Buying a 50mm when already owning a 28-70mm zoom?

[RezaLoghme]

Just to bring everyone onto the same page: I currently own a Leica R4, an R6, and the 28–70mm Vario-Elmar. Yes, the distortion is clearly noticeable — especially at the wide end — but I haven’t drawn any final conclusions yet. I shot a full roll with it at the protests this weekend, so I’ll wait to judge until I’ve seen the results in real-life conditions.

That said, I just added a 50mm Summicron-R (ref. 11216) to the setup. And — please forgive me — I find myself eyeing more R lenses. The system may have its quirks, but there’s something about its feel and balance that keeps pulling me in.

Would love to hear if anyone else went from “just a test roll” to full-blown R addiction.

P.S.: I have no intention of selling the Rs and buying a AF Canon.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Also — I’ll admit it — I’m now tempted by one of the 24mm R wide angles. Fully aware I won’t use it often, and that it’s probably more want than need. But still… the idea of having that field of view in the same Leica R rendering is hard to shake.

Anyone here using the 24mm Elmarit-R just occasionally? Would love to hear whether it's worth owning even if it only gets used two or three times a year.

 

[xkaes]

Konica also made 2 vario type variable focus lens, the 70 to 150 is very sharp, just a pain to use if in a hurry.

The terms are getting muddy at this point. Perhaps you are thinking of Vari-focal lenses which are zooms, but must be refocused as you zoom. You can set the lens at any focal length. These are different from lenses that are not zooms, but still have more than one focal length. Several were sold under the Soligor, and other labels, like a 28mm & 35mm lens, and 85mm & 135mm lens. The Tri-Elmar is like this.

Vari-focal lenses have benefits, and are known for their sharpness, wide-apertures, price, and other features -- if you don't mind re-focusing all the time.

 

[MattKing]

please forgive me

If you are looking to the membership of Photrio for forgiveness for wanting more lenses, you are definitely looking in the wrong place!

 

[MattKing]

The terms are getting muddy at this point. Perhaps you are thinking of Vari-focal lenses which are zooms, but must be refocused as you zoom. You can set the lens at any focal length. These are different from lenses that are not zooms, but still have more than one focal length. Several were sold under the Soligor, and other labels, like a 28mm & 35mm lens, and 85mm & 135mm lens. The Tri-Elmar is like this.

Vari-focal lenses have benefits, and are known for their sharpness, wide-apertures, price, and other features -- if you don't mind re-focusing all the time.

+1
I am always surprised there aren't more vari-focal lenses in manufacturer's lens lines.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Also — I’ll admit it — I’m now tempted by one of the 24mm R wide angles. Fully aware I won’t use it often, and that it’s probably more want than need. But still… the idea of having that field of view in the same Leica R rendering is hard to shake.

Anyone here using the 24mm Elmarit-R just occasionally? Would love to hear whether it's worth owning even if it only gets used two or three times a year.

Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 1:2,8-4,5/28-90mm ASPH. | Leica Camera Classic

Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 1:2,8-4,5/28-90mm ASPH. bei Leica Camera Classic! offizieller Vintage Store ✓ seltene und historische Kameras und Objektive ✓ Sammlerstücke ✓ versicherter und nachverfolgbarer Versand ✓

classic.leica-camera.com

The GOAT. Oh, the golden 1990s, lets make R great again!

 

[250swb]

For clarity if the OP wants a zoom lens that optically is pretty well as good as the 50mm Summicron it is the 35-70mm Vario Elmar f/4 1997-2009 and manufactured by Leica's partner Kyocera. But it's only optically as good at 50mm because it isn't an f/2 lens and many of Leica's sought after characteristics are found in the wider apertures.

The 28-70mm f3.5-f/4.5 is a Sigma lens and not even a Sigma design that Leica have improved upon. Sigma have improved vastly in quality over the years, but back then it was a cheap zoom at best while masquerading in a Leica name. It was intended if you like as a 'kit' lens to get people out the shop with both a body and lens in their hands.

The 21-35 f/4 Vario Elmar 1997-2009 is the sister to the 35-70mm and they make a great pair. Again it's optical quality is very, very close to using primes.

The daddy of them all is the 28-90 f/2.8-f/4.5 ASPH Vario Elmarit which is even better optically and a direct match for all the primes within its reach, but it's expensive.

But given that a late date 50mm Summicron R isn't incredibly expensive it is a good choice. It changes the balance of the camera making it feel lightweight in comparison to a zoom and you get f/2 where the image quality excels (but owning up my photography means I rarely use f/2).

And regarding the mis-information going around the Leica Vario Elmar and Vario Elmarit (but maybe not the Sigma?) are step-less zooms that do not need to be re-focused when zoomed. I have them so I kind of know this for sure.

