The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Hello and Question(s) about the M8

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Hey everyone, my first post on this very nice forum. I'm not sure how I ended up here, but I'm delighted to discover there's a fair amount of experience with the M8 present.

Without too many tedious details, I'm returning to photography after a 20 year layoff. As a student in the 70s, I was fortunate to have carried an M3 with 35, 50, and 90 lenses. The sad thing is, I wasn't all that excited about it then since my real passion was 4x5. Fast forward to the present and I decided last year to jump into the digital world and bought a Nikon D2xs with 12-24, 55-70, and 70-200.

It's been a fun learning and re-learning experience. The thing I am liking least however, is the fact that it's pretty hard to blend in when you're carrying the mass of a camera and lens combo like the D2xs. Sometimes it's not an issue, but there are enough times that it is.

So... I've been considering the M8 as an additional setup. But after scanning a bunch of the threads here and reviews elsewhere, I'm a bit overwhelmed. Is there a thread or threads here that might have a listing of a decent "kit" for the M8? Are there lenses for the M8 that offer different quality and price point options? What about the issues of color cast and banding? Have they been resolved?

Hope you don't mind me asking, but this group more than any other I've found seems to have a great deal of real-world M8 experience. Thanks in advance for your response and thanks to the hosts for the opportunity to ask.

Tim
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
Welcome to the forum, I'll start with lenses at different price points and quality, The CV lenses built with either the M-mount or LTM converter are outstanding low price high quality.

As for a decent kit, that's going to depend on your shooting style and needs. I do lots of low light and my kit is very different from some one doing landscapes.

Banding seems to be fixed. Color cast if you are referring to the Magenta blacks it's function of the sensor, just put IR cut filters on and have fun.

Another very good cheap resource is a subscription to Reid Reviews. I has saved me many times over the cost of the subscription and Sean is a devoted professional user of range finders.

I think you find this good place to learn and feel free to ask questions. I know I ask a lot....
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Welcome Tim . Man you asked the loaded question and a very good one too. You will get many answers here which is great to have to go by. i think the best advice i can give folks on lens choices is first find the lens that is your so called normal lens . The go to lens or what i like to call the lens cap lens. For me that is the 28mm and for others it is the 35mm. now depending on which lens fits YOU the best than you build from there. Now say 28mm is the lens to build around than it all comes to spacing for 28 users you could go 15,21,28,50 and 75 or 90. For the 35mm lens cap folks than a 15 or 18 , 24, 35, 75 maybe the best spacing lenses. So before you start going crazy like some of us here and buy everything ( okay guilty as charged , no question) i think you would serve yourself better by knowing what that lens cap is than we can build you a system depending on your budget and needs. Just in lenses alone there are 3 major brands Leica, Zeiss and CV and all three have different budget ranges and the all have a different looks and feel, so the choices seem endless and in a way they are. But maybe tell us what you currently use and that go to lens. Let's figure that out, now if you can get to a store and look at the M8 and try some glass even better.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Thanks John and Guy. All new territory for me and you've suggested some very good first steps. I'll certainly make use of the Reid reviews and keep the CV lens link in my back pocket until I learn a little more about the universe of available lenses.

And that universe seems rather large! Without starting any kind of flaming debate, can anyone provide a from-the-hip-without-excruciating-technical-detail assessment of the perceived qualities of the 3 major lens mfgs (Leica, Zeiss, CV) that fit the M8? At this early stage I'd like to hear some informed generalizations about the products from each--some "conventional wisdom" about the differences between the three.

As for my Go-To focal length, I think I'd want to look through both the 28 and 35 while mounted on the M8. But my initial thought is it would likely be the 28 since I guestimate that it will be closer to the 35 Summicron I used on my old M3, which was almost permanently mounted on the body. I pretty much never used the 50.

Thanks again, this is really helpful.
 
M

Manatee

Guest
As I mentioned in a former thread I'm about to step up to Leica M8 as well.

I'm thinking of buying a M6 first to see if RF is the right thing for me.

I found a list with serial numbers and corresponding production dates for the M6.

Is there also a list with serialnumbers/production dates for the lenses on the net?

Then another maybe silly question which has nothing to do with the fine art of photography: I see you guys using real short message jargon like LOL, ROTFL etc. etc. Please introduce me, being a Dutchmen with only limited knowledge of English, in this world.....

THX

:confused:Rob
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
As I mentioned in a former thread I'm about to step up to Leica M8 as well.

