Preferred Focal Length on an M8?

[Roger Hicks]

Before I got the 24 Summilux, the lens I used most was a 50/1.5 C-Sonnar, followed by 21/2.8 Kobalux and 15/4.5 Voigtländer. The 24+50 combination remains my favourite. I never much cared for 28 or 35 on digi (35+75 are my standards on film). Go figure.

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[Bobfrance]

I'm under the impression the 35mm would be the most popular on film RFs.
It's interesting that in the poll the majority favour the 35mm on the M8 too, despite it being closer to a 50mm when on an M8.

 

[tbarker13]

I'm betting that has a lot to do with the fact that a large chunk of those people who loved their 35s on film have kept those 35mm lenses to use on digital.
And it is a lot easier to find a fast 35 than it is to find a fast 28.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Oddly (and I see that this is borne out by the poll results), my favorite lens on a 35mm camera is a 50 -- and so is my favorite lens on an M8. I know, I know there are fancy equations that demonstrate that DOF changes and circles get confused and all of that. Nevertheless, I find that almost as important as the field of view is the relationship of in-focus and out-of-focus areas. So: color me 50. I do like 35mm in both formats too.

Oddly, in other formats, I go for "normal"

6x6-80
6x7=90
4x5=180
8x10=300

There's wiggle room in there. I like a 150 and 210 in 4x5 too.

 

[ampguy]

doesn't change much

doesn't change much

the reduced sensor from ff sort of balances out the dof decrease with the longer eff. f.l. Leica claims the lens DOF markings still hold on the M8, and I'm sure they do at many enlarged sizes.

Oddly (and I see that this is borne out by the poll results), my favorite lens on a 35mm camera is a 50 -- and so is my favorite lens on an M8. I know, I know there are fancy equations that demonstrate that DOF changes and circles get confused and all of that. Nevertheless, I find that almost as important as the field of view is the relationship of in-focus and out-of-focus areas. So: color me 50. I do like 35mm in both formats too.

Oddly, in other formats, I go for "normal"

6x6-80
6x7=90
4x5=180
8x10=300

There's wiggle room in there. I like a 150 and 210 in 4x5 too.

 

[gfspencer]

I voted 35mm but lately I've been using my 28mm a lot.

 

[MartinL]

Hi Gang,

but I fancy perhaps going a little wider to perhaps 28mm. My only reservation, is that being a glasses wearer, I only just get the 28mm framelines in the viewfinder and not much else.
Bob.

I checked out your Fllckr photos. Looks like, for many of these shots, framing is not your primary consideration. Now, that's not a slam. I happen to think that many shots, generally, are over-consciously framed, and become photographic "artifacts" rather than valued shots. ---but that's another thread.

I've been enjoying my 28 Elmar, and for a few months it hasn't been off my camera. Broadly speaking, mine are anonymous and quickly shot. My subjects depend on a wider context as do many, but fewer, of yours.

 

[Bobfrance]

I checked out your Fllckr photos. Looks like, for many of these shots, framing is not your primary consideration. Now, that's not a slam. I happen to think that many shots, generally, are over-consciously framed, and become photographic "artifacts" rather than valued shots. ---but that's another thread.

I've been enjoying my 28 Elmar, and for a few months it hasn't been off my camera. Broadly speaking, mine are anonymous and quickly shot. My subjects depend on a wider context as do many, but fewer, of yours.

Ouch!

In my defence, shots taken with the Ricoh GRD are never framed. I use neither LCD screen or external viewfinder and tend to shoot with the camera at arms length down at my side as I like the low angle and can get in really close.

I do however, mostly use the viewfinder when shooting rangefinder, and consequently seem to work at greater distances. In that instance, any poorly framed shots, I blame on my subjects for moving too damn fast!

Thanks for taking the time to look.

'Wider context' is indeed something I've been looking to develop more in my images.

*Makes mental note to tidy up Flickr stream in case anyones looking*

 

[Gary B]

M8 lens, most used

M8 lens, most used

My basic walk about lens is a 25 mm. Fits my style and is close enough to the 35 mm that I found as my favorite lens for film. Likely to be used about 75-80% of the time.

 

[Doug]

Interesting, Gary... I'm just starting to use a 25mm on my M8, and already I can see that it could be another favorite. But I've been making some framing mistakes, in haste using the 35 frames instead of the 24...

 

[Bobfrance]

Update!

Update!

Well folks, I've greatly appreciated everybody's input. Bearing in mind everyone's advice and my own experience I took the plunge and splashed out on a lens on yesterday.

