An M6TTL 0.58 and 50/2 is my entry into Leica photography, and seems perfect for the kind ogf people photography I like best. I do notice times when something wider would be useful, like for architecture and event photography.

The 35 Summicron ASPH seemed like the obvious choice, but the new 28/2 has me wondering. Just as fast, but a bit further in perspective from the 50.

Any thoughts from Leica users would be helpful.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 05, 2001

Answers

Have you used either of these focal lengths on an SLR? While they do feel a bit different on an RF, that may give you some guidance.

It's a difficult question to answer - either lens will do such a good job. My preference would probably be for the 28 at this point. It works so nicely on the .58, and provides a dramatically different perspective from the 50. Until I got my .58 I didn't use the 28 focal length very much, because it was too hard to see the frame lines. That has now changed, and I expect to be using it a lot more (and the 24 a lot less).

That said, the 35 has an awful lot to recommend it - it's smaller, and the angle of view is such that it can be used more like a normal lens while still including a dollop of context in the image. It's also a gem to use wide open (as is the new 28)and is a fair bit less expensive than the 28.

All things considered, if I was building a two-lens kit around a .58 I'd likely go 28/50.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), March 05, 2001.

The cost of either of these lenses is too obscene to buy if you're not sure you need it.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), March 05, 2001.

In my opinion, the 35 and 50 perspectives are pretty close together - I'm sure some others would disagree. I find I use one or the other, but rarely both together. Therefore given the 50, I would opt for the 28. Down the road you can round out your outfit with a 90 for a very flexible, capable, and light weight set. Dan - only you know how much you can afford and what it's worth to you. That's your business alone.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 05, 2001.

The funny thing about the 24mm to 28mm range is that I never think I'll need that wide of an angle for most of my shooting, but when I have that focal length with me, I take a lot of shots with it. I have the 24 to 120 Nikon zoom for my SLR outfit, and it seems like I spend a lot of time at the wide end. I'm still waiting for the Voigtlander 28mm f1.9 to become available, as my Minolta CLE is also a .58 finder magnification with very easy to see 28mm lines. Since you got the .58 finder, a nice 28mm may be the way to go, but as others have said, whether it is an angle of view that fits your eye, only you can say.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 05, 2001.

35mm is my normal. I just bought a 50 for a short tele (have a 90 as well). 28 never really appeals to me, I have 24 and 15 for wider views.

It all depends upon your eye and what you want out of your photos. I like wider when want wide, and modest when I want tele with only very rare exception. 90mm seems like such a long lens to me now.

godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 05, 2001.

The good news is that there really aren't any bad choice here, just personal ones! I think in large part, the type of subject matter you want to shoot will drive the choice. If you are shooting mainly people, you will need to get a little closer with the 28 than you would with the 35, and this may invade their space a bit. On the other hand, if you are shooting primarily architecture, you might have to step back a little further with the 35 to get everything in, and you don't always have that option inside of a building.

Personally, I do not currently own a 28. I have owned them in the past with a Nikon system, but ended up preferring the versatility of a 24/35 combo. I love the perspective my 35 generates and will never give it up. For wider shots or exaggerated perspectives I like the 24.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 05, 2001.

I forgot to add that the one very nice thing about a 28mm is that it's the widest lens you can fit to an M6 without needing an auxiliary viewfinder. The 28mm framelines are difficult to see with the .72x VF if you wear glasses (the .58x solves that issue), but anything wider requires an external viewfinder to obtain a full view of what you are framing.

Not that I use the viewfinder much, but it can make a difference. The person I bought my 24 from didn't use it because he doesn't like to use an external VF ... he prefers his SLR when he goes wider than the M6 viewfinder can cover.

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 05, 2001.

Dan, to the insightful and accurate comments already given, I can add only the following:

There are so many of us who think highly of the 35mm focal length, that if you tried one, you might join us in thinking so, in which case the 50mm might become your second lens;

Both of the lenses you mention could either be rewarding, or could be expensive miostakes if you don't like them. I love my 28mm on my M6, but if you're not sure, why not start with a used 28 f/2.8 for a while to see how you like it? You could always trade up. If you don't like it, you could trade for a 35. If you do like it but find there's a gap between 28 & 50, you could add a 35 later.

Best Wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 05, 2001.

Here's a new 28 f2.0 for sale on ebay from Germany. The dollar must be even stronger there right now than I thought. 28mm f2.0 on ebay no reserve

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 06, 2001.

Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I was playing with the frameline selector on my M to get a feel for the perspectives. One thing I noticed is how much easier it is to see the 35mm frame lines. I wear glasses and I have to scan the finder to see all the 28mm frame lines. Also, there isn't a second set of frame lines when 35 is selected, there is when 28 is selected. Of course, these points have little to do with image perspective, but they are a factor.

I am thinking a used lens makes sense, so if I don't make the better choice first, I can trade later with little lost investment.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 06, 2001.

My 28/2.8, 35/2 ASPH and 50/2 have all been sitting on the shelf along with my M6's since I bought a Tri-Elmar, which lives on a Konica Hexar RF body. That combination had been intended mainly as backup for the M6's and fixed lenses, but the performance and convenience is just so intoxicating that the reverse has happened.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 06, 2001.

Jay, I have the same setup (Hexar and Tri-Elmar) and I think just as highly of it as you do. While there is a performance shortfall at 28mm compared to either the Elmarit or the Summicron, it pales in comparison to being able to change lenses by just twisting that ring. The motor adds a fluidity to shooting that I really value as well. All in all it's a wonderful travel/street shooting setup.

One of the things that using the Tri-Elmar demonstrated to me is that none of the three focal lengths are interchangeable - they all have distinct characters and applications.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), March 06, 2001.

Interesting about the Tri-Elmar. BTW, the old version can be had for $1600 new, while they last. I guess the new version is about $2000. What's the difference?

My problem with the 3E [:-)] is the 4.0 maximum aperture. I do a lot of shooting at 2.8 and 2.0, and frankly I long for 1.4 pretty regularly (and I have standardized on Delta 400). Maybe I should be thinking about a 35mm Summilux?

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 06, 2001.

Dan - that sucking sound you hear ringing in your ears is called "M-affliction". It may drive you nuts, as it has many others. There is no right answer, just lots of different answers. Ultimately probably the best advice is "Go shoot pictures with what you've got. When the well-defined requirement for another lens manifests itself, go get it."

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 06, 2001.

Owning a Tri-Elmar does create somewhat of a paradigm shift re: the other lenses to own. It seems silly for me to hang onto my 28/2.8 being that it's only 1 stop faster. Since I would rarely if ever carry both a 35 and a 50, I have been seriously considering e-baying the 28/2.8, 35/2 ASPH and 50/2 and purchasing a 35/1.4 ASPH as my "low light lens".

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 06, 2001.

Dear Dan: I donīt know how long you have been with a M leica, for me is a camera that only needs one lens, or to be better said one angle of vision, it is not a zoom cannon that can make you reach any thing, more than that an M is an extension of our eyes, in wich you work with a frame in your maind, where you size what you see, for me that is Leica M photography, we are part of that camera, our feet are part of it too, for me it is not a camera in wich you have a lot of options, more that that is a camera in wich you learn to squess the little options it gives to you, little options full of fredom I would say. I have come to use diferent lenses as my principal ones, and it has been through years, with a 21, a 50, even for a wile I was stock to a 90 Elmar, for some reason that I donīt know, Iīve been with a 35 the last eigth years, and Ive become a little flexible last year by adding a 28, for me a great combination of lenses in almost the same prespective, working with this two is not thinking in any in particular, just going a little wider when needed, but keeping prespective, for me a very important thing, of course if you add a 50 or a 90 (Iīm not sure yet) youīre done, the important thing may be not losing the prespective.Best

-- R Watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), March 06, 2001.

Ah yes, I believe I do hear a sucking sound. Only six weeks an M-user, and perhaps 20 films, and I have been bitten. The camera and lens are such a delight to have and to hold, and the images so crisp and refreshing. It urges me to use it and expose more film. (Does this feeling go away?) I believe I could rationalize buying another M with another 50mm Summicron! That one would be different, silver next time ;-)

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 06, 2001.

I have noticed a 6 month or so "honeymoon" period whenever I pick up a major photographic purchase. Becasue of the fact that so much quality, as new equipment changes hands on e-bay, I have a feeling that initial excitment of new ownership leads many of us to buy more than we need.(also of course, many folks find they can't get used to Leica rangefinders) I have had a bad habit of sometimes "collecting focal lengths" instead of buying and using what suits my needs. Every so often the "Voigtlander 15mm bug" still flares up and I fight the urge to purchase that fasinating little lens. I owned a 20mm for my Nikon, however, and hardly ever used it, and I think my style of shooting has little need for the 15 either. When I find myself becoming obsessed with equipment and future purchases, I usually stick one lens on a camera and shoot a couple of rolls with it to remind myself less can be more.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 06, 2001.