I'm thinking of buying a M6 first to see if RF is the right thing for me.

I found a list with serial numbers and corresponding production dates for the M6.

Is there also a list with serialnumbers/production dates for the lenses on the net?

Then another maybe silly question which has nothing to do with the fine art of photography: I see you guys using real short message jargon like LOL, ROTFL etc. etc. Please introduce me, being a Dutchmen with only limited knowledge of English, in this world.....

THX

:confused:Rob
Lens dates and serial numbers

Download Erwin Puts Leica Lens Compendium. It has a table of serial numbers and production dates and much more but take some of Erwin's observations with large shaker of salt. ;)

He has a lot of data on his site regarding lens look it over.
 

LJL

New member
Tim,
Welcome. I will jump in with some of my personal thoughts here, but please do realize that there are an incredible number of very astute, talented and active Leica shooters on this forum that will be able to give excellent and sometime contrary opinions. Enjoy the reads and the thoughts.....great community of very helpful folks.

Your questions about differences among the various line of lenses (CV, Zeiss and Leica) is excellently reviewed many times by Sean Reid, as has been mentioned. There are others that only consider Leica glass the best. My personal kit has all three for very different reasons, including cost, contrast, "look", and specific focal length or aperture needs. Generally, the Zeiss lenses tend to be very sharp and produce a bit more contrast than many of the Leica or CV lenses. That may or may not matter for some. I put a Zeiss 25/2.8 lens into my kit because I wanted a "sharp to the edges", more contrasty "look" for the wider angle shots I like to to take with it. Very specific choice on my part. The Leica counterpart is outstanding also, but does not have the "bite" that I desired. In the mid-range, I have a CV 35/1.2 Nokton, a CV 50/1.5 Nokton, and a Leica 50/1.0 Noctilux. All have vastly different looks and capabilities. The CV 35/1.2 Nokton is there because I love shooting in lower light, love the angle of view, and for street work, the slightly less contrasty look it delivers for me is what I enjoy there. The Leica 35/1.4 is a stunner for sure, and folks will rightly rave about it. It is both too clinically sharp and contrasty for my needs, and it costs a whole lot more. The Leica 50/1.0 Noctilux is without a question in my mind, one of the most unique imagers I have ever seen or used. I love it. However, for normal shooting at f5.6 and up, it is no different, in my eyes than any other Leica, Zeiss or CV lens. It is a stunner at f1.0-1.4 where nothing else can do what it does. I carry a CV 50/1.5 Nokton as my "other 50" because it delivers images very close to the Leica 50/1.4, but at a fraction of the cost. A bit less contrasty, and maybe not as razor sharp, but it does not give up much ground, in my humble opinion.

On the really wide side, I went with a CV 15/4.5 Heliar. Maybe the best deal to toss into a bag for an excellent wide angle view. It comes with its own peculiarities, like not being rangefinder coupled, and needing some work to get it properly coded and filtered to use like a Leica lens, but all worth the effort. It is slower, has a bit of a warm color cast, and does not really shine until about f6.3 or so, but outstanding little gem for many folks. At this wide end, Leica's 16-18-21/4 WATE is incredible for many. Costly, but still great. The Zeiss 18/4 looks to also be quite outstanding at less cost, maybe more contrast, but capable of holding to the edges. Just need to fiddle with it for filters and coding mount.

Others will offer more insights on the other wides in the 21-28 range, as well as longer end stuff, should you be interested. Take a look at some of the great threads from Guy and others on the new Leica Summarits. They also look to be outstanding lenses at more reasonable prices for building an excellent kit.

Hope I have not offended too many with my comments, but this is a great and tolerant group, and I appreciate all their insights. Read as much as you can stand, as there is some great perspectives, and some excellent example image postings to support many of the comments and thoughts.

Like you, I started with and M early on (M4 in the late 70s). Things are quite different and very exciting now for Leica, and there are so many more options for building a great kit over a wide range of needs and prices. Hope some of this perspective helps.

LJ
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
LJ--Thanks for your insight. I am beginning to understand just how much I don't understand. But that's the challenge (or one of the challenges) when contemplating a new camera system.

One thing that seems to emerge from this short discussion and in some of the other threads, is the idea that the various lenses are being compared as equal in many ways and the final choice can be made based on a stylistic preference rather than strictly technical performance. That's a new concept to me since most of the lens options for other camera systems are based on something like a cost/performance relationship. For example, you can buy one of Nikon's best lenses and achieve the ultimate performance the lens/camera system offers or you can pay a bit less with a 3rd party lens and achieve results that come close for far less money. I'm not hearing that kind of comparison here.

