yet another lens advice post!

[ramosa]

All,

To begin, let me say that I know matters such as this are highly subjective. That said, I think I can benefit from input.

I use an M8 with Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH and Summicron 2.0 50mm. (All are in Mint condition, as I am compulsive as heck about such things.) I have three interests in photography: 1) landscape; 2) street photography; and 3) OOF (bokeh)-oriented photography. I find that my current lens makeup is adequate for interests #1 and #2, but not #3. I do NOT plan to build a large collection of lenses. In contrast, I plan on having two or three lenses—and I’m not interested in 75mm or 90mm lenses. I do value lens speed and shallow OOF and would like to move into a lens that draws in a less “clinical” manner. I am pondering three “options” and am seeking input. (Each of these options would cost me about $4,000.)

Option 1: I could purchase a used Nocti 50mm 1.0. This would address interest #3. I could still use the Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH for interest #1 and the Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH and Summicron 2.0 50mm for interest #2. Pro: The Nocti is a darn interesting lens. Cons: The Nocti is a darn heavy lens, and I’d have two of three lenses at 50mm.

Option 2: I could purchase a used Nocti 50mm 1.0, sell the Summicron 2.0 50mm, and purchase a used 35mm lens (either a Summicron 2.0 pre-ASPH v4 or Summilux 1.4 pre-ASPH). With this option, I could use the Nocti for interest #3, the Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH for interest #1, and the Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH and used 35mm for interest #2. Pros: The Nocti is a darn interesting lens, and I would end up with three lenses of different length. Con: The Nocti is a darn heavy lens.

Option 3: I could trade in the Elmarit 28mm 2.8 ASPH and Summicron 2.0 50mm and purchase the following two lenses: Summicron 28mm 2.0 ASPH and Summilux 1.4 50mm ASPH. I could use the Summicron 28mm 2.0 ASPH for interest #1, both lenses for interest #2, and the Summilux 1.4 50mm ASPH for interest #3. Pro: I’d have two excellent fast lenses. Con: I’d be improving my lenses, but not adding to them (e.g., per the addition of a third lens or a Nocti).

So it is with this predicament that I turn to you. Again, I know this is highly subjective—and that there is no “right” or “wrong.” Any help would be greatly appreciated. I have learned a lot about this—and other matters—from reading posts on RFF.

[Mephiloco]

First things first. Sell me the Summicron. I'm in Gentilly, right by Robert E Lee.

Thanks in advance.

[Mephiloco]

I'd lean towards option 3, or option 1, mainly because the Noctilux is so large, I'm not sure how practical it would be to have it as your sole 50mm lens, and to use as an all around lens. If you went with the noctilux I'd say definately either get a cheap, slower 50mm to use as a walk around lens or keep the summicron.

[JSU]

What's your budget? If you like the 28 & 50, keep them, don't bail on a lens and then once its gone have regrets.

Watch the ads here and perhaps ebay, try and snag a LTM Canon 50/1.2. They can be had for around $400 - $450. You'll also need a LTM to M adapter ring. The Canon 50/1.2 is as different from the 50 Summicron as night and day. While the 50/2, as well as your 28/2.8 are both amazingly sharp and highly corrected, they lack, to my tastes, the signature of this older Canon 50.

The Canon 50/1.2 is no Noctilux, if it were it wouldn't be 1/10th the price. Having once owned the f-1.0 Noctilux and currently owning the Canon 50/1.2, I can't say that the Noct is 10 times the lens as the Canon. I have a pair of other 1.2 lenses, both of modern design, one a 35mm and the other a 60mm. The Canon 50/1.2 is unique enough to me to justify having it as well. It has been useful to me for street shooting as well as portraiture and other stylistic interpretive uses.

There is not shortage of examples of the imaging of the 50/1.2 both here and Flickr, judge for yourself if it might be a consideration for you.

[stephaneb]

Option 2 is bound to make you kick yourself forever. I'd suggest option 4: do nothing on the trade side and keep photographing.

[ramosa]

Thanks for the comments and advice. The Internet can drive me crazy at times, but it sure is nice in this regard.

