Totaly new to Leica-- ex D700 user --about to buy M9-- best 3 lenses combo

[Tim Gray]

Yes, the eyes... That's obviously a problem when choosing lenses for RF cameras. Even the threads saying "show your [insert whatever lens] pictures!" seldom contain more than a few pictures. 🙄

The 35/1.4 Nokton is probably one of the most rational choices. It seems sharp enough, is small and cheap. But, if I buy an M9 I'd really want something special. Perhaps the 1.4 Nokton is alright, but I'll have to seek for more picture samples first. My main concern with it (as it appears) is barrel distortion and quite harsh bokeh.

Well, there are comparison threads floating around that have reasonably extensive image documentation. Of course, I would just check out the M-mount group on flickr. Everything is organized there. Not head-to-head comparisons, but you can get a feel for how some of the lenses perform in different conditions.

The best thing about RF lenses - if you stick with lenses that are currently made, NONE of them are bad. Most of the ones not produced are damn good too, but there are some odd performers out there once you start digging back 40-50 years.

 

[nobbylon]

With all the fancy and expensive 1.4 lenses being advised here, I'd prepare myself for a lot of disappointment and out of focus shots coming from using a D700. I use both D700 and Leica M and find that for me grabbing shots and getting the focus spot on is easier with the Nikon. Example, I shot a few pictures of the girls in the aeroplane today with the Nikon and got some nice grab shots which I could never have got with a manual focus camera let alone with the dof of a 1.4 on my Leica.
If you shoot quickly I'd stay with the dslr. If however you go for slower stuff and your subjects give you time then sure, use a Leica. Of course you could zone focus and get quicker but then what would be the point of having fast glass.
If I was going Leica for the first time I would stick with a 35 asph F2. Still expensive but as sharp as anyone will need and with the extra dof you stand more of a chance at good focus. I gave up on 1.4's with r/f as my focus wide open was so hit and miss and for the kind of stuff I like to take just too slow.
Best advice from most on here is 'test drive' before you buy.
If you find you get on with it then an M9 and 35 cron would be my way to go.
good luck

 

[Vince Lupo]

Stupid question: will the M9 work with all the older Leica lenses?

As well, would it work with say, a screw mount lens (like a 105/6.3 Mountain Elmar) with an M-adapter?

BTW I use a D700 for my commercial work, and I love it. Would be nice to have something a lot smaller like an M9 though!

 

[thomasw_]

There's a UC-Hexanon in the classifieds right now (no ties to seller, only to Hexanons😎), and it is as good as the 35mm f2.0 Summicron pre-ASPH. But, less cash involved. There's lens comparisons on the two lenses on RFF to back my claim, I'm positive you'll agree!

UC Hex 35/2 is as good as the cron 35/2 IV in terms of optics and better in terms of build. The downside, which is a dealer breaker for me, is the .9m close focus.

 

[rxmd]

Stupid question: will the M9 work with all the older Leica lenses? As well, would it work with say, a screw mount lens (like a 105/6.3 Mountain Elmar) with an M-adapter?

Why shouldn't it?

 

[Vince Lupo]

Why shouldn't it?

I don't know actually -- I'm not up on the M8/M8.2/M9, so I wasn't sure if there were any 'issues' with using older lenses.

I'm seriously thinking of budgeting for an M9 next year. Having this degree of compatibility would make for some very interesting possibilities, both commercially and personally.

 

[Tim Gray]

With all the fancy and expensive 1.4 lenses being advised here, I'd prepare myself for a lot of disappointment and out of focus shots coming from using a D700. I use both D700 and Leica M and find that for me grabbing shots and getting the focus spot on is easier with the Nikon. Example, I shot a few pictures of the girls in the aeroplane today with the Nikon and got some nice grab shots which I could never have got with a manual focus camera let alone with the dof of a 1.4 on my Leica.

I don't seem to have much problems focusing a 50/1.4 at 1.4 with reasonable accuracy on my RF. Even at minimum focus distance, .7m, your DOF is 2 cm. Not huge, but certainly manageable. Once you get back to 1 or 1.5 meters, it gets even easier.

 

[.ken]

Is this a serious post? lol

 

[Roger Hicks]

Stupid question: will the M9 work with all the older Leica lenses?

As well, would it work with say, a screw mount lens (like a 105/6.3 Mountain Elmar) with an M-adapter?

BTW I use a D700 for my commercial work, and I love it. Would be nice to have something a lot smaller like an M9 though!

Dear Vince,

I use my M8.2 with my 1938 Thambar (1936 design) and expect my M9 (when it arrives) to be even better.

Cheers,

R.

 

[johannielscom]

I don't seem to have much problems focusing a 50/1.4 at 1.4 with reasonable accuracy on my RF. Even at minimum focus distance, .7m, your DOF is 2 cm. Not huge, but certainly manageable. Once you get back to 1 or 1.5 meters, it gets even easier.

