Leica R 28-90 or individual M lenses?

[Paratom]

I only ever had one Canon lense that I liked and that was the 300 2.8. I just don't like the way that they draw - all primaries, no subtlety, but that's just me.

Have you tried the 50/1.2 or the 135/2.0?
In the end I mentioned Canon because IMO the Canon 24-70/2.8II is one of the best if not the best current standard Zoom. IMO it is better than the Nikon counterpart specially at the wide end, and I even go so far that I prefer it over the Sony/Zeis 24-70 because the Canon is sharp as well but has a smoother bokeh. But for sure everybody has his own taste which is good. During the same time when many people switched to Nikon because of the D800 I switched from Nikon to Canon because of the 5dIII (main reasons were speed of the camera and color) and some lenses. (I usually only take the DSLR when I need Zoom, fast AF or Tele)
Now if EVF and manual focus and going back and forth between magnification and framing and a somewhat front heavy combo dont bother you and if 28mm is wide enough I am sure that the combo of the 28-90 on an M type 240 is able to deliver excellent results. Maybe also the M with the additional grip would make this combo weight balanced. I just remember that I found even the Noctilux to be the limit of lens size/weight I would want on a Leica M.
I allways liked and like the M primes, I can see however how sometimes the convenience of a zoom is very nice. I experience this with the X-VArio for example. I often use it preselecting a focal length before I bring the camera to my face.

 

[Jeffg53]

I have owned the 135, same problem for me. I just don't like the colour. When I saw my first shots from Zeiss glass I knew what I had been missing.

Manual focus is fine, and I don't use magnification so back and forth isn't an issue. The lense would be tripod mounted, unless I was in a helicopter and then it would be at infinity.

If I give up on the M, I would still be interested in the 28-90 to mount on whatever I did get. So far, I haven't had any 'whoops, there's an insurmountable problem' moments.

 

[Paratom]

I have owned the 135, same problem for me. I just don't like the colour. When I saw my first shots from Zeiss glass I knew what I had been missing.

Manual focus is fine, and I don't use magnification so back and forth isn't an issue. The lense would be tripod mounted, unless I was in a helicopter and then it would be at infinity.

If I give up on the M, I would still be interested in the 28-90 to mount on whatever I did get. So far, I haven't had any 'whoops, there's an insurmountable problem' moments.

If you don't go for the M and want to use the 28-90 I would probably recommend a Sony A99 with EVF. Why? I have used the 28-90 on a R9 with DMR for some time and didn't find it easy to accurately focus it. A EVF would probably be the "safer" way to get accurate focus.
On the other side if you work on tripod anyways-you can allways use life view on the display for focusing.

 

[Jeffg53]

What was the issue with focus? My understanding is that the Nikon. and probably Sony, have focus confirmation these days. I'm not interested in an A99 but rather its successor. If I don't buy an M, it will be for a larger sensor other camera. Coming from 40MP 3:4 to 24MP 2:3 where I would crop very often makes the M the only acceptable option. That may sound silly but my understanding is that the M is in a class of its own with its sensor.

I had an A900 with Zeiss glass some years back and couldn't get good looking files from it but I think that C1 can do a lot better job these days.

 

[Paratom]

What was the issue with focus? My understanding is that the Nikon. and probably Sony, have focus confirmation these days. I'm not interested in an A99 but rather its successor. If I don't buy an M, it will be for a larger sensor other camera. Coming from 40MP 3:4 to 24MP 2:3 where I would crop very often makes the M the only acceptable option. That may sound silly but my understanding is that the M is in a class of its own with its sensor.

I had an A900 with Zeiss glass some years back and couldn't get good looking files from it but I think that C1 can do a lot better job these days.

Just to be clear: I do not vote against the new M. Indeed it is my favorite camera at the moment.
The problem I had with the 28-90 (as well as other lenses) on the DMR was that I found it difficult to achieve totally accurate focus. With a fast prime it is a little easier because the shallow DOF you see in the viewfinder (plus the brighter viewfinder) makes focusing easier than a lens at f4.0.
Specially with digital sensor small focus inaccurancies can destroy the whole advantage of a slightly better lens.
Even with the big bright viewfinder of the Leica S I find AF in most cases to be more accurate than manuel focus.
I am not saying that it is not possible, but in my case if I find it difficult to manually focus lenses with todays DSLRS. If you dont like Sonys color its not an option anyways Thats why I thought if I personally was insisting to use a 28-90 I would probably choose a camera which allows to use EVF (like the new M or the A99).
I think what you really need is a S2 + 30-90

 

[Jeffg53]

Thanks. One thing that the H did really well was AF. I'm hoping that my ageing eyes are up to the challenge.

As for the S2 and 30-90, great idea but even I have my limit and that is not somewhere that I want to go. Besides, if you think the 28-90 is heavy, that combo would be alot more so.

 

[Paratom]

Thanks. One thing that the H did really well was AF. I'm hoping that my ageing eyes are up to the challenge.

As for the S2 and 30-90, great idea but even I have my limit and that is not somewhere that I want to go. Besides, if you think the 28-90 is heavy, that combo would be alot more so.

I didnt mean to say the 28-90 is too heavy, just that I find it in relation to the camera body/size.

I am looking forward to the images from whatever you decide (I just browsed your site and enjoyed the great images. I even asked myself why you would step away from your current Hassy gear for that kind of subjects? Have you made a decision already?

