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!

Leica R, Zeiss Lens and M lens Mount choices.

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Some of the best Leica R lenses i owned at one point or another. I shot them years ago on Canon and the DMR.

Leica 19 R. One of the best wides around todays rate about 3400.00 You WANT version II
Leica 28mm Elmarit with sliding hood, don't get one without totally different design the older ones. 2400 today.
Leica 35m 1.4 Lux mandler design. Beautiful rendering
Leica 35mm Cron F2. Really nice lens and very sharp
Leica 50mm Lux 1.4. Outstanding lens same design as the M
Leica 80mm Lux 1.4 Mandler design. Beautiful rendering. At 1.4 it has a veiling look
Leica 90mm F2 Cron. Outstanding sharpness. On the clinical side
Leica 180 F2 Cron. One of the best around in this focal length. Big , heavy expensive
Leica 180 F2.8 Apo almost as good as the Cron. Smaller , lighter cheaper

Leica 21-35 I think F4. Really a nice lens. Again zoom better at 24mm up than 21-up. But it will outclass many others. Again expensive.

Leica 35-70 2.8 Unbelievable but forget it you can't afford it today its 10k upwards. Big heavy and very rare. Only 600 made. Leica lost money on this lens. Take my word for it I was scared to shoot the dang thing it cost so much. I paid 6k back than

Leica 35-70 F4. This is a nice all around zoom and see some members have this. Really not a bad choice at all as it is a good overall performer. Make sure you get the F4

Leica 28-90 2.8 basically this replaced the 35-70 2.8 but it is extremely good and sharp. Little clinical and again expensive , heavy and big. If you have it great buying it will set you back around 5-6k.

They have some other longer zooms but again very big , heavy glass.

There Telyt lenses again big heavy, long glass . I don't know all the models but the modular heads are very very expensive.

60 Macro. I don't remember what version I had but very sharp and still can find used.

Now many Leica lenses are still very good but don't expect to be saving any weight compared to Nikon/Canon glass. Some are more compact and the leica 28mm R i would give my front teeth for today. I still want that lens and a member just bought one on my recommendation. He shoots it this weekend. Hope he loves it. The 19mm I can't recommend enough and i have been through every damn super wide on the market. This maybe the best ever. You may see some softness in the very very extreme corners but renders like no other. Love it

Okay jumping to Zeiss in DSLR mounts Nikon ZF.2 and Canon ZE both the same glass.

Zeiss 15mm really great outstanding lens but the Samyang 14mm is a dollar short and 8 times less money. Buy the Samyang fix the distortion unless you shoot this lens a lot than get the Zeiss. Its simple you won't shoot it a lot trust me its very wide.

Zeiss 18mm . Small lens comparable and its also very good . Its the sister to the legendary Zeiss 21mm 2.8 but still a very good lens and a lot of people really like it. Distortion easy to fix in post and a normal distortion.

Zeiss 21mm 2.8 its a legendary lens and super nice but big , heavy and a older design. Has bad mustache distortion but profiles out there to fix it.

Zeiss 25mm F2 do not confuse this with the 2.8 which is a good lens but the F2 is the newer design and outstanding. I owned this lens twice now and its a keeper. I highly recommend this.

Zeiss 28mm F2 is the sleeper lens. Its a really nice lens but has field curvature and gets a bad rap for it but its very good.

Zeiss 35mm F2 again a lens most don't go to but it is really one of the best 35mm lenses around. very sharp and a great infinity lens. I owned several of them

Zeiss 35mm 1.4 well its a beast big and heavy but again really sweet.

Zeiss 50 1.4 not rated that great as wide open it has lens aberrations

Zeiss 50mm Planar F2 macro. Outstanding lens and one of the better 50's around.

