Hello-

This is going to be my first serious camera and I have shot with a lecia m6ttl and really enjoyed it. Having never owned a leica before it will not be no adjusting to the shutter speed dial, and from everything I know, that seems to be the biggest complaint. I also dont plan on using a flash, at least not for a while, so the battery issues seem to be moot for me too. Unless there is something else that I am missing, I think I have settled on the body. But the first lense is a big issue. I am looking for this camera to give me real freedom to go with me everywhere and take wonderful photos in the largest array of situations. I am a musician and spend alot of time traveling and doing things at night. Useless information perhaps. The lenses I am leaning towards are the Summilux 35/1.4 and the Noctilux 50/1.0. Could I go wrong with the summilux 35? Would the Noctilux be to specialized? I have never shot with a 1.0 aperature so, this would be unfamiliar ground. Please let me know your thoughts if you have a moment.

Kind regards, joshua

-- joshua kessler (jkessler@hotmail.com), January 22, 2002

Answers

Go to a store and hold a Noct and a 35 'Lux and a 50 'Lux. If the weight of the Noct, the size of the Noct, and the fact it only focusses to 1 meter don't bother you, you now only have to decide which focal length will give you the images you're after. OTOH, if the size, weight etc of the Noct seem a little daunting, you might now be considering the 50 'Lux, and you still need to figure out which focal length you prefer. From a user standpoint, all of the above lenses have their strengths and weaknesses. But IMO, the 35 asph 'Lux has the fewest weaknesses and the most strengths, and hence I think you could not go wrong with it.

;-) Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 22, 2002.

If I were you I would start off with the 35 lux. It gives you the best compromise between a standard lens and wide angle lens and its the top of its class. The Noctilux is in a different class but its design is specialized to achieve good results in low light. Unless you are looking for unique optical signatures that the Noctilux provides (like coma at max aperture) you are better off with either the 50 lux or 35 lux. My personal choice is the 35 lux for its speed, sharpness, and focal length.

Or why not a 50 summicron? Its plenty fast @ F2 (just buy faster film) and a very cost effective combination with the TTL body that won't leave you cash strapped and hunch-backed from carrying a monster like the Noctilux

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), January 22, 2002.

Joshua,

I made a reply in another thread (Noctilux) for a question you asked about depth of field and landscapes. I'm letting you know here because you should receive a notice about this post, and then you can look in on the other thread. There are some click-able links to photos there.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), January 22, 2002.

Dear Joshua,

Welcome to the wonderful and sometimes whacky world of Leica M. The 35/1.4 is a good choice if you don't mind the weight and size. You might consider 35/2. It is as heavy but more compact I think. If money is an issue (and I sense it is not in your case) you might want to consider a late model non-aspherical 35/2. The non-ASPH 35/2's are also considerably lighter and very nice in the hand.

I don't recommend the Nocti 50/1 for a new user. If you have to ask wether you need it, guaranteed you don't need it. It is a specialty lens optimized for shooting in available darkness a full apature. It is simply not an all around lens. And, yes, it is HEAVY, with a capital H and V. I shoot in available darkness and I've yet to get one. (I hear you, friends: "You will.") It you want speed, go for the 50/1.4.

If you have money to burn, you might consider Leica's 28/2. This is not only an outstanding 28 but one of the best lenses ever made for 35mm cameras. Chasseur d' Images (# 234, 240) spoke of it these terms: "Le sommet du sommet : hallucinant!"

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), January 22, 2002.

Josh, I just got my first Leica M (M6 TTL .72) with a Summilux 35 in November. I tossed and turned for weeks before deciding on the lens, but as soon as I saw my first contact sheet I was 100% convinced. Some may disagree, but I'm confident that at least 50% of the frequent posters on this site agree that the latest 35 Summilux ASPH is THE M lens to have. Superb in low light yet ideal for walking the streets during the day. A wonderful and versatile lens...you won't be disappointed if you already like the 35mm focal length.

As for the Noctilux, I can't say because I've never handled one. Having stated that, it is a specialized piece of equipment. Heavy in the hand and hard on the wallet. In fact, you could buy a 35 Summilux and a 50 Summicron for the price of a new Noctilux. I also understand that the Noctilux is difficult to focus, especially in a hurry.

I'm far from being an experienced Leica user, so take my opinion for what it's worth. Still, I was in your shoes a few months ago so I had to chime in. Get the 35 Lux, man!

-- Luke Dunlap (luked@mail.utexas.edu), January 22, 2002.

You can hardly go wrong with the 35 'Lux as the first lens. Unless you want something smaller, lighter, less expensive, and potentially more convenient with the 35mm F2 Summicron. That was my first lens for my M6 TTL, and I've been very pleased with it. I based my Lux/Cron decision on the difference in price between the Lux and the Cron, divided by how often I would really really need the extra stop.

You can see some of the night shots I've taken with the 35 Cron here.

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), January 22, 2002.

Man I am going to buy an M6 soon as well! My first lens will be the 35 lux as well! David Alan Harvey shoots with a 35 most of the time I believe. I like the versatility, and it gives more of the atmosphere around a subject. Plenty fast too...have fun!

-- Johann (vizioneer@yahoo.com), January 22, 2002.

Starting with a 35 is good advice, but not necessarily because DAH shoots with one.

