers,

Ben

 

[jpmac55]

Thanks, folks - I truly appreciated everyones comments and suggestions. With a recently purchased M8 from a fellow member, I am on my way to rangefinder bliss.

 

[kyzer]

i envy you John.. Good luck do share some photographs out of M8..Cheers

And all those answered to John's query .. have really helped this novice .. to the unknown land of RangeFinders...thanks once again...