I have lots of reading (and dreaming) to do! Thanks again!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
You've got it Tim... Because Leica has been around so long and their lenses have been excellent for several decades, we are forced to use vague adjectives when trying to explain the differences in the look between the various versions. Unfortunately, this has led to us using words like "signature" and "fingerprint" when referring to the way a lens "draws" or "paints" it's image, and thus Leica shooters often appear snobbish to the uninformed; we're not, we just don't have a better mechanism to describe the subtle differences :) But hang around for even a few weeks, and you'll pick up on most of it pretty quickly.

Cheers and welcome!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I have a long winded answer just saving it for the early morning when the brain actually works. LOL
 
K

KJB

Guest
I'm relatively new to the RF system myself but here are a few observations based on the lenses I've tried since getting my M8.

The Zeiss 25 ZM is one of the best bang for the buck lenses. Stopped down a little it is brutally sharp and has great contrast if you prefer the look. It's the one Zeiss lens that I would consider over its Leica counterparts. The Leica's tend to perform better wide open though which is a priority for me as I do a lot of low light work. So here I would go with the 24 elmarit asph or 28cron but that's me.

At 35mm the Leica cron asph can be found at pretty reasonable prices used and is extremely sharp but once again heavy on the contrast. A lower contrast and faster alternative is the CV 35 Nokton which I think has a nice fingerprint though I have only owned the Cron and not the CV. The ultimate lens at this focal length is the pricey 35 lux asph which I think is the best balance of size and speed and it has a wonderful and in my eyes the most pleasing fingerprint of all the 35's though many others will have their own preferences, namely earlier pre-asph version crons.

At 50mm the Lux asph can do no wrong. A bit pricey but it has given me the most WOw factor than any other lens. Open it up and it has wonderful bokeh for isolating subjects and is a great portrait lens for me. The Noctilux at its current prices is probably the lens with the least bang for the buck but if you want to take pictures that have a look like no other then this is the lens to own. I have difficulty focusing this one wide open and it can be hit and miss depending on what you are shooting but when you get it right with the Nocti it can produce a look that you can't get anywhere else.

At 28mm the cron asph is king. Balanced contrast and with great sharpness and color saturation. For me this lens has one of the most pleasing fingerprints in the entire Leica lineup. This is the one you want if you could only have one lens on the M8.

At 21mm and wider the Zeiss 21 ZM is a great value. Sharp out to the corners. I sold this for the 21 asph again for the better sharpness wide open in the center. The 21 apsh is pricey but in my opinion this is where RF systems come into theri own at the wide end. The sharpness and colors I get from my 21 asph are what I always wanted and never got out of my Canon system and L lenses. I love the fingerprint of this one which in my eyes is right up there with the 28 cron asph. The WATE is the most versatile lens with its three focal lengths and it has a distinctly Leica look (colors and tonality) but there is a reason I can't quite let go of the 21 asph despite the overlap and its not just the extra stop.

So a great bang for the buck starting point I think would be Zeiss 25 and the Leica 35 cron asph. If you want to go all out then the Leica 21asph, 28cron asph, 50 lux asph may be a good base to start with. Again, others may have completely different preferences but most of these M mount lenses are so good its difficult to find fault with any of them.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Morning all M8 shooters hopefully you have better weather than me this morning to do some shooting. Anyway Tim i got up early so i can get into my long writing mood. LOL First off you came to the right place , many experienced shooters and M8 owners here. So let's start with the M8 itself and i know you have been reading a lot so far but thinks are pretty good with the M8 and yes it has a few Warts but essential it performs great provided you know what to expect from a camera. One issue today is the use of IR filters. In the beginning Leica made the IR cut off to weak and skipping all the reasons what and what happened the bottom line comes down the fact to the most accurate color the use of IR filters is needed. Besides that if you are shooting any syntethic clothing without the filter it will have a magenta cast. No to control that the use of filters is needed but when you use a lens from 35mm and wider there starts to becoming a cyan drift in the corners. So leica designed there firmware to eliminate that drift when using IR filters and specifically the the Leica IR filters the firmware is tuned to and with a lot of testing around here and such use leica filters at least from 21mm or 24mm wider since the firmware is tuned to them they get rid of the drift better than the use of the B=W filters. We can get into more detail on all this but just to give you a good basic rundown. Buy the filters and put them on every lens and forget everything i just said, it can be that easy to ignore all this stuff.