Zeiss 85mm 1.4 a legendary lens but has that nice veiling look wide open. Stopped down it is very sharp. Sony has one in the ZA model and its pretty much exactly the same thing. I have the Sony today

Zeiss 135mm F2 I just sold mine to get the Sony 135mm 1.8 but these two lenses just about nothing can touch them in his focal length. Big , heavy but well worth it. Love them and love the focal length. Throw it is crop mode and you get a 190mm F2 or 1.8. Also the Zeiss 135mm like the Sigma 1.4 extender

Zeiss 100 macro is another outstanding lens. Okay Im done and going to go test the Voightlander 40mm and some other tests. Post later

I want to put a disclaimer in here. Many of you see me sell a lens and maybe think I don't like it , not the case at all. I may sell a lens purely for the only reason is to get a different focal length I may need. Case in point I just sold my 3rd yes 3rd copy of the Zeiss 35mm F2. That lens is outstanding but I wanted the 25mm F2 more and thats the only reason. So don't get mislead by my buying and selling practices. Im a freaking lens whore at the word go. I buy anything that will give me a edge. Just thought it may help. I know folks watch what I am buying and selling so please don't get mislead. All the lenses i mentioned above I would like to have all of them, of course i would not stay married and my house would be in foreclosure if i did and most likely taken more hits to the head with a baseball bat that any human can withstand. I maybe crazy but I'm not stupid. LOL
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Re: Leica R and Zeiss Lens choices. Mine

I thought this was valuable enough to make it a sticky

Would be nice if folks would do a list of M mount lenses that work on the A7R. If it works on the R model it will work on the A7 model.

Its getting very hard to find this data if we had it in a sticky thread than it would be easy access to everyone.

Please contribute and lets keep the chatter to the other threads and make this more a list type thread.

Thanks
 
All my Leica M lenses perform with no degradation on the Sony A7r.

Leica lux 35 II Mandler -what Guy said for the R+ small and light. Totally sharp from 5,6 - did I say small?
Leica lux 50 II Mandler -What guy said for the R+ small and light. Never gets totally sharp, but no one expects that
Leica cron 50 II rigid Mandler. Character with good sharpness: known look.
Leica cron M 50 last 6bit Mandler: just a perfect lens.
Leica rit m 90 2,8 Mandler compact, sharp from 2,8- perfect on sony balance
Leica Tele elmar 135 4.Mandler very good, some mechanical limits
Leica rit m III 135 2,8 very good but too heavy- going to sell it.
 

Luvwine

New member
Leica M WATE works great on A7r. Not sharp in corners till F8 but useable from wide open.

The M 90/2 apo is great from wide open. Wonderful lens.

CV 35 1.2 works very well up close from wide open. At infinity, there is loss of contrast till stopped down to F 2.8, sharp in corners on A7r starting at 5.6-8.

M Lux 50 is great at portrait distances to short range, but us problematic at infinity--especially away from center. To be reasonable at infinity, must be stopped down to F8 or smaller. Even then, it is not ideal. Best use is portraiture wide open--great bokeh and sharp as a tack in the center.

The M 135/3.4 apo is without issues. Sharp from wide open but corners need stopping down to 5.6-8 for critical sharpness.
 

BSEH

New member
You have to put in the 100 APO- Elmarit-Macro, a benchmark lens in it's class, and a kinda Swissknife only limit by it's focal length. Pin sharp from 2.8. - corner to corner. Render (to my taste) perfect for portraits. Over average bokeh, good background/foreground separation close up. Top noch at infinity, so landscape is same high class as rest... Low or none CA, vignetting, distortion.

Not so good ? hmm maybe you need a elpro or extender to get 1:1 in macro.
 
The little (104 grams) Canon LTM 35/2 - my copy has been with me for more than 50 years- has no problems with the R . It has been defined pour man's sum micron, but of shure it is a strong competitor to the summicron II 6 lenses.
Only problem flare, with light points just outside of frame.
 
Last edited:

psy501

New member
..to keep the ltm lenses coming..canon ltm 50/1.5 sonnar works like a charm..canon ltm 35/1.5 does so also, but with a bit of hard vignetting wide open..canon 50/0.95 dream lens works fabulously and the only m lens i have is the minolta cle 40/2 which is very very nice..and small..and light..
 

BSEH

New member
..to keep the ltm lenses coming..canon ltm 50/1.5 sonnar works like a charm..canon ltm 35/1.5 does so also, but with a bit of hard vignetting wide open..canon 50/0.95 dream lens works fabulously and the only m lens i have is the minolta cle 40/2 which is very very nice..and small..and light..
you have any pic with the canon dream lens?
 
Summicron R 35 type l "9 lenses". Here is portrayed with the summilux m 35.


