THE lens

I switch between a 28 (Biogon) and a 35 (ASPH 'Cron) as my "standard lens". The 35/1.2 Nokton and 50 Planar are for special missions only. :)
 
The first Leica that I had came with a 35mm Summicron and I still have that combo although now it is a M2 with lens instead of an M3. For the M8 the 25 Zeiss 2.5 serves about the same purpose but could be faster. I do like my Canon 50 1.2 for portraits on the M8.
 
Ronald_H said:
I believe it was Stephen Gandy who somewhere one his site commented that he didn't like the 40mm focal length. Also, being used to zooms I didn't give it that much thought really.

But the simple fact is, my first RF was a Canonet with, you guessed it, a 40mm lens. Revelation is too much of a word here, but that camera makes pictures the way I percieve the world. No step closer, no step back.

On the M2, I have an excellent 35 and 50. But still I am contemplating buying a 40 with a seperate finder for it. Let's make it a fast one too.
Click to expand...

I'm also warming to 40mm. I bought a Rokkor-M 40/2 from back alley for my M2, and am liking that lens so much I picked up an R3a to use w/ it. 50 has been my normal, go-to focal length up to now, but I appreciate the extra bit of width from the 40. I'm ambivalent about 35.
 
With the 35 & 50 winners in the #1 lens category, should we be looking at what our second favorite lens is? It is actually a lot harder to pick that #2 lens. Let's just make it "What is your favorite lens that you only pull out on special occasions?" And, "WHY?"

For me, it's the Tri-Elmar. I have the first one, and with a maximum aperture of f/4, it's certainly not going to be my #1 lens. But, it sure is useful when just wandering (and at 50mm one of the sharpest lenses I've seen).
 
My heart belongs to the 50, even if I 've found over time that the 35 is my go to lens when I'm going to shoot indoors. It provides the "wide side of normal" quite effectively.

However outside of those specific occasions, when I pull my camera out of my bag and am greeted by the 35mm frame lines, I think that it's all just a little too wide to frame well. I find that I can visualize everything that fits inside the 50mm framelines as an image, whereas the world often offers too much information in the wider views to be succinct about it.

Maybe it's an ADD thing, but I'm okay with that! <g>
 
My second favourite lens is the Color-Skopar 28mm f3.5. I don't use 28mm as my 'standard' lens because it's generally a bit too wide but there are sometimes situations where you can't step back and then you need a 28mm. This particular 28mm is wonderful. It's tiny so you hardly notice you are carrying it', it's sharp across the frame at full aperture and it's well built and quick to focus. It also has minimal distortion and although there is some vignetting it's not enough to be an issue. And did I say it's fantastic value?
 
FrankS said:
50mm for me at home. It helps exclude extraneous visual elements.
35mm on vacation, because things are more interesting there than here.
Click to expand...

That's what i would have said.

What's odd is that, although i have been a "50mm person" since i started, i'm now moving into wide angles. Before six months ago, i had even struggled with a 35mm lens, feeling it's just 'too wide' and always includes extraneous stuff. But, for some reason, i grew attracted to some work a friend does with a 28mm. I bought one. Now, that seems not too out of the ordinary. More recently, i bought a 24mm. That feels wide, but not 'freakishly' wide. And, now, when i mount a 50mm, it feels a little like tunnel vision - like i'm struggling and want to include more information....

I guess there's no such thing as 'normal.' There's just what your used to That Week.
 
Last edited:
My go to lens is a 50. I find it to be very versatile and since geometry figures prominently in my images I find it easy to draw within the space of a 50's field of view. With anything wider, it's harder to keep extraneous elements out of the frame.

For a special occasion lens, I like using a 25 mm. The perspective is quite unnatural and challenging to use. But when I do get the shot it makes for a very unique and strong image.
 