 

[Jeffg53]

The decision is made. I am no longer a Hasselblad owner. That's the first time I've been in that position for many years. My only camera is an OM D and load of lenses. That leaves me in a funny position - a clean slate and some serious decisions to be made. The one thing that I am sure of is that Leica lenses are in there.

I understand what you mean about being front heavy. If I weren't going to be tripod mounted, it would be a serious issue.

I'm glad that you liked my site, thanks. I'll try to keep the standard up whichever way I go.

 

[algrove]

Thanks Guy. Better or different is exactly how I see the 28-90. On my H4D, the 35-90 zoom was used for 90% of my shots. This let me shoot with a single lense most of the time. The 28-90 looks like it would fit that bill. Again, I have already bought the 100 APO as I it is unique. As to weight on the mount, I believe that the Leica adapter comes with a tripod mount, if it ever ships. I think that the shot of the adaptor on the Leica site is a 240 with a 28-90.

Yes Jeff, the one I used at Photokina had a removable tripod mount.

Just happen to recall that some guys are using the Contax Zeiss Vario Sonnar T* 28-85/3.3-4.0 on the M240 since they really like the contrast it puts out. It entails again another adapter which for me might be one too many. but if it is "better" then its worth a look. I must say Zeiss lenses have always had a soft spot in my heart since my first Hassy 500C. Today I still love how the SWC with 38 fixed Zeiss renders images.

 

[mmbma]

Go back to film? Buy a Linhof 612 or 617 and you will never want anything else for landscape.

The decision is made. I am no longer a Hasselblad owner. That's the first time I've been in that position for many years. My only camera is an OM D and load of lenses. That leaves me in a funny position - a clean slate and some serious decisions to be made. The one thing that I am sure of is that Leica lenses are in there.

I understand what you mean about being front heavy. If I weren't going to be tripod mounted, it would be a serious issue.

I'm glad that you liked my site, thanks. I'll try to keep the standard up whichever way I go.

 

[Dr Owl]

Have you considered the possibility of waiting for the rumoured Nikon D4X, Jeff, and using it with Leitaxed lenses?

Nikon to release new entry level DSLR camera, "revised" compact cameras | Nikon Rumors

You mentioned the D800 earlier, seemingly without that much enthusiasm, but the D4X (or whatever Nikon calls its next landscape camera) is likely to be more solidly built ... and may well have a significantly enhanced specification.

It won't compete in any way with a Leica M as a walkabout camera, but used solely on a tripod it might have its place.

Do single-digit Nikons have the focusing accuracy that you need?

 

[Jeffg53]

Go back to film? Buy a Linhof 612 or 617 and you will never want anything else for landscape.

I don't miss film at all and I've sold my Imacon scanner and I don't much like panos either. I may be odd but I am very happy with squares and comfortable with 645. In anticipation of a return to 2:3, I have been trying out 4:5 compositions. That's actually one of the attractions of the D800. It can give you a 45 mask in the viewfinder.

 

[Jeffg53]

Yes Jeff, the one I used at Photokina had a removable tripod mount.

Just happen to recall that some guys are using the Contax Zeiss Vario Sonnar T* 28-85/3.3-4.0 on the M240 since they really like the contrast it puts out. It entails again another adapter which for me might be one too many. but if it is "better" then its worth a look. I must say Zeiss lenses have always had a soft spot in my heart since my first Hassy 500C. Today I still love how the SWC with 38 fixed Zeiss renders images.

Great, thanks. I'll take a look at the Contax. I'm torn between Zeiss and Leica. They both render beautifully to my eye.

 

[SKueh]

Jeff,
Understand that you are looking for a 28-90 Vario Elmarit. I might have one for you. Check your PM in box.

 

[Jeffg53]

Have you considered the possibility of waiting for the rumoured Nikon D4X, Jeff, and using it with Leitaxed lenses?

Nikon to release new entry level DSLR camera, "revised" compact cameras | Nikon Rumors

You mentioned the D800 earlier, seemingly without that much enthusiasm, but the D4X (or whatever Nikon calls its next landscape camera) is likely to be more solidly built ... and may well have a significantly enhanced specification.

It won't compete in any way with a Leica M as a walkabout camera, but used solely on a tripod it might have its place.

Do single-digit Nikons have the focusing accuracy that you need?

Actually, I'm more interested in what Sony is supposed to be coming out with soon. My lack of enthusiasm is not towards the D800 but DSLRs in general. Having sold the H I don't want to end up with another heavy system. The interest in the R lenses is driven by Leitax as I can use them whichever way I go.

The M240 is the most attractive system going at the moment but I just want to wait and see for a while. While I'm doing that, my idle mind has turned to lenses. The 28-90 is very attractive because I shoot long rather than wide and I often find myself wanting a little more with a 24-70.

 

[Jeffg53]

Jeff,
Understand that you are looking for a 28-90 Vario Elmarit. I might have one for you. Check your PM in box.

Thanks. PM sent.

 

[jonoslack]

Neither of which are exactly stellar performers, as I understand it. The attraction of the 28-90 is that it is stellar.

HI Jeff
Actually I think the WATE is a fantastic performer . . but I would agree that the MATE is really not so good as the 28-90.

Hearing what you're saying about landscapes and tripods it sounds like the 28-90 might be exactly what you need.

All the best

 

[Jeffg53]

I'm certainly hoping so, Jono. I may not know what my next camera will be but I'm decided on the glass.