Dearest LUGs,

I've been scrolling through your Q&A's for weeks now and I'm still having a hard time narrowing down what I'm going to buy.

Everyone seems to say the 35 - 50 - 90 combo is the best, but I can't see myself shooting much telephoto on the M6.

I want to be able to do nightwork - yet have the best quality for daytime grab shots...so I'm thinking about buying one of the the following groupings:

1) 35mm CRON ASPH, 50mm CRON, Noctilux 2) 35mm LUX ASPH, 50 CRON 3) 35 CRON ASPH, 75 LUX

If it were your choice....which would you choose and of what generation of lens?

I've also seen many a posting that knock the Noctilux as "too specialized for much use" - since I've never shot the Noc and don't know its real worth...would it be better to buy a LUX 50 or LUX 35 instead?

Thanks,

Ara

By the bye - I want a 35 in my kit so I guess the .85 finder is out...but how bad is a .72 for focusing the Noc or 75 LUX in available darkness?

-- Ara Ayer (araayer@yahoo.com), March 20, 2001

Answers

Here's my 2 cents. If at all possible, Get yourself to a place that actually has this equipment to look at and handle it. I can tell from your question you would probably benefit from hands on experience with the equipment before making a purchase. I have bought stuff based on others opinions without first playing with it myself (easy to do in the cyber world we live in today), and it sometimes backfired on me. I know its getting harder to find well stocked Leica dealers in today's world, but depending on your location, it may still be possible and is invaluable in helping one decide what they really should buy--probably more than all of our opinions put together.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 20, 2001.

Ara,

Get to handle this stuff first. The agony comes from not having hands on access, as Andrew correctly points out.

Get only one lens.

IMHO, the 35 asph lux is a great choice because

1) You really don't sacrifice much quality relative to the summicron unlike at the 50mm focal length.

2) You get more mileage in terms of slow shutter speed "handholdability" from a 35mm lens than a longer lens, which is what you want in a large aperture available light lens anyway.

3)Furthermore, the 35 is a good choice for indoor photography, which is where many available light situations tend to be.

The .85 finder is not necessarily out-it depends on you really. I'm quite happy using it with my 35mm. Others find it impossible.

A .72 is quite adequate to the task of focusing in darkness. The finders are about equally bright, with the .72 maybe a shade brighter, actually.

Get only one lens at first (did I say that already?)

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), March 20, 2001.

Ara,

My opinion... if you are using the M for what it was intended (street photography/ surrendipity) then the 35/1.4 would be my first choice for a PRIMO one lens combination. The BOKEH is a little more complex than the 35/2 but that extra stop is nice to have just in case (and it really doesn't weigh that much more than the newer 35/2 ASPH). Otherwise, get one lens first and learn how to use it... heck, you'll have to learn how to "see" all over again when you go to a rangefinder system so best to do this with a standard lens.

Either the 35/1.4 or the 50/1.4 would be my choice now for a good first lens. I started with the 35/2 (old style) and now I have 3 lenses 24- 35-75. Choices that work for me but not until I was thoroughly familiar with the pros and cons of the rangefinder.

Photography is about quality... not quantity. Sometimes less is more.

Regards,

John.

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), March 20, 2001.

Another opinion...

I would definately get the 35 asph 'lux to allow for low-light work, and excellent everyday stuff -- so forget choice #1. As for the next lens, you mention you don't see much need for a telephoto on your M6, so perhaps the 50 'cron becomes the best 2nd lens. The good news about picking up a good used 50 'cron, is you won't have any trouble selling it if you decide you don't like it.

I use both my Noctilux and 90 APO asph on my .72 body and have no focussing or framing problems. I like the view it gives with the 35, and the 90 is still very useable. Again, if you're shying away from teles, you might be happier with the lower manification finders in the long-run.

Last point. If I could only have one lens for my M6, it would be the 35 asph 'lux because I love it, and use the 35 most. The next lens would be a tough choice between the 90 APO ash and the 24; probably the 90 by an eyelash. Then the 24, then the 50 'cron. Now for the tough part -- In reality, I probably use the 50 'cron more than either the 24 or the 90... BUT I could make the 35 or 90 work in its place for most of those situations if I had to.

Hope this helps!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 20, 2001.

Also:

I forgot to mention that I find the bokeh in the 35 asph 'lux to be a bit smoother than the 35 asph 'cron -- so on this point I differ slightly from John Chan -- but they both provide very nice bokeh, IMO.

Jack

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 20, 2001.

Ari, it makes sense to go for the 35mm f/1.4, because at that focal length the wide aperture is very useable owing to the greater depth of field. By the same token (or maybe it's a different token), f/1.4 at 75mm would help you to keep your shutter speeds up for your nightwork, to minimize camera shake with this longer focal length. I don't think the step from 35mm to 75mm is too great a stretch, and would give you a lot of versatility with only two lenses. The 75 'Lux is not exactly unobtrusive, though, if your nightwork includes candids/street work. The Noctilux scares me because of its shallow DOF wide open, its large size and weight, and cost. The 50 'cron is an image quality leader, but it sounds like speed is more of a priority for your needs. You won't sacrifice any real-world quality with the Luxes.

Best Wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 20, 2001.

I should have stated - I rented a .72 M6TTL w/a 35 Summicron ASPH for a week and absolutely loved it. Since I try to shoot manually with primes on my F100 Nikon - I had no real trouble with the transition to the M6. In fact, it was kind of a relief not having all the options that a modern SLR affords. After a day I was shooting from the hip - setting zones/DOF and getting great results on the street and subway.

Unfortunately my rental didn't include most of the lenses I'm asking about.