35mm, 35mm, 35mm! More great photographs shot with that focal length than all others combined. I'll make a wager on that. ;)
 
It is pretty obvious that 'normal' lenses seem to be the most popular. It makes me wonder why more manufacturers don't make 43mm 'true normal' lenses. Not only would it make perfect sense for the slr users, but i would think that 43mm would be pretty easy to intuit on a leica, as it would be exactly halfway between the 35 and 50mm framelines.

As to second lenses, as I mentioned on the previous page, the 90 f4 elmar is my second. The main reason that it is truly a second lens and not just another lens I have but don't use very much is because it is so small. If it was larger, I would probably not use it very much at all.
 
pbjbike said:
35mm, 35mm, 35mm! More great photographs shot with that focal length than all others combined. I'll make a wager on that. ;)
Click to expand...

I gotta disagree, unless we're talking strictly about journalistic stuff. My 'library' has a lot of stuff by Penn and Avedon, and then a lot of fashion stuff - predominantly shot with 'normal' lenses. 50mm on 35mm, 80mm on a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad, 360mm on an 8x10....
 
For me it's a 50 mm cron. Currently it's the only M lens I have.

I thought about getting a wider lens, either 35 or 28. Before I bought the 50 cron I tried using my old 35mm nikkor exclusivelly for a month (on my SLR), but I found that I don't really like the fov. Most of the time I find myself stepping forward closer to get tighter frames.
 
With my film Ms, I've always leaned toward the 35mm lens.
Strangely, when I shoot with my M8 - I do the same.
I'm still trying to settle a specific favorite, though.
 
I find it easy to attune to a 60-degree angle of view, or thereabouts. In between the ~57 of the 40mm and ~63 of the 35mm, and this is a fine range for me. With this angle I move to the spot for the perspective I want, and when I bring the camera to my eye it’s framed like I want, with the relationship between foreground and background as I expect. This is good for landscapes, streetscapes, and environmental portraits, though for the last I may go wider bringing me forward into closer touch with the subject. (That’s why 28 is my second-fav, and that’s the 28 Summicron on 135 film.)

Though I have several M-mount 40’s, the f/2 Rokkor that came with my CLE is just about ideal; I like the look and feel.

Similarly, I favor the 28 Summicron on my M8 as having pleasant contrast and an ability to render detail well. Also similarly, my favorite lens for the Pentax 67 is the aspheric 75mm f/2.8 which not only focuses very closely but shows an extra brilliance and sparkle. (The latest 4/55mm SMCP is second)

Not much lens choice with the 645 RF’s... the Fuji GS fixed 60mm lens is smack in the right spot, while the 65mm for the Bronica is only slightly narrower at 57-deg. Nonetheless, no quarrel!

All with about a 60-deg angle, and these lenses I generally prefer to walk out the door with, depending on the body and format.
 
Funnily enough, 35/1.4 (Summilux) on film and 50/1.5 (Sonnar - 67 equivalent) on the M8/M8.2.

Then again, 75/2 is my easy second choice on film, and I don't have a 24/25, which would be the 35 (OK, 36-37) equivalent. I keep thinking of getting one but I don't think I can really afford a 24/1.4...

I really like a more-or-less doubling sequence: 18-35-75-135, though if I could afford it, I think I'd use a Tri-Elmar rather than the Zeiss 18/4 (I'm not sure). On the M8 the same sequence would be 12-24-50-90, of which I own only 50 and 90 -- though the 15/4.5 Heliar (which I do own) is an acceptable substitute for the 12, and I'd really like a Tri-Elmar so I could use it on both film and digi.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
35 Cron is on the M8 most of the time. 50mm is a bit too long on the M8 but I use it quite a bit for portraits, and when I want wider, I go all the way down to 15mm.
15-35-90 Is what I always carry around and it's been working quite well.
 
When I go out with my M6 TTL, I usually pack my Leica 35mm ASPH and 90mm APO/ASPH lenses. Once I am in my darkroom, I can raise the enlarger head to create a closer 50mm lens-type composition from the 35mm lens's range of capture and I can do the same thing from the 90mm lens's range of capture (create a larger-than-90mm range of capture).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom