gustav[] pEña
gustav[] pEña
I just recently got my firs leica analog leica camera (i also own de D2) whit the 28 2.8 made in canada. I found this lens appearing to much in my 28 frameline and do not like it. When Im taking pictures I found my self trying to compansate in the composition for the black (lens) I have in the down right corner. I also notice Im havin composition probles in thits corner at the end.
So Im planing to buy another lenses and since I live in mexico and do not know any leica shop here, I got to other the lenses by internet so I can not try them. can you guys tell me which of the folowing lenses Im interest are not seem in their respective frame line?
CV 12 and 15 mm (of course whit the 12 and 15 extra finder)
ELMARIT-M f/2.8/28 mm
SUMMILUX-M ASPH. f/1.4/35 mm
SUMMICRON-M ASPH. f/2/35 mm
SUMMILUX-M ASPH. f/1.4/50 mm
SUMMICRON-M f/2/50 mm
LEICA APO-SUMMICRON-M f/2.0/75 mm
CV f/2.5/75
90 MACRO F4
As always thanksfull
gustav[] pEña
So Im planing to buy another lenses and since I live in mexico and do not know any leica shop here, I got to other the lenses by internet so I can not try them. can you guys tell me which of the folowing lenses Im interest are not seem in their respective frame line?
CV 12 and 15 mm (of course whit the 12 and 15 extra finder)
ELMARIT-M f/2.8/28 mm
SUMMILUX-M ASPH. f/1.4/35 mm
SUMMICRON-M ASPH. f/2/35 mm
SUMMILUX-M ASPH. f/1.4/50 mm
SUMMICRON-M f/2/50 mm
LEICA APO-SUMMICRON-M f/2.0/75 mm
CV f/2.5/75
90 MACRO F4
As always thanksfull
gustav[] pEña
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
You forgot one great multi-purpose lens: the Tri-Elmar.
BTW, On a rangefinder like the Leica M one will nearly always see the lens in the lower riight hand corner, that is why Leica perforates some lens hoods to make them less obtrusive. You soon get used to that and find you are not even noticing the black spot any more. On the upside: the rangefinder will always show you the surrounding area. You'll learn to disregard that for composition purposes as well.
It is totally different from a SLR or a D2 for that matter. It is a learning curve.
BTW, On a rangefinder like the Leica M one will nearly always see the lens in the lower riight hand corner, that is why Leica perforates some lens hoods to make them less obtrusive. You soon get used to that and find you are not even noticing the black spot any more. On the upside: the rangefinder will always show you the surrounding area. You'll learn to disregard that for composition purposes as well.
It is totally different from a SLR or a D2 for that matter. It is a learning curve.
Last edited:
mtokue
Well-known
Hi,
The SUMMICRON-M ASPH. f/2/35 mm does not appear in the viewfinder frame and is a great Lens,Unfortunately I Just sold mine!
I bought the Summilux 35mm ASPH and the hood does appear in the Viewfinder frame.
Both the Summicron and Summilux Pre ASPH do appear in the viewfinder but as these use Vented hoods so it is not so bad.
Mike
The SUMMICRON-M ASPH. f/2/35 mm does not appear in the viewfinder frame and is a great Lens,Unfortunately I Just sold mine!
I bought the Summilux 35mm ASPH and the hood does appear in the Viewfinder frame.
Both the Summicron and Summilux Pre ASPH do appear in the viewfinder but as these use Vented hoods so it is not so bad.
Mike
peter_n
Veteran
As a previous poster stated, you are invariably going to see some portion of a lens in the viewfinder, whether they encroach inside the frameline or not.
I would also encourage you to consider Voigtlander wide-angle lenses like their new f2.5/35mm and f1.4/40mm. Both are very small and excellent quality.
I would also encourage you to consider Voigtlander wide-angle lenses like their new f2.5/35mm and f1.4/40mm. Both are very small and excellent quality.
gustav[] pEña
gustav[] pEña
Ok, but Mike said that the The SUMMICRON-M ASPH. f/2/35 mm does not appear in the viewfinder frame and the Summilux 35mm ASPH neither whitout the Hood.
I dont use Hoods/shades becouse they make my camera look bigger and I want to be as invisible as posible and I also dont want to get the attention of thiefs. Im a street photographer.
So if the 35 1.4 does not encroach the frame I would guess the 50f2 neither but I rather buy the 50 1.4 but not know if I going to see it in the frame.
I guess I can live whit it but if I have the choice to shoose the ones that do no encroach the frame I will. And thats why I need you boys to help me.
Now the 35 sumilux is in my shopping list whitout hood.
cheers!
gustav[] pEña
I dont use Hoods/shades becouse they make my camera look bigger and I want to be as invisible as posible and I also dont want to get the attention of thiefs. Im a street photographer.
So if the 35 1.4 does not encroach the frame I would guess the 50f2 neither but I rather buy the 50 1.4 but not know if I going to see it in the frame.
I guess I can live whit it but if I have the choice to shoose the ones that do no encroach the frame I will. And thats why I need you boys to help me.
Now the 35 sumilux is in my shopping list whitout hood.
cheers!
gustav[] pEña
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Do you mean you don't want to see the lens inside the framelines or don't you want it to be seen it in the viewfinder at all? Most lenses clear the framelines more or less without the hood or even -as with the Summilux 50 which has a small pull-out hood or the Tri-Elmar first version which is conceived without an external hood,- with their hoods on. Most modern M lenses of or over 50 mm have non-removable pull-out hoods anyway.
The smaller 35 mm lenses as a group are the least obtrusive for taking candid photo's and for encroaching in your viewfinder.