The physical mass and intrusion into the finder of the 35 ASPH Lux bothers me, and gives me pause, when I think of trading my tiny pre- ASPH 35 Lux for one.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), January 22, 2002.

I'm a musician too and I think you should consider the speed issue a lot.In the dark night clubs you will always run into situations where F2 wont do even at 3200.I used a 35mm f2 for years and most of the time got my shots but I think now that I own a 35mm 1.4 asph that that is really a great all rounder.But having said that I think it is best to start with a 50mm to train/disipline the eye for composition.The new 50mm 1.4 will also focus closer...a definate plus.It seems for me that the 35mm often leaves too much around the subject and the longer 50mm isolates more, helping produce pics with more impact.Some times I feel the 35 mm is more a snapshot lens in the way it renders.Tending to Avg looking photos esp with people in the pic.As to the noctilux I love the look and plan to own one very soon.It feels great on the m leica to me,although difficult to focus.I wouldnt get the noct as a first lens.If you want an all round lens get the 35 1.4 or maybe the 28f2.If you are thinking about 3 or more lenses eventually...you shouldnt miss the 50mm experience.Think 24mm,35mm,75mm,or 28,50,90.Keep in mind that wide angles require more thought in composition than the 50 and up.I couldnt imagine never using a 50mm but the most used lens for me is the 35mm1.4.That may change soon.

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), January 23, 2002.

Joshua-- A lot of these decisions depend on the depth of one's pockets. I had to sell my wonderful M4 and 3 lenses a few yrs ago because I needed a new car. But have since gotten back into Leica via the M4-P route. Since I thought I might have to make do with one lens for quite some time, I went with the 50mm Elmar-M. If it looks likely you'll be able to have 2 lenses, then you might do well to start out with a 35. The 75 or 90 would be a nice addition later on. But a musician might find himself in cramped quarters from time to time, and the one who suggested the 28 'cron might have a good idea. That and a 75 would make a nice combo. The 35 & 90 are nice, as would be the 35 & 75. I haven't looked lately, but I think the 28 'cron & 35 'lux Asph are priced nearly the same. I find that I can often get farther away from something, but it can be difficult to get closer, at times. For that reason, I have often thought I could make do with only a 75mm 'lux, til the ship came in and I could add the 28 or 35.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), January 23, 2002.

though i personaly prefer the 50 lux i would recommend a 35 lux as a only lens. i really like the shallow depth of field you get with that lens.

one thing really sucks with it: it has a horrible lenscap. i hardly use the huge lens shade (one reason top go leica m is its small size for me!), so i have to use the provided cap. it was made to fit both the 50 and the 35, but the outer rim with the release buttons is too large for its diameter. thet means that i tend to knock it off too often.

i tried to find out whether one of the nice voigtländer caps fit, but didn't get a reply yet. are there and voigtländer 1.9/28mm user out there? this cap might fit.

this is not a very big issue, but i paid gbp1500 for this lens, and i expect a bit more than such a crappy design for that money!

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), January 23, 2002.

I recently faced the problem of what lens or lenses to buy. I was tempted to buy the 35mm Summilux. But, size and cost were factors. I couldn't stop dreaming of the 28 Summicron, especially since 28mm is my favorite all around lens for travel. But, 28 is a bit wide for shots of people, I think. So I bought both the 28 and 35 Summicrons. I saved about $1000 buying the slower 35mm lens and that paid for a big chunk of the 28.

I couldn't be happier!!!!!! The 35 Summicron ASPH is fantastically sharp and contrasty. And, the 28 Summicron is every bit the 35's match. I haven't done a critical analysis but I think both are fantastic on my slides.

-- Tom (therbert@miami.edu), January 23, 2002.

Joshua,

My advice is to purchase Leica equipment in the best condition you can. I like used, but not very old equipment in ex+ or Mint- condition. With camera bodies (M6 or TTL) you just can't go wrong. Leica M6's hold their value so well that if you don't like what you have you will be able to sell it for within $100 or so of what you paid for it. And that's the worst case. I received a great education for the $150 I "lost" in trading my M6 away. I probably could have received even more it if I was patient, but was able to sell it almost immediately. I have no regrets. The Leica M6 teaches you a great deal of photography, composition, and technique.

I started with the ASPH 35mm Summicron f2.0 Same deal here. Very expensive but I love it. I'm not selling it, but if I were I don't imagine I'd suffer any loss in value. I didn't think I would use flash either, but when winter comes around you'll use the flash. My family loves people shots and the flash overcomes lighting tint and flourescent issues. I've taken lots of pictures in my home with f2.0 (available light) and lots with flash, and I like the color rendition of the flash shots. The DOF is so thin with lenses under F2 that you have to be real good to have your subject in correct focus. (I ain't no Mike Dixon or Jeff Spirer) Your preference will be your own, but don't discount the value of flash; I wouldn't choose a lens on the flash issue. The 35 ASPH f2.0 is a great lens.

This leica stuff is mostly luxury. If you enjoy using the products you will likely not stop with one body and lens. All are tradeable if you are diligent in the quality of your initial purchase.

Don't ignore the quality and value of Konica Hexanon lenses either. They are excellent lenses. (Thou I don't think the resale value will hold as well as leica)

Good luck!

-- David Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), January 23, 2002.