A Leica At Long Last!

[ohnewton35]

Before you make any decision do a search online for 'the 50mm lens and metaphysical doubt',
read this essay by Mike Johnston and relax as you realize that your personal vision and a modicum of talent will be far far more important than what lens you stick on that M6.

I love this article and as a budding photographer I have to say it really enlightened me. I'm attaching the link for those who would also like to check it out https://luminous-landscape.com/sm-02-09-22/

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[Luis-F-S]

If it were me I'd search for a good 50 f2 DR Summicron. One of the best lens ever for the M Leicas. I had one with just a bit of haze in it, sent it to Youxin Ye and it came back as new. One of Leica's sharpest lens and won't cost as much as a used car.

+1, or any of the 50 Summicrons. I have the small one made in Canada, 1980's vintage if memory serves me right. It's hard to get a 50mm better than a Summicron, probably the cheapest and most plentiful Leitz lens and much cheaper than the Summilux! Also, if you buy it right, it's hard to loose money later on if you decide you want something different. L

 

[James Page]

Step 1: Get a Canon 50mm 1.8 screw thread + adapter for $100 and go and enjoy your Leica while you save up for a Summicron or something equally beautiful and shiny.

Step 2: Buy the mega expensive lens and shoot that for a year or two (whilst worrying it will be stolen or damaged).

Step 3: Compare the shots of the two lenses by mixing up random prints.

Step 4: Curse loudly.

Seconded. The Canon is a great lens.
And the VC 35 2.5 you bought is also a fine lens.
Enjoy your camera. Remember, Leica's are to be used.

For some fun Leica reading, peruse leicaphilia.com

 

[bo eder]

After saving for over two years and exhibiting sheer determination I have finally purchased a near mint Leica m6 from tokyo. It has been a long time coming. I'm a 17 year old and I have to state that after wanting a leica for my collection and to shoot with for more than two years I feel so great to finally consider myself among the world of Leica users. Now with the Leica in the mail I'm faced with such a large collection of lenses. Finally having purchased the Leica body I hardly wanna wait another 3 years to fund a lens for it. So with that in mind whats the best lens to start out with? I've read alot about the differences between a 35mm vs 50mm lens and after all the overwhelming information I'm not quite sure I've come up with an answer. I kind of want to start with a Voigtlander but I'm not quite sure I have been fully awakened to the many options that a Leica m mount has to offer. Any suggestions?

What a minute, what kind of madness is this? You bought the body first and you don't have a lens? Leica lenses are WHY you shoot Leica in the first place, right? Shame on you! Go back to your corner and start saving up again! Don't mention it again until you have the right lens on that body.

Had you done it the other way, say bought a Voightlander Bessa R4 or something and put a Leica M lens on it, then I can understand that. If you said you just bought a little Canonet instead while you saved up sounds even better.

And regarding the 'large collection of Leica lenses', you're really limited by the frame lines in the camera right? So you'd only be getting maybe 3 or 4 (if you had that kind of cash) anyway. I'm not a Leica-hater, I shot a Leica M2 with a 35 Summicron for a few months back in the day and I just couldn't get the attraction. Shooting manual SLR's made more sense to me because I could literally use ALL of Nikon or Canons lenses with no problem or having to add anything to those cameras. I got a chance to play with an MP once and they're so lovely, it was like buttah, they are cool machines. Just a bit rich for my blood and not conducive to helping me solve photographic problems on a shoot.

But I would get either the 50 Summilux, or the 35 Summilux if you had frame lines for those (you should). The 35 I lean to more because it's slightly wider. Now start saving!

 

[Luis-F-S]

What a minute, what kind of madness is this? You bought the body first and you don't have a lens? Leica lenses are WHY you shoot Leica in the first place, right?

+1

 

[ohnewton35]

Well I would say part of my madness came from the collector side of me not necessarily the user one. I now have apart of my collection a world famous camera that makes my collection significantly better than your average thrift store box camera. I bought it as something to build on. I can go throughout my entire life adding lenses and saving for them to use with this camera and it will for me always be the camera I saved and worked hard for. And to me it seems different than if I say got a summicron then one day got a summilux and and just didn't want to sell my summicron because "I saved for it". That m6 body isn't going anywhere except everywhere I go. Now I have a foundation in which to build on and I worked my ass off for it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Ignore the snobbers.

For M mount lenses I have an M3 and a Hexar RF. I use the Hexar far more. I don't use any Leica lenses either, not that they are bad. The last Leica lens I had was a 35mm Summicron which I sold after buying the Zeiss Biogon. Wasn't even close! For a 50mm I use a Pentax-M f/1.4 that I converted to M mount. Best dang 50 I think I have ever used. That includes Leica and Zeiss 50s (I use Contax SLRs). The Summicron 50 I used to have was nice, but kinda Meh.

