My Next Leica Lens?

[Listak]

All,

Looking for the pro's to give me their opinions. I have a black MP with a 50mm 1.4 lux and looking for a wider angled lens. I was thinking a 35mm 1.4 Lux but wanted to see what everybody thought? Should I go wider? I'm a big travel photog and street level junkie. Is the 1.4 worth it? I know you Cron users have some good points. Just looking for some opinions.

 

[Maxapple88]

Why a Leica lens? Zeiss makes excellent wide angles. Many regard them to be better then Leica's.

 

[spysmart]

I no pro but the 28 'cron, 35 VC skopar-II and 50 'lux is my carry around set.
The VC is very small and discrete, while the 28 and 50 are used when speed is needed.

I used the 35 'lux as a only lens for a long time, but it's quite big with the hood and unpredictable shooting into the sun. Since switching to the fast 28/50 and 35 VC, the 35 'lux stays at home 95% of the time. However the 35 'lux remains unbeatable as the close quarters indoor lens.

 

[payasam]

If you aim to get only one wide angle lens, you might opt for a 28: a 35 is not so much wider than a 50. For most travel and street work, f/2 should be fast enough.

 

[ferider]

Try a CV 28/1.9. If you like it, upgrade to a Summicron. By then, you might even go for a 28/1.4, perhaps 🙂

 

[Steve Bellayr]

35mm f2 Summicron with ASA 400 is sufficient. If you go to 28mm Zeiss has a nice lens at f2.8 with a lower price. IMHO size and weight take precedence often times when considering shooting on the street or carrying the camera for extended periods of time.

 

[ampguy]

35/2 cron asph, even comes in a BP model. The luxes are all a compromise unless you're using only for f1.4.

 

[RichardB]

The 35mm Summilux ASPH is the best single useful lens for the M system. Clinically sharp wide open, you just can't get a better lens. The 28mm Summicron ASPH costs you an f stop at 2.0 and the 24mm and 21mm ASPH's need to have external finders. It's the lens I use most of the time.-Dick

 

[northpole]

I'd recommend a 35mm Chron (Chrome for the brass body) plus a 25mm Zeiss. These will give you great wide angle coverage and, in my opinion obviate the need for a 28mm. If you later decide 35mm is the one for you, you're unlikely to lose much on the Chron changing over to a 'Lux - assuming you decide you need the extra stop.

Peter

 

[northpole]

Oops - to finish - forgot to say, if the 25mm perspective really appeals, you could then consider switching to a 24mm Elmarit if you felt your prime lens has to be Leica.

Peter

 

[sepiareverb]

The 28 Summicron is fast becoming my favorite lens of all time. Fantastic quality even wide open- yes some vignetting, but it's an f2.0 wide angle. Top quality in every way. Beats the pants off the 35/2.0 ASPH.

 

[ampguy]

Really?

Really?

28/2 still has more distortion than the 35/2 ASPH according to Puts.

The 28 Summicron is fast becoming my favorite lens of all time. Fantastic quality even wide open- yes some vignetting, but it's an f2.0 wide angle. Top quality in every way. Beats the pants off the 35/2.0 ASPH.

 

[John Elder]

IMHO 28mm. 35mm, and 50 mm lens are totally different and used for different things. For myself, the most important focal length is 35mm. It was my first lens for an M body and used it exclusively for a couple years before a bought a second lens. I have lens from 21mm to 135 for the rangefinder, but my current street kit consists of 21mm , 35mm, and a 50mm all mounted on seperate bodies, all contained in a Domke 5hb bag. I can't imagine not having a 35mm lens.

 

[sepiareverb]

28/2 still has more distortion than the 35/2 ASPH according to Puts.

Well, here are some comparisons to show distortion:

28/2.0 ASPH @ 2.8

35/2.0 ASPH @ 2.8

Tripod mounted camera, scans from 810 silver prints.

There is certainly a bit more vingetting with the 28, but as for distortion, I see the 35 as worse. In use I don't notice the distortion from the 35, but at size (1620 prints) the 28 negs print better, with more visible detail. A much newer design than the 35.

 

[novum]

Well, here are some comparisons to show distortion:

[pics excised]

There is certainly a bit more vingetting with the 28, but as for distortion, I see the 35 as worse. In use I don't notice the distortion from the 35, but at size (1620 prints) the 28 negs print better, with more visible detail. A much newer design than the 35.

Whenever I see comparisons like this, I end up feeling like such a doofus. I am often "wrong" when forced to choose the better pic. I have a decent eye for apprehending what might translate into a decent picture, but these comparisons often leave me scratching my head.

 

[elude]

2/28 ASPH or 1,4/35 (ASPH) (Since you've suggested a Summilux I guess you're a lowlight/bokeh photographer, so wider is out of the question).

However I find 35 & 50 to have the same use, and I go with the 35 most of the time... You have all cards in hands! They're outstanding lenses.

 

[ampguy]

Sepiareverb,

My 35/2 cron asph does not have that pincusion distortion at any aperture I've used. Have shot brick walls very much, even in the last month or so. Will try to find the pics. Also, upper left corner, actually all corners and edges look a bit out of focus in your example.

 

[thomasw_]

As you like to shoot in lower light and with a 35 mm lens, I can recommend the summilux 35/1,4 asph highly. It has a lovely rendering.