Mephiloco (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=29931): I will keep that in mind, but I have moved west from New Orleans. Just a few weeks ago. (I already miss the charcoal-grilled oysters!) I hear you on the Nocti. I think I’d love it in some regards, but would I end up lugging it around? Actually, one critical reason that I moved from Nikon to Leica was my having gotten so darn tired of lugging around heavy cameras and lenses. I greatly like the simplicity—and lightness—of Leica. I guess I should scratch the Nocti!

JSU: I think I could afford any of these options, with a “hit” of about $4 K (maybe a bit more). But, of course, I’d prefer to spend less! You make an interesting suggestion. I have pondered the Canon 50/.95, but the prices seem to be pretty high (not has high as the Nocti, of course). I agree—my two lenses are very sharp, but I seem to be wanting for a lens with different type of draw. Perhaps, I should look into the Canon 50/1.2, per your suggestion. Is it heavy (like the Nocti and Canon 50/.95)? I will definitely check out some examples on flickr.

stephaneb (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=25753): thanks for humorous and succinct recommendation. Perhaps, trading out of my current lenses really won’t bring a good end, while costing money. After all, I am not unhappy with them; I’m just hoping to add a lens that draws differently (i.e., in the classic Leica manner). My “eye” would appreciate more of an artistic than clinical lens.

A follow-up question would be … Per option 3, how much are the “upgrades” worth? (I mean from Elmarit to Summicron for the 28mm and from Summicron to Summilux for the 50mm.) My reading and viewing lead me to believe that these two new lens are more in line with the type of draw (more "artistic" than "clinical") that I seek, no?

[Benjamin Marks]

Ramosa:

I want to second JSU's basic point. You have two great lenses. If you want to add a capability to your kit, you really should be framing the question in terms of the kind of OOF areas you like. There are many reasonably fast lenses that will give you an effect different than that produced by the two you have. For $100-200 you could get an older lens like a Summarit or a Summitar that will really give a distinct look to your pics. Or a Canon 50/1.5 in LTM plus an adapter which is a Sonnar clone and will give you a very different look wide open than your more modern glass.

Ben Marks

P.S. these options are inexpensive enough that you won't have to sell your current, excellent glass -- three lenses is not a "collection"

[sepiareverb]

Split the difference and get a 50/1.4 pre-ASPH. Interesting yet not heavy. Keep the 28/2.8 ASPH.

[JSU]

Thanks for the comments and advice. The Internet can drive me crazy at times, but it sure is nice in this regard.

Mephiloco (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=29931): I will keep that in mind, but I have moved west from New Orleans. Just a few weeks ago. (I already miss the charcoal-grilled oysters!) I hear you on the Nocti. I think I’d love it in some regards, but would I end up lugging it around? Actually, one critical reason that I moved from Nikon to Leica was my having gotten so darn tired of lugging around heavy cameras and lenses. I greatly like the simplicity—and lightness—of Leica. I guess I should scratch the Nocti!

JSU: I think I could afford any of these options, with a “hit” of about $4 K (maybe a bit more). But, of course, I’d prefer to spend less! You make an interesting suggestion. I have pondered the Canon 50/.95, but the prices seem to be pretty high (not has high as the Nocti, of course). I agree—my two lenses are very sharp, but I seem to be wanting for a lens with different type of draw. Perhaps, I should look into the Canon 50/1.2, per your suggestion. Is it heavy (like the Nocti and Canon 50/.95)? I will definitely check out some examples on flickr.

stephaneb (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=25753): thanks for humorous and succinct recommendation. Perhaps, trading out of my current lenses really won’t bring a good end, while costing money. After all, I am not unhappy with them; I’m just hoping to add a lens that draws differently (i.e., in the classic Leica manner). My “eye” would appreciate more of an artistic than clinical lens.

A follow-up question would be … Per option 3, how much are the “upgrades” worth? (I mean from Elmarit to Summicron for the 28mm and from Summicron to Summilux for the 50mm.) My reading and viewing lead me to believe that these two new lens are more in line with the type of draw (more "artistic" than "clinical") that I seek, no?