Others have mentioned the Canon 50s and I agree. One sleeper lens I have held onto is the Industar-50 collapsible. You can get them for peanuts and it is a really good lens. If I had a spare I would send it to you for nothing. I have hung prints made from the I-50 next to the haughty glass and no one ever comments or cares. There is a little dose of reality for you.

In other words, go make images with what you have or what you can afford. If the images are good, no one that matters will care what lens you used. People on the internet might act like you are not a real photographer if you don't use a Leica lens, but you can safely ignore them. You can feel sorry for them too, and sometimes even a bit of a chuckle is in order as well...

Good luck!

 

[bo eder]

Well I would say part of my madness came from the collector side of me not necessarily the user one. I now have apart of my collection a world famous camera that makes my collection significantly better than your average thrift store box camera. I bought it as something to build on. I can go throughout my entire life adding lenses and saving for them to use with this camera and it will for me always be the camera I saved and worked hard for. And to me it seems different than if I say got a summicron then one day got a summilux and and just didn't want to sell my summicron because "I saved for it". That m6 body isn't going anywhere except everywhere I go. Now I have a foundation in which to build on and I worked my ass off for it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

Good for you. I don't discount people doing what the want to do and I'm certainly not a 'snobber'. I've just always been told that the body is just your light tight box for the film. The lens is really what helps make your image, right? And the collectible mystique about the Leica isn't so much the body, but the glass. So getting a great body first, and some cheap lens to get you started doesn't make any sense to me. And you don't have to be a Leica guy - I'd say it to the person who bought a Nikon F6 and thought he'd save a buck by getting a Sigma kit lens for it too. Yes, build on your system, but I would've collected lenses first. Those Voightlander Bessa's take M mount lenses and you can find those for under $600. Once you had saved and collected the killer glass for your kit, getting the Leica body wouldn't be that big of a financial stretch.

You should check out those guys in Hong Kong on YouTube - DigitalRev - they did a video of pro cameras with cheap lenses and cheap cameras with pro lenses for a comparison. It makes sense.

 

[James Page]

Well I would say part of my madness came from the collector side of me not necessarily the user one. I now have apart of my collection a world famous camera that makes my collection significantly better than your average thrift store box camera. I bought it as something to build on. I can go throughout my entire life adding lenses and saving for them to use with this camera and it will for me always be the camera I saved and worked hard for. And to me it seems different than if I say got a summicron then one day got a summilux and and just didn't want to sell my summicron because "I saved for it". That m6 body isn't going anywhere except everywhere I go. Now I have a foundation in which to build on and I worked my ass off for it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

You sound like a very intelligent young person. If I were to give you any further advice (and this is applicable As a general life rule) it would be to ignore other people's advice and do whats right for you. This includes things like your aesthetic, and , in this instance, the creation of your camera collection.

like you, i bought my first Leica at the age of 18 in 1976. It was a new M5. Most people told me not to buy it becsuse the M5 wasn't a "real Leica." I still have it, and still love it. Its probably the single most cherished thing I've owned. Good luck on your journey,

 

[blockend]

What a minute, what kind of madness is this? You bought the body first and you don't have a lens? Leica lenses are WHY you shoot Leica in the first place, right? Shame on you! Go back to your corner and start saving up again! Don't mention it again until you have the right lens on that body.

Slightly simplistic, IMO. I'm not a Leicaphile but if someone wants a hard-wearing, interchangeable lens rangefinder film camera, there isn't a lot of choice. Voigtlander have stopped making RF cameras and future parts availability is unknown. They cost roughly the same a secondhand Leica. ZI stopped making rangefinders and are expensive. Used Canons are still around.

I think anyone wanting to try a Leica should factor in the cost of a CLA at the very least, before purchasing. The lens mystique is beyond my capacity to understand, let alone see. If you like low contrast uncoated lenses there is no shortage, without paying a Leica premium. On the other hand if carrying a Leica makes someone feel better, it's cheaper than cosmetic surgery or a drug habit.

 

[Jim Jones]

ohnewton35 -- Your M6 might be a lifetime investment unless film becomes more of an obstacle rather than a tool for good photography. Even if that happens, you'll still have one fine piece of engineering and history. My M4, bought overseas in 1970, was still working the last time I used it. So were its lenses. That adds up to a pro-rated investment of only a few dollars a year for the camera and a little more for the lenses. Some people have suggested buying less expensive equipment until you have enough experience to select the system that is ideal for you. Good advice, but you can also buy equipment that can be used for a very long time, and perfect the skill with which you use to that gear. Us humans are far more adaptable than our cameras. That's one of the qualities that makes us human. The quest for perfect photo equipment can divert us from a primary reason for owning that equipment: making photographs.