 

[xkaes]

For clarity if the OP wants a zoom lens that optically is pretty well as good as the 50mm Summicron it is the 35-70mm Vario Elmar f/4 1997-2009 and manufactured by Leica's partner Kyocera. But it's only optically as good at 50mm because it isn't an f/2 lens and many of Leica's sought after characteristics are found in the wider apertures.

I was unaware that Kyocera produced the 35-70mm f4.0 Vario-Elmar lens -- which very well might have actually been made by Tomioka, which Kyocera acquired when they bought Yashica. Minolta made the earlier 35-70mm f3.5 Vario-Elmar version.

 

[RezaLoghme]

No other 28-70mm Vario Elmar R lovers here?
Nobody?
The lens was part of the R-E "bundle", and also part of the mildly questionable "Olypmpia" set.
Funny how the O. Games are not as fashionable anymore.

(posted the link because of the great pics, it is rare to see a R body/lens combo in such pristine condition)

My theory is that the 28-70mm, being probably one of the cheapest R lenses besides the 135mm and the various 70-200/210 Vario Elmars, is a great "beater" lens which the user does not babysit but expose it to where the action is.

 

[miha]

Everybody is different, but I would never use a slow zoom lens on a manual focus camera, too much work with two or three rings to twist before you're ready for a shot. And this Sigma-made Vario Elmar, Leica-badged lens is overpriced (average in every department, and with heavy distortion on top of it) and would be the last lens I'd buy for the R system. YMMV.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Yeah I have already bought it some time ago, for 280 EUR if I recall correctly, so its alrready "sunk cost". Now see what to do with it.
That's why I am keen on getting to know people who bought that lens when it was new.

 

[Craig]

Zoom vs fixed is always about tradeoffs. Size vs weight vs max aperture vs 1 lens over several.

The one zoom can replace several fixed lenses, plus you have the advantage of everything in-between to frame exactly as you need to. As you have seen, this comes at a cost of optical performance and the zoom is usually a larger lens than any of the primes.

The prime disadvantage is you need to carry 3 lenses to replace the one zoom and you'd always be changing lenses. The advantages are faster max aperture and (usually) between optical performance.

Only you can say what is best for your shooting style. Fixed subjects are fine for changing to the right lens, while something that is rapidly changing might be best suited to the zoom.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Zoom vs fixed is always about tradeoffs. Size vs weight vs max aperture vs 1 lens over several.

The one zoom can replace several fixed lenses, plus you have the advantage of everything in-between to frame exactly as you need to. As you have seen, this comes at a cost of optical performance and the zoom is usually a larger lens than any of the primes.

The prime disadvantage is you need to carry 3 lenses to replace the one zoom and you'd always be changing lenses. The advantages are faster max aperture and (usually) between optical performance.

Only you can say what is best for your shooting style. Fixed subjects are fine for changing to the right lens, while something that is rapidly changing might be best suited to the zoom.

Did you work with a 28-70mm VArio Elmar R?

 

[Craig]

Did you work with a 28-70mm VArio Elmar R?

No. I've not owned Leica R. Same concepts of one lens vs 3 apply in any system though.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Ah ok.

I am specifically looking for users of the 28-70mm Vario Elmar R, and for some fresh perspectives.

 

[RezaLoghme]

My "thesis":

Because the Leica R Vario‑Elmar zooms are unloved by forum purists and inexpensive on the market, they become the lenses you instinctively reach for in the real world — the ones that see the most streets, the most airports, the most human chaos. And in doing so, they paradoxically produce the most interesting work.

• Unloved = guilt‑free use
  The 28–70 and similar Leica R zooms never carried the cult mystique of Summicrons or Elmarits. That means you don’t feel like you’re “wasting” their magic if you shoot graffiti, construction sites, or a cluttered market. You just use them.​
• Cheap = you take it everywhere
  Unlike a €4k 50 mm APO Summicron that might stay home for fear of theft or damage, a €350‑500 Vario‑Elmar can go into a backpack, to the seaside, on a hike, or to a busy souk without a second thought.​
• Zoom = reactive shooting
  In “places where there is a lot to see,” the ability to frame on the fly is crucial. Instead of deciding, “Should I bring the 35 or the 50?” you just zoom to where the action is happening.​
• Underrated = pleasant surprise
  Many users online report being shocked at how good their results were, after expecting mediocrity based on forum chatter. That sets up a “quiet satisfaction” — you’re getting Leica colour and rendering, but in a lens no one is bragging about.​

 

[skahde]

The more lenses I own in the range around 50 mm there more do I appreciate nice rendering. If a lens is special in this regard I buy it if it's not too expensive.
With the 28-70 Vario (made by Sigma afair) it would be a big surprise if there was any chance you would ever ask "this shot has such a great look, I must own that lens, which one was it?"
In a word: Get the Summicron. Or if using any other system look on flickr or wherever what pictures from the best primes for this system look like and get hooked too.

