Lenses for Digital M?

[skimmel]

Under the assumption that the upcoming digital M will have a 1.3 (or so) crop factor, I'm trying to figure out what a good set of lenses would be for me. (No right answer here, of course, just hoping to brainstorm a bit and get some opinions.)

I currently have an M7 with just the 50mm 1.4 ASPH. Would like to have a wide angle and perhaps later a tele, but if I get a 35mm now (which is probably wide enough for me), it will be a 45mm on a digital M. My 50mm will be a 65mm.

I'd like to get a wide angle soon (before the M) but maybe I should get a 28mm instead of the 35. I could still use the 28mm now while waiting for the digital M. If the M never appears (or I can't afford it), I have the 28mm (although on a 0.72 finder, it's not ideal for me, especially wearing glasses).

I could just get a 35mm now and use it as my wide angle on the M7 and my normal lens on a digital M. Still leaves me without a wide angle on the digital M. Guess I could sell the 50mm to fund a 24 or 28mm when the digital M comes out (but that's a hard lens to part with!).

Anyway, just hoping to generate some ideas.

Note: I posted this in the leica-camera.com forum and got some good responses if you'd like to read those:
http://www.leica-camera.com/discus_e/messages/3/163902.html?1127285840

 

[jaapv]

As I stated somwhere else, the Tri-Elmar seems to be the ideal all-in-one lens.It might be worth your while to get a CV lens in the range you think you might like and try your hand at using it. You can always sell it off again at a far smaller financial risk and then get exactly the right Leica lens for your purposes. Or keep it and save some money, there is nothing wrong with CV quality!

 

[pvdhaar]

I wouldn't make my wide angle purchase decision on a camera that hasn't surfaced yet. The crop factor is speculative; may be 1.3 but may also be 1.6, who knows? The thing may not even materialize..

I'd look first and foremost to the kind of wide-angle you need now. Choose what's best for your current gear. Then if you in the future decide to buy a digital, look what it does on that digital. You may find that the cropping doesn't bother you as much.

I had the same dilemma for a DSLR (oh shame on me!). I was fretting over which wide angle to add to the 50mm I had for a film SLR in anticipation of a DSLR, figuring that I'd probably be best served with a 28. Finally I decided to first get the DSLR and later see what wide angle I'd need. This has been a wise decision. Now that I've seen how the 50 behaves with the 1.5 crop factor, I doubt that a 28 will be my final choice..

 

[StuartR]

The 35mm f/1.4 ASPH is the only lens that I have seen that comes close to your 50 asph, so you might want to check it out. If you can afford it, a 21 asph would probably round out the kit perfectly. But as others have said, I would'nt buy now before we really truly know what the camera is going to be. They did say it was going to be the same as the DMR (1.37) in a Leica World News about a year ago, but now rumor has it that it will be 1.3, not 1.37. So who knows? I would just wait if it is big deal. That said, you won't regret purchasing a 35/1.4 asph.

 

[jaapv]

Actually,Stuart, they did not say that straight out, they said it would be similar. 1.3 would be nice for mental focal lenghth equivalent calculations. 1.37 would be overstressing my mind.

 

[skimmel]

I think the idea of not trying to anticipate makes sense and just buy what I need (want) now for the M7. I don't have the money though to buy new lenses when the digital M comes out (especially after I find the money just to buy the body!). My hope is to be happy with what I have now for the digital. Ugh! It's really a tough situation.

With any camera I will want a fast "normal" (around 50mm) lens. That's why my only lens is the 50 1.4. I could by the 35 1.4 now and then I'm covered, but that's an expensive lens!

 

[sgy1962]

For what it's worth, the 28mm Summicron ASPH is generally considered an outstanding lens, and is generally considered a bit "better" in terms of resolution and contrast then either the 35mm Summicron ASPH or the 35mm Summilux ASPH, which themselves are both outstanding.

The 35mm focal length is a great "do it all" versatile lens. If I was going to only have one lens, then it would be this focal length, because of its versatility. But if you already have a 50mm lens, then I would go for a 28mm focal length, because the field of view of the 50 and 35 are so close. With the anticipated crop factor of the digital M, I expect the 28mm focal length to take the place in rangefinder use currently held by the 35mm lens.

