Ok, I have been Leica-lized about 11 months now. Started with a 0.58 TTL & 50/2, got a 35/2. I use the Leica several times every week (a lot). I have used my Contax SLR 4 times since I got the Leica. I keep thinking I need the SLR for Tele-work (don’t care about macro), but I wonder if a 90 Elmarit wouldn’t do?

I just packed up the following Contax gear for sale on Ebay. All CZ lenses, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 45/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/2.8, 135/2.8, an Aria, hoods, adapter rings, filters, cable releases, etc., and a couple of brand X lenses. That's a lot of nice stuff sitting on a shelf.

I figure I’ll sell all that stuff and use the $$ to buy the following (over time); a 90mm Tele-Elmarit, a 1.25x eyepiece, a 28mm Summicron, an 0.85 TTL, and a 135 APO Telyt.

I feel OK about this, but, I’d appreciate any thoughts others that have experienced such a drastic change might offer?

Thanks.

PS, my wife has an AF Nikon in a pinch, and, anyone interested in the Contax stuff?

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), November 28, 2001

Answers

I posted a similar question.

One thing to think about- as long as you have a steady income, getting new equipment may not be so much a question of converting old into new-- i.e., selling then buying-- but maybe just getting new a little more slowly! (like the old joke, "The ____ isn't really more expensive, we just have to pay a little longer...")

'Course, that goes against my simplicity kick.

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), November 29, 2001.

Dan, your 35 and 50 are great lenses in a classic range for the M. I might be inclined to keep the 85 and 135 with that Aria body. It's a very personal thing, but I reach for an SLR when I want a tight portrait. (I like my FM2n with 105/1.8.) I went through a Contax phase, and still recall that 85/2.8 as a "killer" lens. There's another school that says "never sell anything, you'll only regret it."

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), November 29, 2001.

Dan: As a long-time Nikon F3HP user, I'm wrestling with the same dilemma, having just acquired an M6TTL with a 50/2 and 90/2.8. I'm having a hard time imagining when I'll want to pick up the Nikon again. My longest lens for the Nikon is a 180mm, which I rarely use. For me, part of the Leica appeal is the simplicity, the minimalist approach. I'd rather spend my time learning to do more/better with less gear. So if, after you part with your Contax stuff, you feel the desire to wrap your hands around a nice SLR, I've got a Nikon F3HP I'd be willing to sell! :-)

-- Jim Reed (jimreedpc@aol.com), November 29, 2001.

Go fo it. If you don't need a tele longer than 135 and you don't need macro and you don't need to see exactly where SND filters are falling in your image and you don't need to expose 4 or more frames per second you probably don't need an SLR! (I'm wrestling with the same thoughts.)

As for your next body, if you're going to buy the 1.25 magnifier, I'd consider the .72 over the .85 -- with the .72 at least you have the 28 framelines and can still see around the 35's, so if your .58 body goes kaput you're still in business...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), November 29, 2001.

I agree with Jack, sell your SLR gear, use the proceeds to enhance your M system but, as he says, get a .72 instead of .85, especially if you're going to buy the 1.25x magnifier.

You might also find a 21mm or 24mm lens a more useful addition to your system than 28mm, since you already have a 35mm. You realize how close 28mm and 35mm are when you look at the framelines.

BTW, if you don't already have such a thing, Leica makes a very neat table-top tripod and ball head.

(I'm great at spending other people's money, aren't I? Sorry!!)

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), November 29, 2001.

Dan,

do you have an Vivitar series I for the contax, 28-105/2.8-3.8 ? That one would be tempting as well as an affordable tele lens in the 180 - 200 mm range ...

Don't give up the contax that fast, I still have mine and use it from time to time, esp. when I need a variety of lenses and do not have room to pack the Leica. It also handles a bit faster and I'd rather lend the contax to a friend than the Leica ;-)

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), November 29, 2001.

It is a pity,pity.

Contax , Carl Zeiss is an excellent system. Zeiss optics is everybit as good as Leitz/Leica, many Zeiss T* lenses are superior to Leica's: Distagon 28/2.8 Planar 50/1.4, 60/2.8, Vario Sonnar 28-85 and Hologon etc.

You are going backward-- rangefinder is a stone age technique, --- cluttered viewfinder, two small patches in the center, then surrounded by frame on top of frame..

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), November 29, 2001.

"I have the most amazing coincidence to report." - Doonesbury comic strip c. 1975.

I traded a Contax RX and some lenses (along with G2 stuff) to get my first Leica body and lenses. That was 8 months ago. I still have a lensless Nikon F body, and have felt no strong itch to get anything to put on it. I have been considering a Leica reflex body to use with the 400 Telyt, and was also thinking of getting a zoom or 180.