Both the 28 Summicron and 50 Summilux are heavier, and bulkier, than the counterparts you currently have. I have the 28 Summicron specifically to use on my M8.2, for me it is a comfortable combination. Does it feel bulkier, heavier than my M6 and 35 Summicron (v4), absolutely but not so that I don't hesitate to carry it most of the time.

I don't currently have a Leica 50 but I have had both the 50 Summicron and 50 Summilux, both pre asph, and the Summilux was not as useful to me as the Summicron. My Summilux only focussed to 1 meter, whereas my Summicron focussed to 0.7 meter, for me that was a big deal as used on my M6's. I should point out that my Canon 50/1.2 only focusses to 1 meter, but I have other lenses that focus much closer so this isn't an issue for me now.

You mentioned the Noctilux and the Canon 0.95, both are unique and I feel not too very similar to each other. I have a trio of 1.2 lenses, two are modern and the third, the Canon 50/1.2 is older. It is perhaps its age that I find appealing, wide open it isn't as sharp and contrasty as more modern lenses, but that is its charm. This isn't an issue of depth of field, but rather what the lens does with both that which is in focus and that which isn't. I'm bored to death with the concept of bokeh. I am however, totally jazzed at seeing the backgrounds that happen when I use this lens, which i tend to use wide open at least 90% of the time. If it is closed down to f-5.6 or 8, and it isn't shot straight into a bright light, it can look very modern. But who cares as I deliberately use it wide open. Same as when I owned a Noctilux, the whole point of having such a lens is to use it wide open. If you want to shoot a 50 @ 2.0 - 16, use a Summicron.

So much for my soapbox. Search the Flickr tags for the lenses that appeal to you as well as consider actually using such a lens. For me the Canon 0.95 makes some pretty amazing images, but the technique of using that beast is more than I want undertake. The Canon 50/1.2 is not that much slower and it isn't a slow lens, at all. But it is half the bulk of the 0.95, which is so big some have resorted to using popsicle sticks to reach the lens release button on the M8. Not a problem, not even close to being a problem, with using the 50/1.2. And the weight of the Noctilux is not insignificant either.

[hiromu]

Any reason you don't consider Voigtlander Nokton F1.1 or Hexanon F1.2?? Seems much less expensive option if you can live with non-Leica lens. Also, I tend to use wider than 28mm for landscape, usually 21mm, sometimes 15mm, on M8.

[elshaneo]

I agree with JSU, get the Canon LTM 50mm f/1.2 for its charming signature vintage look, I also have this particular lens. Check these 3 links:

http://www.pbase.com/shanelam/image/115592522

http://www.pbase.com/shanelam/image/115592521

http://www.pbase.com/shanelam/image/115592523

They were shot with this lens ;-)

I also find the lens to make a perfect balance (size and weight) with my Leica M7...

[ramosa]

Thanks so much for all of your input and comments. I need to take some time to ponder this and view photos from some of the recommended lenses.

Benjamin Marks (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=1566): I get your point—and value it. Perhaps, the best approach is consider improvement by addition (and not addition and subtraction). You noted, “Three lenses is not a ‘collection.’” That makes me chuckle, as though I agree with you, my wife may not. Ha.

sepiareverb (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=10537): a new wrinkle—the 50/1.4 pre-ASPH.

JSU (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=31367): thank you again for your in-depth comments. You mentioned some interesting lenses, including your use of the Summilux 28mm on you M8.2. I find that I tend to use my 50mm primarily wide open. That’s a reason why I have pondered other 50mm variants. And I didn’t sense that you were on a “soapbox”—more that you were providing great aid to me, a guy in need of advice. I will definitely consider the Canon 50mm 1.2.

hiromu (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=27130): I guess I have only been directly exposed to Leica lenses. But I have read good things about other lenses on RFF, etc. I have never used a 21mm lens. Do you need to use a supplemental viewfinder?

elshaneo (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=24454): Thanks for your comments and sample photos. I especially like the first one—of sidewalk musician. I really need to ponder this lens.