Lens choices: portability vs speed

[250swb]

Size apart, and small is nice if you want a comapct camera bag, it is worth remembering that even a fast lens can be stopped down to f2.8. And that is where I would normally set my downward (or is it upward?) limit if light isn't a consideration. I like the transition from OOF to in-focus you get at this sort of aperture, not so wide open that things out of focus are a mushy blur, but stopped down enough so there is still some identifiable tonal structure in objects in the OOF regions. It is a classic look, a look where things can encroach into the frame and still be recognisable and not indecipherable, ideal for people pictures, 'street', etc. where a busy image is going to encompass many things.

Steve

 

[Hausen]

I have recently tried to simplify my kit so decided on M9 + 3 Summicrons 28/50/90 + Xpan for film. Can fit in easily in a Crumpler 6 Million dollar home and is light. Agree with comments above on 50 summicron. Have had mine for a 2 weeks and it is amazing. A test shot below with it wide open I shot yesterday.


Wide open! by BigHausen, on Flickr

 

[jonoslack]

I have recently tried to simplify my kit so decided on M9 + 3 Summicrons 28/50/90 + Xpan for film. Can fit in easily in a Crumpler 6 Million dollar home and is light. Agree with comments above on 50 summicron. Have had mine for a 2 weeks and it is amazing. A test shot below with it wide open I shot yesterday.


Wide open! by BigHausen, on Flickr

shhhhhh
I'm getting there, although I reckon the slim elmarit is okay for 90 (the summicron is a little large) added to which you certainly need the 28 and 75 cron:ROTFL:

 

[ramosa]

As I alter my lenses, I know I will definitely have two recently noted lenses (Cron 50 and Elmarit 90, both most recent versions), but it is a challenge to figure out which 35 to go with. Cron 35 asph is just too modern and too clinical for me. Perhaps, the previous Cron 35 IV?

 

[Paratom]

As I alter my lenses, I know I will definitely have two recently noted lenses (Cron 50 and Elmarit 90, both most recent versions), but it is a challenge to figure out which 35 to go with. Cron 35 asph is just too modern and too clinical for me. Perhaps, the previous Cron 35 IV?

From what you write I would recommend to take the 35mm Summarit into consideration.

 

[pophoto]

I have recently tried to simplify my kit so decided on M9 + 3 Summicrons 28/50/90 + Xpan for film. Can fit in easily in a Crumpler 6 Million dollar home and is light. Agree with comments above on 50 summicron. Have had mine for a 2 weeks and it is amazing. A test shot below with it wide open I shot yesterday.


Wide open! by BigHausen, on Flickr

I don't know what it is with the 50cron (I had the last version, now sold) and M9 (Also gone), I never lusted for the faster 50lux or Noct. A wonderful lens in every way! If I ever have to go with a M again and one lens, it would be the 50cron.
I also had the 35lux, hated it to be honest! (That might be just me)


Love the shot btw!

 

[cam]

speed wins for me.

that doesn't mean you have to compromise on size, though. one of the smallest, lightest lenses i own is the 35/1.4 pre-asph. a near perfect lens, imo, (even with the occasional flying saucer flare. the only reason i don't shoot it much is the stupid 1m near focus that drives me mad.

still, one of my favourite combos to shoot on the R-D1 was the 35 Lux pre-asph, gradually opening up as the light failed until nothing but the Nocti f/1 would do.

i do have multiple lens in two focal lengths, however: 35mm and 50mm. i find the rendering different on each, and they all have their strengths and weaknesses... whilst i love using the 8 element pre-asph Cron on sunny days, if i was travelling with only one lens it would be the 35 Lux -- v.1 Asph as i have never been able to find my holy grail Aspherical (rendering like the pre-asph but able to focus at .7m)... like i said, speed wins for me (but i like to shoot in the dark).

 

[edwardkaraa]

Anyone use the Zeiss 50/2 Planar ... I'm not adverse to going Zeiss for a 50mm. Focus shift issues? Other?

-Marc

What Roger said, plus no focus shift at all. Image quality wide open is superb.

 

[Godfrey]

still getting to know the M9, have a lot of exposures under the bridge with the GXR-M now.

i mostly prefer the smaller lenses .. f/2.5 is fast enough for most things, even f/4 is quite reasonable a lot of the time ... and i like the rendering qualities of the CV Skopars as much as some of the Leica and Zeiss lenses too.

my kit is now expanded with a new CV Nokton 50/1.5 and, my, what a nice lens it is.

so ... currently i have 21/4, 28/2, 28/3.5, 35/2.5, 40/1.4, 40/2, 50/2.5, 50/1.5, 90/4 and 135/4.5 lenses to work with on the M9 and M4-2 (and GXR-M). each has its individual character, size and weight. pick almost any combination of one, two or three and that's my kit.

ten lenses, three bodies, about three lenses per body ... yeah that's about right. or too much. ;-)

G

 

[exile]

My slowest lens is f/2.8. My fastest is f/1.2. For any particular shoot I pick between 1 and 3 lenses depending on what I'm going to photograph, how much walking I will need to do, and what the prevailing light conditions are likely to be.