Okay before i get to far off the Ir filters , Leica uses a 6 bit code to identify the lens in use , so if you put a 24mm elmarit on with the coding the firmware knows how much correction to throw in to clean up any of the cyan drift and such. So to the users everything gets corrected in the Raw file and you don't have to worry about it.

Now the trick here is coding the lenses so this correction will happen otherwise the camera does not know what is on the camera at all. One reason many folks just buy the Leica glass and get there lens coded at the factory or repair facilities . Buying new the codes are already there.

Now with Zeiss and the CV lens (Voightlander) they do not have this code. So there are several tricks around to code your CV and Zeiss lenses so the can copy the coding of a lens that matches . say you have a Zeiss 28 than you can code it for a leica 2.8 elmarit and so on. We can really get into a lot of detail here and there are some places that can mill the coding spots into the lenses and even make custom rear mounts AKA my Zeiss 18mm has a custom mount on it and is coded for Leica's Wide angle Tri elmar which we call it the WATE lens. Also the Voigtlander lenses are screw mount lense so you need a adpter to a M mount to use them on the M8, now here there is a gentleman named John Milich that makes a custom screw on adapter that has the recessed holes for coding which you the end user fills in with Black and White nail polish to match the code to the Leica lenses. Many folks have a Voightlander 15mm and do this for example than they jam or John makes a hood that they can put a 39mm IR filter in it. Again we can get into this as you go along. i would be here for days describing all of this andi may miss some points so as you ask specific questions the members here can guide you in the right direction.


Stop
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Go

Did not want to lose what i wrote sorry , been logging people in and answering PM'S also so i have ten pages open .

Okay let's move on to Lenses and basically what some of the differences are . Now i have a couple Zeiss lens and CV lenses that i have used . i do suggest reading Seans reviews on the lenses to since they will be more in depth plus he really does a nice job on testing. This forum is very good friends with him and he is also around here a lot too so if you have specific questions he certainly will jump in and help. One other thing to is we have a LOT of experts here that really are being quiet at the moment but there are some real brains around here to help too.

Okay leica lenses , Zeiss lens and CV lenses all have different price points besides having different construction and looks or fingerprints as Jack said.

leica has 4 modern lens designs actually 5 but lets talk about the 4 main ones.

Summilux are the 1.4 lenses which there are 3/ 35,50,75
Summricrons are the F2 lenses which there are 5 28,35,50,75,90
Elmarits are the 2.8 lenses and there are 3 or 4 21,24,50,90
Summarits are the newest lense 2.5 speed and there are 4 35,50,75,90
Elmars i don't even know all these but there is the WATE which is a Tri-Elmar 16,18,21 all in one lens.

I may have missed a few and i certainly will be corrected trust me, leica owners are pretty detail folks and they will correct me as they should.:ROTFL::ROTFL:

Now lets just talk about the looks of them because this is were the rubber hits the road and i will use general comments from folks that i have read and include what I know.

Summilux lenses first off are pretty expensive because there is special lens elements in them and there design is very complex because there built for speed and across the board leica designs for great performance wide open that is the leica way and in all there series of lenses they build for performance wide open or slightly stopped down and often there best apertures in general are at F4 and 5.6 .

Now the 35 and 50 are very sharp wide open and the 75mm is also but not to the degree as the 35 and 50 which are ASPH lenses , i will just talk the modern lenses than questions about the older designs no ASPH you can ask questions on. The 75mm is not ASPH. Now the Summiluxes tend to be very sharp in the middle wide open but tend to be soft in the corners and lower contrast until you stop them down a touch. So the 50 and 75 tend to be very nice portrait lenses , now the 50 asph is something special because it is amazing wide open and stop down, there is not a better 50mm lens made IMHO. It is deadly sharp

Summricrons in general the summricrons were built to be the best at F2 and stopping down only adds DOF to the images so there great contrast wide open and they pretty much stay that way all the way through the apertures. They tend to have high saturation and contrast and are very sharp across the frame even wide open. Very nice lenses and if you want sharp and punchy these will not disappoint.