I went for 28mm and after trying out the Voigtlander 28/f2, The M-Hexanon and the Zeiss Biogon I plumped for the Biogon. The Hexanon came very close, and in fact I liked the feel and build beter than the Zeiss, but the Zeiss beat them all when it came to how it rendered (particularly it's crispness). That's no absolute judgement of course, just the way I like my images - crispy.

I did try a 35mm Summicron, for comparison, which was better, but not ££££££ better and out of my budget anyway.

After a couple of hours shooting it definitely felt right. I can't wait to get out and use it some more. Just need an IR Cut filter now!

Here's one of my first images from it (though probably not great for representing the lens as it has a degree of Lightroom post-processing in it).

Bob.

 

[Doug]

Congrats on your new lens, Bob! I hear enthusiastic comments on the 28 Biogon ZM.

 

[Bobfrance]

Thanks Doug.

 

[_goodtimez]

I believe that a 35mm on an M8 is providing the same images as on any film leica, less the edges which are cut. The fact that the sensor is a bit smaller does not transform a 28 into a 35 for example; it just provides the exact same picture except that some frame around it is missing.
We can often read in magazines theories about the fact that a slightly cropped sensor, as compared to 24 X 36, transforms the lens. I think this is not true as only the field of view is cut, and the perspective is not changed. That also means making portraits with a 35 on an M8 gives a completly different perspective than with a 50 on a film camera; in fact on the M8 it remains a 35, from the perspective point of view.

 

[Doug]

True, Goodtimes, and that's why a digital sensor smaller than 24x36 is called "crop sensor". Perspective is an unrelated matter, though, completely dependent on the spacial relationship between camera and subject. Field of view is smaller on a crop sensor, so for the same framing with the lens as on film one must move away from the subject, thus changing perspective. Or switch to a wider lens.

 

[jplomley]

I can't really decide. My favorite focal lengths on my Mamiya 7II are the 43mm and 65mm. To emulate this, I have a 21/2.8 Asph on one M8 and the 28/2 Cron Asph on the other. So I don't really have a "favorite lens"...I simply have two lens that cover the angles of view required for the sorts of images I see. I believe I could work equally well with a 24/35 combo, but these lenses have very different signatures from the 21/28 combination (i.e. higher resolution, more clinical)

 

[JNewell]

I *think* that part of what we're talking about and around here is the result of years of associating things like perspective and DOF with specific focal lengths on 24x36. You can do the math for the crop factor but it doesn't tell you about anything other than magnification ratio - as far as I know, anyway. But that's only part of the picture (pardon the pun).

I think that if we had all migrated from, say, 6x6 to 24x26, we'd be having similar discussions?

If I buy a FF camera, it'll be because it's too hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

True, Goodtimes, and that's why a digital sensor smaller than 24x36 is called "crop sensor". Perspective is an unrelated matter, though, completely dependent on the spacial relationship between camera and subject. Field of view is smaller on a crop sensor, so for the same framing with the lens as on film one must move away from the subject, thus changing perspective. Or switch to a wider lens.

 

[Doug]

I think that if we had all migrated from, say, 6x6 to 24x26, we'd be having similar discussions?

I think you're right! But it would be even worse because of the difficulty in translating from 1:1 square to 3:2 rectangular at the same time as "size"... How DO you figure "normal" focal length? Frame diagonal, or long side, from the full frame or cropped to print proportions?

From the earlier years when it was less common to use other lenses (on the minority that offered interchange), it was clearer what "normal" was: the lens that came on the camera!

 

[jaapv]

I believe that a 35mm on an M8 is providing the same images as on any film leica, less the edges which are cut. The fact that the sensor is a bit smaller does not transform a 28 into a 35 for example; it just provides the exact same picture except that some frame around it is missing.
We can often read in magazines theories about the fact that a slightly cropped sensor, as compared to 24 X 36, transforms the lens. I think this is not true as only the field of view is cut, and the perspective is not changed. That also means making portraits with a 35 on an M8 gives a completly different perspective than with a 50 on a film camera; in fact on the M8 it remains a 35, from the perspective point of view.

The lens never changes, and indeed on the M8 the impression it gives is not vasty different from a film camera, but if one moves backwards to a position where the angle of view is the same as a film camera in the original spot would have been, the perspective does change significantly.

 

[Rob-F]

I don't see any discussion of the 21mm lens. I had imagined that the M8 would provide a frameline for it, since its equivalent would be 28mm; and 28mm is not a too-difficult frameline to provide on the M6/M7/MP. Evidently there is no frameline for the 21mm. Or is there? Maybe not, as I see people complaining that the 24mm frame is already too hard to see with glasses on.