One of my all-time-favourite lenses is a Jupiter 3 50/1.5 sonnar. Any of the old canon/nikon/jupiter 50mm sonnars are very small, very light, and give you plenty of speed. Brian is 100% correct to mention the 50/1.5 sonnars in this thread - they are the exception in that there is no speed Vs weight compromise in this old lens design.

I agree that other great compromises are the legacy 35mm and 40mm f/2 summicrons, and the current 35mm and 50mm summarit f/2.5's.
However, I personally would never have a standard 35/40/50m slower than f/2 because I use f/2 so much in indoor shooting. Everybody draws the line somewhere, and for me it is faster than the current summarits.

 

[seakayaker]

Ah, choices . . . . .

Leica: 24/3.8, 35/2, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 75/2, 90/2.8

Zeiss: 50/1.5

Voightlander: 28/1.9, 40/1.4, 50/1.5

On Cameras today: M9 - 50/1.4 Lux, MP - 35 Cron with HP5, M6TTL (.85 VF) - 75 Cron with Kodak Porta 160

On a walkabout this past Saturday afternoon I had the M9 and used the 24/3.8, 50/1.4, and 90/2.8. (Also had a Mamiya 7 II - 80/4 and shot a roll of 220 film)


Yes, some day will have a slim kit, ya, some day soon, ya soon . . . . .

 

[Godfrey]

Ah, choices . . . . .
Leica: 24/3.8, 35/2, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 75/2, 90/2.8
Zeiss: 50/1.5
Voightlander: 28/1.9, 40/1.4, 50/1.5

On Cameras today: M9 - 50/1.4 Lux, MP - 35 Cron with HP5, M6TTL (.85 VF) - 75 Cron with Kodak Porta 160

On a walkabout this past Saturday afternoon I had the M9 and used the 24/3.8, 50/1.4, and 90/2.8. (Also had a Mamiya 7 II - 80/4 and shot a roll of 220 film)

Yes, some day will have a slim kit, ya, some day soon, ya soon . . . . .

LOL! It's at least an aspiration to be proud of. ;-)

 

[Brian S]

My M9 has a 1950 Jupiter-3 on it right now, and is probably the first camera that it ever worked correctly on.

1950 KMZ J-3: first infocus images from a very early Jupiter.

But totally worth it!

Typically, J-3's need to be "shimmed" to focus optimally on a Leica. This particular example had a focal length that was off as well.

 

[ramosa]

Over the past year, I have thought a lot about this topic. I have found that I really don't need faster than 2.0. In fact, for this reason, I recently committed the "Leica sin" of selling my Lux 50 asph. I first had a Cron 50, sold it to get the Lux 50, and then sold it to get a Cron 50. (No joke.) Here's what happened: When I looked back at the images I had with the Lux 50 from the last year, I found that I rarely used f/1.4 and hadn't gotten any captures that I couldn't have gotten with the Cron. So the Cron 50 does everything I need at that focal length and is significantly smaller and significantly less expensive than the Lux 50. So now I have the Cron 50--along with an Elmarit 28 asph, Cron 35 asph, and Elmarit-M 90--for use on my M8. When I upgrade to an M10 (whenever it surfaces), I will sell the Elmarit 28 and have a very good and quite portable "trinity" of 35-50-90. Of course, all such matters depend on what you shoot, how you shoot, and what rendering you like.

 

[Hosermage]

don't forget the imminent cron 50 ASPH...

 

[Double Negative]

Over the past year, I have thought a lot about this topic. I have found that I really don't need faster than 2.0...

Nothing wrong with that. You know what and how you shoot and realized that the Cron was a better solution. A darn good lens, that.

There have been rumors of an ASPH version floating around for a while now. I think it's inevitable. Granted, the performance increase will likely be minimal (not that going ASPH is a waste, just that the Cron is that good!) - mostly in the corners and edges. They might even add FLE. Count on it costing a lot more though... Witness the jump in price from ASPH to FLE with the 35 Lux. Holy moly!

So I'd hold onto that Cron for dear life.

 

[ramosa]

Yes. I know there will be a Cron 50 asph soon, but I actually prefer the last few Mandler lenses (e.g., Cron 50, Elmarit-M 90) to the Karbe-designed asph lenses. I like the rendering more ... and, thus, was happy find the current Cron 50 before the change. My new 35 is the Cron asph, though I had pondered the V4, too.