If you were to have only one Leica lens

[RMarques]

Actually, now I have only one, so this is my answer: 35mm f1.2 nokton!

Sold my 35mm color-skopar and 50mm nokton 1.5 to buy it 3 days ago.

it's huge, weights a ton and blocks part of my viewfinder,but the pictures it takes are amazing!!!

 

[besk]

50mm F/3.5 Elmar collapsible. With a table top tripod you can do almost anything with it. More likely to have it on my Leica IIIf anyway- in the camera bag or on my belt in a small pouch.

 

[jingles_97]

Toss up between a 35mm Lux pre-asph for its size and speed, and a 50mm Cron-DR for its versatility and sheer beauty.

 

[Ronald M]

Put me on the wait list for the new 50 ASPH. Is there a promised announcement date yet?

For now I will make due with the 50 1.4 `Lux.

 

[kossi008]

Too bad I already voted, I just had a thought:

If I was to own ONE Leica M lens, let it be the Nocitlux f/0.95.

Then I'd sell it and buy half the ZM line with the proceedings.

 

[_goodtimez]

Can't vote: its not in the list >>

SUPER ANGULON f 3.4

 

[danlindberg]

One lens only is a tough call. After a couple of sleepness nights I would probably go for a 50/1.4 Summilux. I do actually prefer the 35 as a walkaround lens but with 0.7m close focusing range means I would miss closer portraits....but as it is I have a 75 cron on order for those

 

[nobbylon]

I think now it would have to be the 35mm 'cron v4

 

[david.elliott]

Would be a 50/2.8 modern elmar. Still want to try one of those.

 

[sper]

Zeiss 35mm f2. Leica too expensive and not worth it.

 

[jmkelly]

Zeiss 35mm f2. Leica too expensive and not worth it.

Then why did you vote in this poll? I can't recall how I originally voted, but after much reflection I've decided that the one Leica lens that is definitely worth the money and doesn't have a competitor that performs anything like it is - the 75mm Summilux.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

For years I've sworn up and down that it is my DR Summicron.

Then I got a 35mm Summilux. After owning a bunch of 35mm lenses including Serenars, a Summaron, the f/2 Canon, CV Ultron f/1.7, Konica UC Hexanon.
After all is said and done, I love the 35 'Lux the most (pre-ASPH)

My shooting style has changed too and while I love both the 50mm and 35mm focal lengths, I'm leaning towards the 35 now.
Crazy times.

Phil Forrest

 

[semilog]

Zeiss 35mm f2. Leica too expensive and not worth it.

You've haven't shot much with the 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH, I gather.

I eventually sold mine (and currently shoot the Biogon-C 35/2.8), but the ASPH pretty much cured me of "too expensive and not worth it" disease.

Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Yes. And in the end, it was the cheapest lens I've ever owned, since I used it hard for 11 years and still sold it for more than I paid, even inflation-adjusted, and even though I bought it in mint condition and sold it exc. That's what I call value.

 

[35mmdelux]

Zeiss 35mm f2. Leica too expensive and not worth it.

I think the Leica is worth the price in the used market. Some of us value compactness and quality. I went further afield with the 35 Summilux.

 

[hexiplex]

Going back to basics for a few months with my M4-P and my six element Summicron 35 as soon as I get the lens back from CLA... I even had doubts about leaving it for service, I hope nothing happens to my baby.