But the more I think about it, and the more I've tried various R (and F) lenses, the more I think I won't bother with anything EXCEPT possibly the 400. For anything shorter, I'd just as soon use one of the 90s and walk a little. For sports or wildlife or something the 90 really can't handle*, I'd rather go all the way to the 400 and get REALLY tight. (No jokes about single-malts or green-apple martinis, please!)

See nearby post about '90s revisited' - there's a link to a portrait. I much prefer working with the fast 90 to using a 180 on an SLR.

I can sympathize with the people that like having an SLR for the short teles, but I find it more (peaceful? functional? easy?) to deal with one system and not have to switch mental gears between SLR and RF, if I can make it work (and mostly I have).

*actually, I have used the M and 90 for both of these, with variable success; and also studio work. I love pushing the M and myself to the edges of the envelope, and hope to keep improving.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 29, 2001.

It is a hard decision because the Contax stuff is so darn nice, and desireable. But I haven't used it in a year, so what good is it? Hmm. I will miss the 10 meter remote release for family group shots.

Phil: Totally agree with you about the CZ 85/2.8, and amazingly good little lens.

Jim: Yea, I love the 'little' part of Leica-land. That's why I'd get the 90 Tele-Elmarit over the current Elmarit-M.

I'll think about the 0.72 vs. the 0.85, hopefully I can compare them side-by-side someday (funny how there aren't many stocking dealers for Leica-M these days).

Kai: No Vivitar Series I, but I do have an excellent Tokina 100-300/4 in the YC mount. Its about the size of an AF80-200/2.8, and it takes 77mm filters. Its a one-touch zoom. Get with me off line if your interested.

Martin: my deep fear is that you are correct.

Andy: I read it, and other testing by Jack and Paul over the weeks. I know that the 90 AA is spectacular, but I have decided on the Tele-Elmarit. I love small, your report confirms its performance, and in the end, the TE is 13mm shorter, 183g lighter, and takes 39mm filters, as compared to the current 90mm E-M. I'd put a 50/2.8 Elmarit hood on the TE, no filter or lens cap and be a happy shooter for sure.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), November 29, 2001.

Dont sell the Contax kit. I sold my and have always regretted it. It takes fine pictures and for the lost you take, it is simply unwise to part with something you may use sooner than you think or can pass on to someone close. I suspect manual 35mm Contax days are numbered and while that may not enhance its value to you, it will make it harder to replace it, should you go 360 degrees to the beginning. Best regards

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), November 29, 2001.

Dan:

The 12575 hood is significanly narrower yet deeper than the 'Cron hood, and reverses nicely over the 90TE... IMO, worth the money for the 90TE.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), November 29, 2001.

Keep the Aria and the 85/135. I too did the same thing a couple of years ago. Found that all (it seemed) of my shooting was with my Leica and 35/50 combo. Sold an Olympus kit (2 bodies, lenses from 16-300mm). Once it was gone I all of a sudden had cause to do some real tight portraits. Also some copy work of my stuff for an exibit. Ended up picking up an R3 with short zoom and 90mm plus 2X. If the Contax stuff is paid for, you'll never be able to replace it for what you're going to get for it used. Think hard......

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), November 29, 2001.

Dan,

Bob is right, you have a lot of lenses in a close range, I'd rather thin out the range and 'try' the Leica before selling - of course it is a step backward, but then every step back gives you a better overview of what's before you ;-). If I were you I'd keep a small set like the 50/85/135 with a body and get rid of the rest, which should get you a nice amount of money.

I've seen that you do not plan to get any 'normal' lens for the Leica, which is definitely a must. The 135 seems nice, but even with a .85 you'll reach the limits of the Leica. Do you really want a 28 on your .85 ? I'd try this out before because you might have problems using it w/o an additional finder. I'd do the same with the 135.

And yes, I'd be interested in your 100-300, please mail me separately.

Kai

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), November 29, 2001.

Dan: I wasn't trying to 'dis' the 90TE (not me!)

Yet another example taken with the 90TE, about f/4.

You might quiz Jay (among others) about the 135 APO vs. the previous Tele-Elmar f/4. As with the 90's, the improvements may be in places where you'll never notice them.

Otherwise I have no bones to pick with your projected choices.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 29, 2001.

Hi,

I have both systems, M6 and Contax RX. They are fine cameras. I would keep both systems. Contax lens are bargains. 50mm F1.4 costs $240 USD. Same Leica lens will cost you $1,200( the cheapest). Just be prepared to spend much more on the lens. That's one reason I purchase the Contax system after my Leica M6. Too much investment.

Good luck,

Chris

-- Chris Lee (rangefinders@yahoo.com), November 30, 2001.