But Nobbylon shot girls on an aeroplane, I'm pretty sure they move back and forth more than 2cms rather quickly😀

In general, I agree with you though. I only shoot RF, look for as much DOF as I can possibly get in situations like that, and regularly refrain from taking the shot altogether, since I'm running out of speed, or aperture. Just lean back and enjoy the view, take a mind picture😉

If you cannot do that, either professionally or mentally, get the D700 out!

 

[TomN]

i started with the 35, 50, and 90 option, but I know shoot with a Voigtlander Nokton 1.2/35mm and a Leica Summilux 1.4/75mm. If I were to add another lens it would be a 21mm. I do have the Voigtlander Heliar 15mm, but it doesn't get used often.

BTW, I shoot weddings with the above lenses. The 35 and 50 is all i really need.

 

[Vince Lupo]

Dear Vince,

I use my M8.2 with my 1938 Thambar (1936 design) and expect my M9 (when it arrives) to be even better.

Cheers,

R.

Okay that settles it -- it's the M9 next year!

 

[mark-b]

Get the 18mm Zeiss Distagon, the 35mm Summicron, and the 50mm Collapsible Summicron.

 

[Tim Gray]

But Nobbylon shot girls on an aeroplane, I'm pretty sure they move back and forth more than 2cms rather quickly😀

In general, I agree with you though. I only shoot RF, look for as much DOF as I can possibly get in situations like that, and regularly refrain from taking the shot altogether, since I'm running out of speed, or aperture. Just lean back and enjoy the view, take a mind picture😉

If you cannot do that, either professionally or mentally, get the D700 out!

I guess. I never found my 1V to focus a 50/1.4 more accurately than I can on an RF. Faster, yes, but not more accurately.

 

[Makten]

Well, there are comparison threads floating around that have reasonably extensive image documentation. Of course, I would just check out the M-mount group on flickr. Everything is organized there. Not head-to-head comparisons, but you can get a feel for how some of the lenses perform in different conditions.

I'll look at that, thanks.

The best thing about RF lenses - if you stick with lenses that are currently made, NONE of them are bad. Most of the ones not produced are damn good too, but there are some odd performers out there once you start digging back 40-50 years.

You're probably right. I've been satisfied with most lenses on my D700 too, at least sharpness-wise. But bokeh is something else. For example, I really didn't like the Nikkor 35/1.4 AI-S, which is a very hyped lens that you're supposed to love just because it's expensive and fast.

With all the fancy and expensive 1.4 lenses being advised here, I'd prepare myself for a lot of disappointment and out of focus shots coming from using a D700. I use both D700 and Leica M and find that for me grabbing shots and getting the focus spot on is easier with the Nikon.

Are you talking about AF lenses on the D700? I exclusively shoot with MF lenses, and I can't believe it would be less easy with a RF than with the stock screen in the D700.

Example, I shot a few pictures of the girls in the aeroplane today with the Nikon and got some nice grab shots which I could never have got with a manual focus camera let alone with the dof of a 1.4 on my Leica.
If you shoot quickly I'd stay with the dslr. If however you go for slower stuff and your subjects give you time then sure, use a Leica. Of course you could zone focus and get quicker but then what would be the point of having fast glass.

I'm seldom in any hurry. 😉 Here's what I do: http://www.fotosidan.se/gallery/listpic.htm?authorID=59503

If I was going Leica for the first time I would stick with a 35 asph F2. Still expensive but as sharp as anyone will need and with the extra dof you stand more of a chance at good focus. I gave up on 1.4's with r/f as my focus wide open was so hit and miss and for the kind of stuff I like to take just too slow.

Well, there's nothing wrong with stopping down the 1.4 lens to f/2, right? 😀

Best advice from most on here is 'test drive' before you buy.
If you find you get on with it then an M9 and 35 cron would be my way to go.
good luck

I've just briefly tried one in a store, and I loved everything with it.

 

[Roger Warren]

I like the quick and easy use of the viewfinder's frame lines. I prefer to use 28, 50, 90. The 28 is a great wide angle with no visible distortion.

 

[eddyj]

range finder M8.2

range finder M8.2

I have had my Leica M8.2 for just over 5mths and after atleast a mth and a half i am realy digging this camer i have the Zeiss 35/1.5 and the 75 f2 and waitinf for my 50mm f2 zeiss planner..All in all first and foremost i luv the forums where PPl actually Help you a great deal , its not like any forums ala depreview where you are put up against a dslr and lenses and made to feel not welcome sometimes..thats why i gave up my dslr shooting i still have my 1ds mkiii canon but most of the time i shoot with my Leica , and now that the Pana GF1 is in my hand i will solely use both the leica and Pana..

I am sure you learn to luv it..and actually fall in love with what you have beleive me

 

[Rob-F]

It's all quite subjective, especially where focal length is concerned, because it depends on how you see the world. I agree with you on the 35/1.4. From there, I would go (for a 3-lens combo) with the 24 of your choice--I use the Elmarit--and the 75 Summicron. So then you would have a well-spaced 24-35-75 outfit with a good spread of focal lengths. I have the 75 Summilux (not the Summicron) and the 90 Summicron ASPH. Nothing wrong with either of those, but somehow I think the 75 Summicron is a great choice, better ona rangefinder than the 90, and I think there's one in my future.