I usually don't buy without trying...yet I'd like to narrow the field somewhat because rentals tend to bite at $30-60 a day - depending on the lens.

I was really happy with the 35 Summicron and I was thinking of making it my first lens and possibly buying the Noc for low light later on - especially since everyone raves about the 35 ASPH Summicron.

But if the 35 LUX is just as good as the Summicron - it might be worth the money to buy it instead of the 35 Summicron and the Noc combo?

Any suggestions welcome

Thanks,

Ara

-- Ara Ayer (araayer@yahoo.com), March 21, 2001.

Oh and thanks to everyone who gave me their two cents thus far - know your advice is valued.

Ara

-- Ara Ayer (araayer@yahoo.com), March 21, 2001.

Ara:

Click here for an earlier post where I compared these two lenses.

Jack

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 21, 2001.

And click here for a post where I compred the Noctilux to the Summicron.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 21, 2001.

I've tried all of them. --> 35 lux ASPH + 75 lux <-- The .72 body is fine for this pair. Of course, this is just my opinion, as always.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 21, 2001.

I mean this with the greatest of affection, but this (or "we") are not the Leica Users Group (or LUG) as you have appeared to mistake this group for. The LUG acronym has been taken by the majordomo email list. We are, unfortunately, something less acronymable, i.e. the LPQADF, or, in a pronouncable sort of way, "The Lapquadef." So that would make us here "Lapquadeffers." Just thought you'd like to know. Thanks for posting, though!

My three main lenses are the 21/2.8, 35/2 pre-ASPH, and the 50/2. If I could, I'd buy the new 35/2 ASPH or the 35/1.4 LUX; can't make up my mind right now, so the affordability part is moot. But one thing is for sure: The 50 'cron stays, probably until the day I die, as my overall standard and favorite lens.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), March 21, 2001.

When I bought my M6TTL, the two lenses I bought with it were the 35/2 ASPH and the 90/2.8. I already had the Heliar 15. Of the three, I use the 35/2 much more than the other two. It's a beautiful lens. I couldn't see spending the extra $1000 or so for another stop of lens speed, that money allowed me to afford the 90.

When I acquired another M body, I found I needed another lens at least in the wide to normal range because neither the 15 nor the 90 was comfortable as a "keep it on the camera all the time" lens. I acquired both the 24 and the 50/2 as a result. I find that I use the 35 and 24 most now, the 50 is akin to a mild telephoto for me with the 90 being for when I need just a bit more reach than normal.

You really can't go wrong with any of the Leica lenses, but for me the cost differential between the f/2 and f/1.4 in both 35mm and 50mm focal lengths is just too great, and I like the imaging qualities of the f/2 lens versions more. (I'd probably pay the difference for the jump to the Noctilux if I could afford it, but it's a heavy piece of glass when you don't need all that speed.)

If you're still not sure, I'd buy just one lens and then figure out where to go from there. BTW: the .72x body focuses all my lenses wide open perfectly and I suspect it will work beautifully for the 50/1 or 90/2 as well. Pick which viewfinder magnification you want by your vision needs and most commonly used focal lengths. I find that 35/50/90 work great with the .72x for me, I don't use a 28 or I'd have bought a .58x.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 21, 2001.

OK, stop the 35mm lovefest! :-) I shoot most of my pictures with the lens the camera was built for (old Oskar must have had a REASON to pick the 50, right?) and about 2% with the 35mm, and then regret it later. So you should definitely choose for yourself. It'a a lot of money, no matter what you do, but an older 50 Summicron is hardly going to break the bank, so why not start there? And if you don't think you're going to use a 90, don't let the bullies :-) here push you into it :-) I know I'm in the minority here, but my second choice would be a 24mm. Don't you have some lens choice habits already established with other cameras that you could move over to the Leica for a start???? In my opinion, that would be the best place to start.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 21, 2001.

Real Leica people shoot with ELMARs.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), March 21, 2001.

To Michael Darnton:

Michael, calm down... as Tony pointed out (thank goodness!) this is not LUG :-)

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 21, 2001.

I'm calm. But it IS a lovefest. In reality, though, I don't quite make sense of asking other people what to do in this instance. A friend of mine in a different field asks "did you pass your girlfriend around to your friends to get their approval?" (apologies to those of tender sensibilities) to people who put priority to other people's advice over their own needs. Seems like a good universal concept to me.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 21, 2001.

On the surface I (and I suspect most others) agree with you, Michael. However, the older I get the more I think this type of question is a way of flushing out the experiences and advice of those who have gone down that path. Judging by the above responses, I'd say the question has done its job!

Since there are no rule-makers present, every statement made is *inherently* that person's opinion, and that's all. Even all taken together (e.g. 35mm love fest) there's still room for plenty of other opinions. I hope every person on this forum understands the value of his/her own individuality and does not come away feeling bullied.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 21, 2001.

Thank you all for your advice. And excuse my LUG reference - apologies all around. I guess I'm going to have to go to the store and try the lenses on for size - maybe rent a few and see what's what. With such shocking sticker prices - I can't afford to play the switching game - even if Leica's retain most of their value.

Thanks again and good light to you all,

Ara

-- Ara (araayer@yahoo.com), March 21, 2001.

No problem whatsoever. Actually, I think many folks here are LUG members anyway.

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), March 21, 2001.

Tony:

Don't understand the argument here. I love the 35 mm ASPH and the 50 mm Cron. My favorite is 24 mm. Of my 14 Nikon lenses, it is the only one with metal showing through [don't like those aux. finders]. Still if I have to look at overall quality, my Zeiss 40 mm C/FLE puts them all to shame. Too bad it must be connected to a body that is so big. Different conditions require different things.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), March 21, 2001.