The smaller 35 mm lenses as a group are the least obtrusive for taking candid photo's and for encroaching in your viewfinder.
Last edited:
laptoprob
back to basics
What is more important: What you see in the viewfinder or what you know the camera is 'seeing' through the lens?
How about character of a lens? At least to me that is more important...
Remember that without hoods you are more vonerable to flare.
make a wise choice...
Rob.
How about character of a lens? At least to me that is more important...
Remember that without hoods you are more vonerable to flare.
make a wise choice...
Rob.
gustav[] pEña
gustav[] pEña
Jaapv, Im talking about the Framelines I dont care about Viewfinder. I just want to see my Frameline clear.
And Laptoprop, you are right, is more importan what you know the camera is seeing. Actualy I do lot of blind photographs whit my leica and my Rollei 35 SE. But sometimes I do want to compose. I really dont care that much but, as I said before, if I can shoose the ones that do no encroach the frame I will. Also we are talking about currently leica lens so I guess we are talking about "the character of a lens" anyway.
Thanks for your opinions.
I still would like to know about the lenses you are using with and without shades so I can buy what Im lookin for through the internet. Im still kind of confuse. I just know for sure about the 35 f2 and the 35 f1.4
I asume the tri-elmar will encroach my frame at least in the 28 frameline but now Im confuse since I read What Jaapv said. Can you inform me again please.
Cheers
gustav[] pEña
And Laptoprop, you are right, is more importan what you know the camera is seeing. Actualy I do lot of blind photographs whit my leica and my Rollei 35 SE. But sometimes I do want to compose. I really dont care that much but, as I said before, if I can shoose the ones that do no encroach the frame I will. Also we are talking about currently leica lens so I guess we are talking about "the character of a lens" anyway.
Thanks for your opinions.
I still would like to know about the lenses you are using with and without shades so I can buy what Im lookin for through the internet. Im still kind of confuse. I just know for sure about the 35 f2 and the 35 f1.4
I asume the tri-elmar will encroach my frame at least in the 28 frameline but now Im confuse since I read What Jaapv said. Can you inform me again please.
Cheers
gustav[] pEña
Last edited:
I think you'll be wise "get used to it" or "get rid of it"... It is just an inevitable part of the rangefinder experience! That said, a slow lens, short and small in diameter, is less visible in the viewfinder. Voigtlander 28mm f/3.5 Skopar is an excellent example.
In aid of just getting used to it, a useful technique is to swing the camera to the lower right to see what is otherwise occluded by the lens barrel. Now having this in memory, return to your composition and shoot!
It is just an inevitable part of the rangefinder experience! That said, a slow lens, short and small in diameter, is less visible in the viewfinder. Voigtlander 28mm f/3.5 Skopar is an excellent example.In aid of just getting used to it, a useful technique is to swing the camera to the lower right to see what is otherwise occluded by the lens barrel. Now having this in memory, return to your composition and shoot!
aizan
Veteran
your eyes have an unobstructed view, so assuming you don't have the camera to your eye all the time, it shouldn't be a problem!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Yes, the Tri-Elmar does block off a segment in the 28 frame, however, this is the first time I ever heard of anybody having a problem with that.
If you don't mind my asking, what were your reasons for buying a M camera in
the first place? It might be that the advantages still outweigh the
problem you have with the framelines. In fact, I'm nearly sure that
in time that will be the case. and if not, well, there are plenty of other great
cameras out there....Not Leica M, I give you that.
If you don't mind my asking, what were your reasons for buying a M camera in
the first place? It might be that the advantages still outweigh the
problem you have with the framelines. In fact, I'm nearly sure that
in time that will be the case. and if not, well, there are plenty of other great
cameras out there....Not Leica M, I give you that.
gustav[] pEña
gustav[] pEña
Well, Jaapv, I onw a canonet nice and beutiful camera. The lens do not get into the frameline. I like it couse is light, do not call the atention of thieft, not reflex mirror moving in slow speeds, and all those advantage we alredy know over the reflex cameras. As I said I also used a beutiful ROLLEI SE and a DIGILUX so I drop my profesional camera (Canon N1 new) for the leica and I happy whit it.
The Only think I didn't like about my M was the lens interfering in my frame. I thought it was couse it was an old lens and the new ones could be smallers (mine use 49 filters and I read the new one is 46). I thought that the 28 is more complex than the 35, 50 and I wanted to ask you about what 35, 50 and other lenses do not block a segment of the framelines. I thought maybe (couse I dont know in personal leica lens, just mine) maybe half of the leica lenses block the frame and maybe the other half dont. Ok, now you guys tell me all the lenses block the frames (I just have been told about the leica 35 not bloking the frame and some CV) I accep it, I didnt know, I wont change my camera, I love it a lot.
THanks all of you for your help!
gustav[] pEña
The Only think I didn't like about my M was the lens interfering in my frame. I thought it was couse it was an old lens and the new ones could be smallers (mine use 49 filters and I read the new one is 46). I thought that the 28 is more complex than the 35, 50 and I wanted to ask you about what 35, 50 and other lenses do not block a segment of the framelines. I thought maybe (couse I dont know in personal leica lens, just mine) maybe half of the leica lenses block the frame and maybe the other half dont. Ok, now you guys tell me all the lenses block the frames (I just have been told about the leica 35 not bloking the frame and some CV) I accep it, I didnt know, I wont change my camera, I love it a lot.
THanks all of you for your help!
gustav[] pEña
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Well, I've loved my Leica's for the last 30 years, so I can relate to that Good luck and have fun with it!