Elamrits i can only speak of the 21mm and 24mm. These are wonderful wide angles and the 24mm i consider the sharpest in it's class although the Zeiss 25mm folks may have something to say about that. The 21mm is very very good and i love it but has a nicer smoother look than say the leica 24mm . Both extremely good lenses and either one will make you a very happy camper. i own the 21mm myself

Summarits these are new lenses and right now many test being done on these by myself and Sean also. There budget priced but not budget in quality and actuall y very very nice please see the reviews on these here and Seans site. To me there riding the middle between the look of the Lux and the look of the Cron. There price tag is very attractive 1495 for the 35,70,90 and 1195 for the 50mm I believe. i bought the 90mm myself.

Elmars i can only speak of the WATE which is a 16,18,21 F4 lens and it is actually a zoom tecnically but has indents for each focal length. Great lens and wonderful for traveling and produces extremely nice images but It does have a price tag too.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Zeiss maybe let some members talk about these more since i only own the 18mm


CV lens if some members can talk about them a little also. But these are very inexpensive and do produce great results almost everyone seems to have a 15mm and at 350 dollars they should. I have a 12mm which no one makes a 12mm besides CV and i love it , great little lens but these are not RF coupled so quessing is part of the fun with focusing

Please excuse any spelling errors if i corrected them everyone would think i did not write this stuff:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
 

robsteve

Subscriber
On the whole Leica versus third party lenses, I think you are better off just getting the Leica lens unless it is a focal length you will not be using much.

Some people start off with the third party lenses and then the Leica bug hits and they have to have the best, a Leica lens. If you just buy the Leica lens to begin with you avoid the extra expense of the third party lens.

My suggestion would be to start with a used Leica lens or one of the new Elmarits.

Robert
 

Terry

New member
I am new to the M8 and rangefinders in general (and very much an amateur). I had the double problem of not only what lenses to get but what focal lengths would be my go to. I didn't want to make a big mistake and had some excellent emails back and forth with Sean Reid. I bought the CV35 f2.5 and CV75 f2.5 as my first two lenses (of course along with the required 15). In addition, with the advent of the M8 and the crop factor Leica lenses in anything wider than a 50 were not at all easy to find.

But, then as Robert said above the "I want to have a Leica lense syndrome set in" and I bought a new coded 50 'cron. On the used side it was easier to find longer focal lengths and I got a 90 Macro Elmar (guy forgot this one one the list). It is as Jack puts a two-fer. Really nice, small collapsible 90mm lens and adapter to use it close up for macros.

Yes, it is nice to have Leica coded lenses and not worry about getting adapters and self coding the lenses.

Then......

I was going away on a trip and feeling like I had nothing on the wide end that was fast. The advice from the expert owners here was the 28 'cron. I have found "my" lens. Love the focal length and it will be on the camera most of the time. An expensive choice of lenses but not one regret in buying it.

So, one big thing in your favor is that the backlog of lens backorders seems to be clearing and there are more being list as available and in stock at dealers. In addition the Summarit just got launched which adds new possibilities.

FWIW - I am going to stick to the CVs for my focal lengths between the 28, 50 and 90 as I don't change lenses that much and just step forward or back.

terry
 

robsteve

Subscriber
FWIW - I am going to stick to the CVs for my focal lengths between the 28, 50 and 90 as I don't change lenses that much and just step forward or back.

terry
What I wonder is how often people use the CV lenses after getting a Leica lens? I can see it when the CV lens is a 15mm or 21mm and the other Leica lenses are 24mm and up.

In your case Terry, I bet you will use the 28mm Cron before going to the 35mm CV. In other words, the money spent on the 35mm CV was a waste unless you use it or sell it. The point I was trying to make in the first post is that buying CV or Zeiss lenses just costs you more money rather than saves you money.

Robert
 

woodyspedden

New member
What I wonder is how often people use the CV lenses after getting a Leica lens? I can see it when the CV lens is a 15mm or 21mm and the other Leica lenses are 24mm and up.

In your case Terry, I bet you will use the 28mm Cron before going to the 35mm CV. In other words, the money spent on the 35mm CV was a waste unless you use it or sell it. The point I was trying to make in the first post is that buying CV or Zeiss lenses just costs you more money rather than saves you money.

Robert
I think you are right Robert. Once you spend $5K to get the body it is unlikely that you will be satisfied with the cheaper lens alternatives, at least over the long haul. However I am unsure as to whether this is more about brand loyalty, some snobbery etc than with image quality. If you carefully read some of Sean Reid's reviews the Zeiss lenses in particular and the CV lenses in many cases have extremely high image quality although drawing differently than the Leica counterparts. Now understand that I pose this as a possibility while owning Leica lenses exclusively.

Woody
 
Top