 

[Sirius Glass]

What a minute, what kind of madness is this? You bought the body first and you don't have a lens? Leica lenses are WHY you shoot Leica in the first place, right? Shame on you! Go back to your corner and start saving up again! Don't mention it again until you have the right lens on that body. Had you done it the other way, say bought a Voightlander Bessa R4 or something and put a Leica M lens on it, then I can understand that. If you said you just bought a little Canonet instead while you saved up sounds even better. And regarding the 'large collection of Leica lenses', you're really limited by the frame lines in the camera right? So you'd only be getting maybe 3 or 4 (if you had that kind of cash) anyway. I'm not a Leica-hater, I shot a Leica M2 with a 35 Summicron for a few months back in the day and I just couldn't get the attraction. Shooting manual SLR's made more sense to me because I could literally use ALL of Nikon or Canons lenses with no problem or having to add anything to those cameras. I got a chance to play with an MP once and they're so lovely, it was like buttah, they are cool machines. Just a bit rich for my blood and not conducive to helping me solve photographic problems on a shoot. But I would get either the 50 Summilux, or the 35 Summilux if you had frame lines for those (you should). The 35 I lean to more because it's slightly wider. Now start saving!

Hey, give the OP a break. He is an enthusiastic teenager. I was one once. Have you always been a heartless cruel curmudgeon?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well I would say part of my madness came from the collector side of me not necessarily the user one. I now have apart of my collection a world famous camera that makes my collection significantly better than your average thrift store box camera. I bought it as something to build on. I can go throughout my entire life adding lenses and saving for them to use with this camera and it will for me always be the camera I saved and worked hard for. And to me it seems different than if I say got a summicron then one day got a summilux and and just didn't want to sell my summicron because "I saved for it". That m6 body isn't going anywhere except everywhere I go. Now I have a foundation in which to build on and I worked my ass off for it.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

Good for you!

 

[bo eder]

Hey, give the OP a break. He is an enthusiastic teenager. I was one once. Have you always been a heartless cruel curmudgeon?

I work for Disney. I'm sarcastic by nature

 

[ohnewton35]

I work for Disney. I'm sarcastic by nature

Where in Disney? I'd imagine you get all kinda of photo opportunities there.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[bo eder]

Where in Disney? I'd imagine you get all kinda of photo opportunities there.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

I'm both audio engineer and musician, working within the entertainment division. As a tech, I head up the group that maintains the background music you hear, parades, fireworks (although I started off mixing bands like a lot of us). As a musician I stared drumming for them back in 1986, and my last gig was in the Soundsational Parade. Picture a happy rodent on a set of drums in that one. Although I can neither confirm or deny who that actually was

 

[Ces1um]

this:

Dead Link Removed

Sharp lens, good compromise between the 50mm and 35mm (since it will be some time before you can afford a second lens). It wouldn't be my pick if money is unlimited, but since you understandably have restrictions this would be a very usable starting point.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

this:

Dead Link Removed

Sharp lens, good compromise between the 50mm and 35mm (since it will be some time before you can afford a second lens). It wouldn't be my pick if money is unlimited, but since you understandably have restrictions this would be a very usable starting point.

It is sharp then it is not in its focus shift mode.
Also 40mm lens is not really good for framing with classic film M cameras. You need Bessa R3M for 40mm lens correct framing.

For less, sometimes twice less, you could get Jupiter-3.
I will soon put my Summicron 50 IV on sale because J-3 I have is enough for film. Especially for bw film.
One film Leica photog recently interviewed by Leica Blog also switched from Cron and Lux to this lens for his BW film and prints.

 

[Eric Rose]

This thread has been dead for 3 years. The OP hasn't been seen since Jul of 2017 so I would imagine he has got his lens and is a happy snapper. To bad we couldn't keep him.

 

[Sirius Glass]

 

[Alan Gales]

View attachment 196010

Yeah, he's probably sold the Leica and replaced it with a Hasselblad and 80mm Planar by now.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yeah, he's probably sold the Leica and replaced it with a Hasselblad and 80mm Planar by now.

And then bought the 100mm lens because it is sharper.

 

[Alan Gales]

And then bought the 100mm lens because it is sharper.

Maybe. I shot my daughter with the 80mm that I had. It worked great. I bought the softar 1 for my wife. Before that I had an RZ with the 110mm. My wife hated that lens! The rest of us thought she looked fine.

The 100 would be great for other subjects though. Just not my wife!

 

[Ces1um]

View attachment 196010

wild! it shows up in my "New" menu along with 6000 other new posts. Maybe I ought to clear them!

 

[faberryman]

I ended up getting a 35mm color skopar for 275$. I read a couple reviews showing the sharpness of the lens. Good investment?

It is a good lens and you likely can get your money back if you sell it, so it is a good "investment". Now start saving your money for a Leica lens for your Leica body. In the meantime, make a lot of images.