The anticipated field of view of a 50mm and 28mm lens for a digital M will be something like having a 75mm lens and 35mm lens with a fil M, which is very versatile. Not exactly, but you get the idea.

Personally, I would just stick with film. There are really no bad choices.

By the way, I just got back my first roll of film from using the 50mm Summilux ASPH. Simply outstanding.

 

[StuartR]

sgy1962 -- where have you heard that the performance of the 28 summicron is considered better than the 35 summilux ASPH? I have not heard that, so I am curious as to where it is coming from.

 

[peter_n]

Stuart there have been a number of comments especially on the German Leica forum about the performance of the Leica 28 ASPH in comparison to other Leica wides.

I personally don't think the 35 and 50 are that close at all, but I do agree that the 28 and 50 make an excellent pair especially if you like to shoot street.

 

[StuartR]

Peter -- I will try to find them. I must admit that I am not a big fan of the 28mm focal length, so it probably has been that I just have not sought out the threads. I used to have a 28mm ultron but though a great lens, it just didn't do it for me. I agree however that if the DM has a smaller than 35mm sensor, then the 28 would become a very useful lens. As it stands now, I think that it is neither here nor there. I tend to prefer a 21/24, 35, 50 type progression.

 

[peter_n]

I think I've seen similar comments elsewhere Stuart, PN for example. The only even remotely critical thing I've heard about the f2.0 ASPH is a bit of light fall off wide-open. Apparently Leica built the f2.0 lens at the same size as the f2.8 version, pretty amazing really as its a full stop faster. I think Doug here has the f2.0 ASPH and the images from his look pretty good to me.

I really like the 28mm length, particularly close-up. I managed to get an M-Hexanon and feel very lucky. I don't like tabbed lenses so I can't use any Leica wides. 🙁

 

[aizan]

They did say it was going to be the same as the DMR (1.37) in a Leica World News about a year ago, but now rumor has it that it will be 1.3, not 1.37.

Is that a new rumor, or an old one that missed the news about them using the same sensor as the DMR, whose crop factor is 1.37x, not just 1.3?

 

[StuartR]

I think that is a new one Aizan -- the one that came out of a recent Leica fair and the distributor telling people that.

 

[jaapv]

Err.. they did not come straight out and say that, Aizan, they said it would use similar technology to the DMR so they left their options open. Well, we'll see the result when the thing is officially presented.

 

[aizan]

damn, i just re-read the lfi and leica world articles and they don't say anything about the crop factor at all. how the hell...

 

[sgy1962]

sgy1962 -- where have you heard that the performance of the 28 summicron is considered better than the 35 summilux ASPH? I have not heard that, so I am curious as to where it is coming from.

Just through the years from users who have both focal lengths of the most recent offereings. Mostly for those folks who had both the 35mm Summicron ASPH and the 28mm Summicron ASPH. And this would seem to be borne out if you compare the MTF (?) graphs on both lenses. And the Putts guy in his article on the 28mm Summicron ASPH says in effect it is a notch better then the 35mm Summicron ASPH. And over the years everyone says that the 35mm Summilux ASPH and the 35mm Summicron ASPH are just about the same. I believe the literature gives the nod to the Summicron. Anyway, if you combine all that stuff in my head, the result is you get what I said. No first hand knowledge; I'm just the happy owner of the 35mm Summicron ASPH.

All this discussion about lenses -- and I'm as guilty as anyone -- is a bit academic anyway.

I'm also a general believer that the later developed lenses are "better." For a couple of years I owned a 35 (summicron) -50 (summicron) -90 (teleelmarit) setup circa. late 80's. Although more practical then the current lineup, because they weighed less and were smaller, they clearly, from an optical perspective, were not as good. This was clearly also true for the 50mm Summicron which had the same optical formula as the current one. The coatings on the current model, which I owned for a couple of years before the tabbed version, must have something to do with it.

And although I'm a firm believer that lens quality has little to do with whether the pictures I take are good, one of the reasons I got into Leica was their reputation for great optics -- so why not go for the best, which means the current lineup.