 

[RezaLoghme]

I have bought the (3rd gen) Summicron already.

I am looking at Reddit and Flicks posts of people who used the 28-70mm, and it is interesting to see how one perceives a photograph when knowing or now knowing with which gear it was made.

I am not a pixel peeper but it would be great to compare the 50mm Summicron R and the 28-70mm Vario Elmar R (set at 50mm) like for like.

 

[loccdor]

When shooting 35mm, I like to carry two cameras, one with a 28mm and one with a 135mm. If that's impractical, I go with a single camera and usually a 50mm.

I use small camera bags clipped with carabiners to belt loops, or clip the camera directly to a belt loop from its strap mount with a carabiner. This allows very fast access of both cameras without putting a load on the back.

Advantages of 2 cameras also include: different films (color & b&w, fast and slow), mechanical breakdown redundancy, battery (if applicable) redundancy, and never being unable to take a picture during reloads.

Since I would always carry 2 cameras while traveling far from home anyway, zooms have less appeal to me.

When the lenses have massive price differences, that's a different discussion.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Yeah my 28-70 cost less than half of what the 3rd gen 50mm Summicron costs.

 

[dokko]

I am not a pixel peeper but it would be great to compare the 50mm Summicron R and the 28-70mm Vario Elmar R (set at 50mm) like for like.

Since you seem to have both lenses, why don‘t you just do exactly that?

Take a picture with the 50 cron, swap to the zoom set to 50mm, take the same picture again.
Do it once at the same aperture and once where you use the cron at f/2.

I’ve done exactly that with many Leica R lenses (not the 28-70 zoom, but the 35-70 f/4 and my most used primes), mainly compared them to Zeiss C/Y, Zeiss ZF, Nikon AF and Nikon AI-s lenses.

To give you a heads up:
It will depend a lot on the light/subject of the picture and the film/scanning/enlarging you use.
A Noritsu scan of a landscape shot at f/11 with Kodak Gold 200 will hardly show any difference.
A high quality scan of landscape shot on Portra 160 or a moody portrait on TX400 can show a significant difference between lenses, in resolution, colors and rendering.

 

[RezaLoghme]

What if the 28-70mm makes better photos than a prime lens?

 

[dokko]

What if the 28-70mm makes better photos than a prime lens?

Very much depends on what you consider „better“.
For me it doesn‘t (or rather, so far no zoom I tried did).
but as said: give it a try yourself. it might work perfectly fine for you.

 

[RezaLoghme]

My "thesis":

Because the Leica R Vario‑Elmar zooms are unloved by forum purists and inexpensive on the market, they become the lenses you instinctively reach for in the real world — the ones that see the most streets, the most airports, the most human chaos. And in doing so, they paradoxically produce the most interesting work.

• Unloved = guilt‑free use
  The 28–70 and similar Leica R zooms never carried the cult mystique of Summicrons or Elmarits. That means you don’t feel like you’re “wasting” their magic if you shoot graffiti, construction sites, or a cluttered market. You just use them.​
• Cheap = you take it everywhere
  Unlike a €4k 50 mm APO Summicron that might stay home for fear of theft or damage, a €350‑500 Vario‑Elmar can go into a backpack, to the seaside, on a hike, or to a busy souk without a second thought.​
• Zoom = reactive shooting
  In “places where there is a lot to see,” the ability to frame on the fly is crucial. Instead of deciding, “Should I bring the 35 or the 50?” you just zoom to where the action is happening.​
• Underrated = pleasant surprise
  Many users online report being shocked at how good their results were, after expecting mediocrity based on forum chatter. That sets up a “quiet satisfaction” — you’re getting Leica colour and rendering, but in a lens no one is bragging about.​

Nobody replied to these so far. A lens is more than its optics, it is also about the usability.

 

[Craig]

My "thesis":

Because the Leica R Vario‑Elmar zooms are unloved by forum purists and inexpensive on the market, they become the lenses you instinctively reach for in the real world — the ones that see the most streets, the most airports, the most human chaos. And in doing so, they paradoxically produce the most interesting work.

I use Nikon, but the lens that is on the camera 90% of the time is the 24-120 F4. Has vibration reduction so good for a few more stops of handholding and the range covers off almost all of what I want to do. It's a perfect travel lens. I would never want to go to 3 or 4 fixed lenses to replace it for travel.

So yes, I generally agree with you. Any small quality tradeoffs in a zoom image are better than no image because you had the wrong lens, or where changing lenses when something happened and you missed the shot.