I live in Daytona Beach, and we have several annual events including a twice a year motorcycle gathering, which we are having the first one now, Bike Week 2001. If there is ever a mental block for picture taking, these events offer such an over load of subjects that you are forced to slow down, or risk burning too much film. This event is about 10 days long, so I decided to go out the first day with only a single M6 and a 50mm lens. Normally I agonize over what to bring, and have gone through several basic outfits over the years consisting of combinations of Nikons and Leicas, with lenses ranging from 20mm to 300mm. I was surprised that I shot 5 rolls of film with this non- serious gear, I wasn't really hoping for much.

I just got my rolls back from that first day, and I was shocked. I have several thousand shots from previous events, but those 50mm shots are as good as any shot with the arsenal of gear I dragged around until my shoulder throbbed with pain. The best shots were on the last couple of rolls, when my "50mm eye" was fully awake and took over on auto pilot. The first few shots were weak because I was standing in the same spot I would have stood with my 105 or 135, but soon I was finding myself walking right up to the correct spot for the lens. The lack of a second, third or fourth, optical variation meant that I was working faster and more certain. For every shot I missed by not having the "correct" lens, I believe I got 10 more by not second guessing the composition. I made the camera in my hand work for the shot, and was successful quite often.

Whether you get the 28 or 35, or just live with your 50 a bit longer, I think it doesn't really matter. If you are staying in the moderate focal length range, you can be successful with any lens. I also believe that any single lens completely understood and mastered will be better than a "bag o' glass" injecting more decisions into your process. If you forgo the choice for a while longer, the selection might become more clear, or you might realize that you haven't max'ed out the lens on your camera yet. After 30 years and thousands of Dollars, I am using 50mm lens most of all on my Leicas. Had I simply knew that in advance, I'd have more money in the bank, and would be a better photographer.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), March 06, 2001.

Absolutely agree with you Al, Iīm for certain happier with ten rolls of film with one lens, than the same with an arsenal of equipment, ten rolls in a day is a good day.

-- R. Watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), March 06, 2001.

Dan...

I started out with a new 50/2 with an M6-TTL last November. A month or so ago I purchased a used pre-ASPH 35/2 and fell in love with it. After a short bit of time I sold the 50/2 and picked up a used 90/2.8. For me it is the perfect combination.

-- David Cunningham (dcunningham@attglobal.net), March 13, 2001.

I used a 35/90 combination for the first several years as an economy measure, but eventually added a 50 because I was experiencing too large a gap between them. The 50 is just right for some shots.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 13, 2001.

Al: Thanks for sharing your experience. I agree that it is not gear what will make us better photographers but feeling, practice and knowledge. I have tried a lot of gear myself and thanks to my M3s have come to your same conclusions in the last years. In fact, for the first time in my years as an entusiastic amateur I don't feel like needing to search for some new additional piece of equipment that would magically improve my photography. Which actually began improving all of a sudden since I got a R4 with a 50 mm only. Simple camera and excelent lens. Then was when I began feeling that going the simple way could be rewarding and entered the M world and began being happy going around just holding one of the M3s in my bare hands and trying to get to the right place at the right moment to do the right simple adjustments that will render right what I intended to get on film. I still have much to improve. In fact I'll always will. But doing it this way is a real joy. Now to Danīs question which is supossed to be the real matter here: from my SLR experience I got the idea that a 35 mm will be useful in far more opportunities than a 28 mm would. My feeling is that the 35 mm is the widest lens that still allows a "natural" perspective (or almost) in most situations. The 28 mm tends to render too "lensy" images for my taste. But still, sometimes it happens to be right what you need. How often it will, will depend only upon the images you want to make, I guess. Unfortunately, this being a very personal decision aimed to satisfy your own taste only, I think that there is no way for you to make a sound decision other than making pictures with both lenses (which I did) or (far less expensive) study and compare other photographers' images made with them. Photo magazines and books could help in this respect. I wish I could be of more help but I have no means to present you with 28 mm and 35 mm images here for you to compare. I hope someone else could ... Regards, Dan, and good luck.

-Ivan

-- Ivan Barrientos (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), May 06, 2001.