Which Lens would you get?

[ToddB]

OK guys. This piggybacks on thread of FE and AE1 .. A member mentioned the the FE can be fitted with a Leica R lens with an adapter.. If you were to get one Leica lens for FE, which would it be?

Todd

 

[Rick A]

I wouldn't, I would stick to OEM lenses. IIRC, you lose infinity focus with adaptors.

 

[ToddB]

OEM lenses. IIRC

What are those?

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Manufacturer's lenses. Personally, I don't see the point in buying a Nikon body and then trying to stick on it some other lens than a Nikon one.
If you want a Leica lens, then get a Leica camera. They're very nice cameras and it is an excuse for LAS (Leica Acquisition Syndrome).

 

[Rick A]

Original Equipment Manufacture means to match brands, and if I remember correctly

 

[BrianShaw]

If I didn't already ahve all of the Nikkor lenses I'll ever need/want/use... I'd consider the Zeiss lenses in Nikon mount long before adapting leica lenses.

 

[ToddB]

Planar Zeiss.. ahh yes. Those are awesome.

ToddB

 

[BrianShaw]

Zeiss. "I" before "e" except after "c".

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Planar Ziess.. ahh yes. Those are awesome.

ToddB

Spit out that koolaid!
The Planar is a double Gauss, just like the Summicron... and just about every other standard 50/55/58 for 35.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Spit out that koolaid!
The Planar is a double Gauss, just like the Summicron... and just about every other standard 50/55/58 for 35.

But this one goes to 11...

 

[E. von Hoegh]

But this one goes to 11...

Huh. Mine go to 16!

Todd, don't waste your money on a Leitz lens and an expensive new mount to preserve infinity focus. It won't have auto diaphragm (IIRC) and at f:4 you won't be able to tell it from a Nikkor.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

http://youtu.be/4xgx4k83zzc

 

[E. von Hoegh]

http://youtu.be/4xgx4k83zzc

http://harryshearer.com/le-show/

 

[gone]

The R 90 2.0 Summicron is about the best 35mm portrait lens you can buy, but I make do w/ a less expensive R 90 2.8 Elmarit. The Summi will set you back probably $700 to $800, and if you are patient you may find an Elmarit for $450-$550. You'll want the first version. I bought mine for less than $300. It has a bad rear element w/ lots of marks from fungus removal. Looks like it was sprayed with salt or something. I had to shim the bad element w/ washers from Ace Hardware because whoever cleaned the fungus forgot to put the shim back in. Still, I'm pretty happy w/ the IQ. I do regret selling my Summicron though.

The lens mount to put it on a Nikon is $20, and the lens focuses perfectly to infinity. No issues there at all. Shots are Tri-X, taken w/ the Elmarit on a Nikon N8008s SLR.

 

[benjiboy]

All I can say is if Nikon and Canon lenses aren't good enough for you you must be one hell of a photographer.

 

[ToddB]

In my defence. I always thought Leica glass was superior. Later I'll drop an image a shot with that Nikkor 135mm 2.8 lens I got a while ago. Let me know if the Leica R or Ziess would do a better job.

Todd

 

[tony lockerbie]

I have both Nikon and Leica R cameras (SL, SL2) and while the Leica lenses are special, so are most of the Nikkors. If you want to use Leitz lenses find a good SL, shouldn't be too expensive. If you already have a Nikon, look for a 85mm 1.8 or 105mm 2.5, these lenses are really good....or if you are a rich man, find the 85mm 1.4...truly great lens.

 

[Alan Gales]

I bought a Contax 139 back in the early 1980's. I owned 5 Carl Zeiss lenses. I have had friends who shot Leica, Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus and Pentax. I also used to sell cameras in a Venture store which was similar to Target plus I had friends who worked in real camera stores.

The saying back then was if your 35mm Camera and propriety lenses were not sharp enough then you needed to move up a format.

I think that saying really applies today with all the cheap medium format equipment out there.

 

[Dr Croubie]

I wouldn't, I would stick to OEM lenses. IIRC, you lose infinity focus with adaptors.

Depends what lens you put on what body, and whether you get an adapter thin enough.
Leica R, Nikon F, M42, Pentax K, Olympus OM, C/Y, they all work on Canon EF and FD with no problems whatsoever (except the obvious loss of AF & electronic-aperture). I daresay that this may have slightly contributed to the popularity of Canon (d)SLRs, they're almost a 'universal acceptor' of other brand SLR lenses. The irony is that the most prominent lens that EF can't accept is their own older FD/FL.

(actually, my PK-EF adapter is too thin, infinity focus is where the lens says about '1m', I can't get any closer than 3m or so, which may or may not be a problem on an 8mm fisheye, haven't used it enough yet).

 

[jerrybro]

Leica R bodies are stupid cheap these days. KEH has an R4 at ex for $105. I've never shot the R but did have an M setup, everything is now gone but the M4 body. I loved the construction of the lenses, and the optical quality was good, and they are so dang small, but in the end I cannot tell what was shot with Leica and what was shot with Nikon or even Minolta without checking my notes.

 

[jerrybro]

The R 90 2.0 Summicron is about the best 35mm portrait lens you can buy, but I make do w/ a less expensive R 90 2.8 Elmarit. The Summi will set you back probably $700 to $800, and if you are patient you may find an Elmarit for $450-$550. You'll want the first version. I bought mine for less than $300. It has a bad rear element w/ lots of marks from fungus removal. Looks like it was sprayed with salt or something. I had to shim the bad element w/ washers from Ace Hardware because whoever cleaned the fungus forgot to put the shim back in. Still, I'm pretty happy w/ the IQ. I do regret selling my Summicron though.

The lens mount to put it on a Nikon is $20, and the lens focuses perfectly to infinity. No issues there at all. Shots are Tri-X, taken w/ the Elmarit on a Nikon N8008s SLR.


View attachment 87603


View attachment 87606

Very nice shots, and I'm sure it is a marvelous lens, but I'll give credit to the photographer and the processing first.

 

[pen s]

Would it be simpler just to get an R body. Some of them are not very expensive.


I obtained a couple of Super Takumars, a 50 f1.4 and 135 f3.5 for $30 at the end of the day at a camera show. Never thought of trying to adapt them to my OM mount, I just picked up a M42 mount Fujica....for $20....it works and even included a battery.


The best body for any mount lens is a body from the same company.

Alright...you got me, M42 mount lenses are a special case.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

It seems to me that you are going about your camera selection backwards. Figure out what lenses you want, then get a body that they fit. I prefer Zeiss and Leica lenses myself. Lots of people say that the lenses don't matter, but I can see a difference and I am not delusional. If you want to use Zeiss lenses there are a bunch of bodies that are good. Even the Yashica FRI is good, and can be had for a song. Leica lenses tend to be more pricey and the bodies are as well. I use Contax for SLRs and Leica for rangefinder.

Don't overlook Pentax and Minolta either, especially if you want to save some dinero.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

It seems to me that you are going about your camera selection backwards. Figure out what lenses you want, then get a body that they fit. I prefer Zeiss and Leica lenses myself. Lots of people say that the lenses don't matter, but I can see a difference and I am not delusional. If you want to use Zeiss lenses there are a bunch of bodies that are good. Even the Yashica FRI is good, and can be had for a song. Leica lenses tend to be more pricey and the bodies are as well. I use Contax for SLRs and Leica for rangefinder.

Don't overlook Pentax and Minolta either, especially if you want to save some dinero.

Yup. Totally agree. Or Nikon too.

 

[dehk]

Why would you need anything else but a AIS 50 1.4?