which is more important : body or lens?

[FrankS]

As someone who's been married more than once, I think this is hilarious, WAyne. 🙂

 

[sf]

title

title

Ergonomics does play a role in your photography. If you have a RF body that isn't comfortable for you, you'll spend too much time fighting the camera, which becomes a distraction.

One of the reasons I don't like tabbed lenses -- they don't work for me.

Another RF camera that doesn't work for me: the Voigtlander Prominent. I just took it out today for a roll of Agfapan APX 100 to see if I could see myself using this camera a lot. I can't. Great Ultron lens, but I found myself spending too much time fiddling with the controls.

In most cases and speaking strictly of tools, I would say that the lens is most important. However, don't dismiss the body as "any body will do" doesn't always hold true.

I'll second that one. I dislike the fact that the Nokton is tabbed. It is a great lens, but the tab made it hard to focus. I like traditional focusing rings, I feel like I have more control, more fine tuning ability and more flexibility in my grip.

My point was not just about the Nokton though. Even between the Skopar or Ultron and something Leica. Just as good for my purposes.

and, yes, as far as the most important step in the technical process, the lens IS the most important, but only from a purely technical perspective, only looking at the action of taking a picture as "subject - lens - camera body - film - print" - but it is more than that, and the camera body becomes more than merely a body or a holder for the lens and film. But yeah, it is really hard to argue either way. My opinions just push me further in the CV lens/ Leica body direction that the other way around. But that is just me, and everyone has their tastes.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

LOL - Kiev. How true. You are wise, Grasshopper.

Frank: I agree; just being a smart alec about other irrelevant logs being thrown into the fire.

 

[FrankS]

Now I understand! There should be a sarcasm icon. What would that look like?

 

[richard_l]

You can get romantic about a body but not about a lens..../QUOTE]With me it depends on the lens. I can enjoy using a Nocton, but I can't get romantic about it. Likewise a Summicron. The new 50mm Elmar is another matter, however... It is even sexier than an M6.

Richard

 

[jano]

With me it depends on the lens. I can enjoy using a Nocton, but I can't get romantic about it. Likewise a Summicron. The new 50mm Elmar is another matter, however... It is even sexier than an M6.
Richard

No, I won't say anything, it's just too easy.. :angel:

 

[KoNickon]

Interesting -- someone made the point that it's the camera body where most of the "user interface" (my terms) occurs and where a pleasant (or unpleasant) shooting experience comes from. Lenses certainly aren't without the ability to contribute to that experience, though. For example, some people love a lens with a focusing tab, while others prefer a regular focusing ring. Consider the CV 35/2.5 M39 lenses, Classic with focusing tab and Pancake I with SLR-style focusing ring. Same optics, but very different feels (haptics?). I happen to prefer the Pancake, which I guess betrays my SLR roots.

 

[ed1k]

I think both are important. Lens is not most important even from pure technical perspective. You may attach perfect lens to the poor body with poor shooter and poor darkening inside. You won't get any better picture than with cheap lenses attached to that poor body. Just my $0.02

Eduard

 

[richard_l]

No, I won't say anything, it's just too easy.. :angel:

That's very considerate of you. However, fondling a lens is no worse than doing the same with a a firearm, a fishing rod, or whatever 😀 .

 

[Scarpia]

Shouldn't the enlarger lens be part of the picture? What difference does an excellent camera lens make if the enlarger lens is a lemon? And doesn't even an excellent enlarger lens add or subtract something from the negative? RF'ers want to know!!!
Kurt M.

 

[Hektor]

I can't understand what all the fuss is about........

Surely you take the Leica lens off the CV body......

and put it onto the Leica body.......

and then use that to take the pictures !!.........

Simple really !!.............

 

[kiev4a]

That's very considerate of you. However, fondling a lens is no worse than doing the same with a a firearm, a fishing rod, or whatever 😀 .

Different strokes for different folks. As much as I like cameras, lenses and even a fine firearm, whatever still tops my fondling list

 

[Dan Chang]

buy the lens, these Ms soon will be obsoleted by digital body and lack of film on the market, 10 rolls film will buy you two M6s. so go for lens

 

[Hektor]

You'd find it more rewarding to put the effort into deciding which film to use !!.....

It'll probably alter the pics more .

 

[richard_l]

Different strokes for different folks. As much as I like cameras, lenses and even a fine firearm, whatever still tops my fondling list

I guess I can't really argue with you there. Whatever is tops. Then the other things.

 

[Toby]

You'd find it more rewarding to put the effort into deciding which film to use !!.....

It'll probably alter the pics more .

I have a black list of labs who can make an M7 with 35/1.4 summilux look like a £5 disposable camera

"There's many a slip between cup and lip" as they say the -journey is longer than camera and lens

Having said that its also about focal length and rangefinder base length so I'd choose M6 with CV75/2.5 for more consistent focusing or Bessa R2a with 35/1.4 summilux as the two good cheap /expensive combinations thus totally contradicting myself depending on circumstances 😀

 

[RObert Budding]

I'm just happy that I need not choose - I can have both!

Robert

 

[rover]

Wow, I spent the morning with my M3 and really enjoyed it, but I love the character that lenses can contribute to an image, a Sonnar is different than a Summicron which is different than a Nokton. My M6 doesn't have the same hold of me, though I use it more than my M3.

But then I sold an R3a and replaced it with an M6.....but I have 11 50mm lenses.

I am going to have to think on this one.

 

[principe azul]

Body for me, and, as pointed out above, the ergonomics of the lens. The CV lenses are more than good enough.

Would be more clear-cut if we were talking SLRs. For all the arguments about the difference between the Bessa and Leica viewfinders, they're clearly in the same league. But in SLRs, there's a big difference between a low-mag, squinty finder with a poor screen and an F2/F3/F4 with the screen that suits you and lets you focus with ease in low light.

In that case, the cheaper body would get in the way of what I was trying to do. But if I used a cheaper lens, I might discover that I liked the way it rendered the scene, even if it wasn't technically up to spec.

So, I'd say some cameras are better than others (barring price and weight), but lenses aren't necessarily better, just different. Depends what you're looking for.

 

[principe azul]

In other words, some cameras get in the way and have no redeeming features, but there's usually some characteristic, some difference, to look out for in any lens.

Still, I'd feel as silly with a Nikon F6 and a cheap 28-300 zoom as I would with a knob-wind Zorki and a Noctilux.