_DSC1601 by sergio lovisolo, on Flickr

big and heavy as it is, I prefer it to type 2. It produces solid and deep images, with a look not at all related to the dreaminess of the co-portrayed lux
 

scho

Well-known member
..to keep the ltm lenses coming..canon ltm 50/1.5 sonnar works like a charm..canon ltm 35/1.5 does so also, but with a bit of hard vignetting wide open..canon 50/0.95 dream lens works fabulously and the only m lens i have is the minolta cle 40/2 which is very very nice..and small..and light..
I would add the 28mm and 90mm M-Rokkors. Both are excellent on the A7R.
 
I would add the 28mm and 90mm M-Rokkors. Both are excellent on the A7R.

But what's the status between m-rokkor 90 vs. elmarit-m 90? Those lenses look almost identical, but I've been lead to understand elmarit-m is better. i've used elmarit-m on m9 and it was fantastic. Deeply regret sellingt it now!

Currently i have a chance to snatch either of these in nice condition for a good price, with rokkor being half of the elmarit price. The elmarit is used with little signs and the rokkor is mint. So which to pick?

//Juha
 

GDI

Member
I have a late 35mm Elmarit-R that performs very well on the A7r. Would you guys think I am missing a lot when compared to the f1.4 or f2.0(other than speed, of course)? It seems it would be fairly hard to beat stopped down to 5.6/8.0...
 
I have a late 35mm Elmarit-R that performs very well on the A7r. Would you guys think I am missing a lot when compared to the f1.4 or f2.0(other than speed, of course)? It seems it would be fairly hard to beat stopped down to 5.6/8.0...
No.The elmarits 2 and 3 are similar to the 2 summicrons when stopped down.
Clearly, with the speed, you loose also the wide open look...
 

GDI

Member
Thanks for that quick reply, Sergio. Now I can continue my search for a reasonably priced 19 Elmarit-R V2! :)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
But what's the status between m-rokkor 90 vs. elmarit-m 90? Those lenses look almost identical, but I've been lead to understand elmarit-m is better. i've used elmarit-m on m9 and it was fantastic. Deeply regret sellingt it now!

Currently i have a chance to snatch either of these in nice condition for a good price, with rokkor being half of the elmarit price. The elmarit is used with little signs and the rokkor is mint. So which to pick?

//Juha
The M-Rokkor 90mm f/4 is identical to the Elmar-C 90mm f/4 other than the lens bezel and filter ring. Earlier series ones were actually made by Leica in Wetzlar on the same production line*(they say "Made in Germany" on the bottom of the lens barrel), later ones made after the CL was discontinued were produced in Japan by Minolta.

The Elmarit-M 90mm f/2.8 is a bit larger, just a bit heavier, and has a slightly different design RF focusing cam. I had one briefly years ago and it was a very nice performer. I had the Elmar-C 90/4 for some years before that.

Whether better or worse than the Elmar-C/M-Rokkor 90/4 I cannot say ... I never did anything that could count as a true comparison test. The M-Rokkor 90/4 performs very nicely wide open, and that's good enough on speed for me most of the time.

I have the M-Rokkor 90 now and tried it on the A7, but haven't done a definitive test yet. It seems to work very nicely even wide open, and f/4 is usually fast enough for my needs (although having the Summicron-R 90/2 lends new appreciation for the possibilities with a two stops larger aperture setting... :).

G
 
Whether better or worse than the Elmar-C/M-Rokkor 90/4 I cannot say ... I never did anything that could count as a true comparison test.
*sigh to me* I made just a tiny bit of a mistake with my guestion..

The elmarit-m is excellent, no doubt. I had the elmar-c 90/4 with rubber hood also, for a very brief time. I decided I didn't like it due to slow aperture. I wanted that 2.8 and also the shallower dof it allows..

Anyway, what I actually wanted to ask was about 90 elmarit-m vs. 90 hexanon-m, which are almost identical by looks but apparently there are differences in optical formula used.

So: which to get, elmarit-m or hexanon-m? elmarit used but just cla'd & nice condition vs. pretty much mint hexanon-m. Hexanon is around 35-40% cheaper, both available by "just pulling the trigger".

I got so carried away reading this thread that I mixed hexanon-m and rokkor-m :LOL:

//Juha
 

Ocean

Senior Subscriber Member
Elmarit-m, Hexanon-m and Contax-g 90 are about similar in their optical performance. Hexanon and Contax share the same optical formula. Elmarit-m is a better built lens and a bit heavier too. In term of price, the Elmarit costs about twice of the Hexanon, and the Hexanon is about twice of Contax. But you won't go wrong with any one of them for A7r.
 
Top