Street photography with the M10 and one lens (summer trip to Europe)

Which lens would you recommend for the M10?

  • 35mm 1.4 Summilux

    Votes: 14 66.7%

  • Canon 35mm 1.5 ltm

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Zeiss Sonnar 5cm 1.5 (1937)

    Votes: 4 19.0%

  • CV 50mm 1.0 M

    Votes: 1 4.8%

  • Canon 50mm 1.4 ltm

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Summicron 50mm 2.0

    Votes: 1 4.8%

  • Elmar 50mm 2.8 M

    Votes: 2 9.5%

  • Heliar 50mm 2.0

    Votes: 1 4.8%
  • Total voters
    21
  • This poll will close: .
Raid, those are hard to chose from. But take that Sonnar.

If I were to suddenly have the money to make a trip across the pond, my M 240 in hand with one 50mm, it would be my Zeiss Sonnar 50/2 collapsible (humorously also 1937) in Contax mount tweaked to S mount.

The Canon is the other strong temptation - possibly the finest of the early double Gauss lenses, but nothing ever beats a Sonnar if you want the speed. If you have the light, grab a Tessar but otherwise use a Sonnar.
 
wlewisiii said:
Raid, those are hard to chose from. But take that Sonnar.

If I were to suddenly have the money to make a trip across the pond, my M 240 in hand with one 50mm, it would be my Zeiss Sonnar 50/2 collapsible (humorously also 1937) in Contax mount tweaked to S mount.

The Canon is the other strong temptation - possibly the finest of the early double Gauss lenses, but nothing ever beats a Sonnar if you want the speed. If you have the light, grab a Tessar but otherwise use a Sonnar.
Click to expand...
It just so happens that I own a beautiful Zeiss Sonnar 5cm 2 that someone grafted into an Elmar barrel and made it to ltm or M mount. It is not collapsible anymore.
 
Last edited:
"If you are planning for a summer trip, which photography equipment will you take with you?"
As it happens I am planning a trip to northern Italy late August-September. I've been to many places in Europe a number of times with different equipment: Leica M, Mamiya 6MF, Fuji 6x8, Leica M w/ 40 heliar and Pentax 645, Rolleiflex T.... Each time i get good images. The larger negatives are lovely to print from, but the sparseness of a Leica has its charms. (In my case limited to only the 40mm or 50mm i feel they're too narrow a view, with 35mm cameras, I always miss the wider view if i don't have it)IMG_0876.jpg
This time i'm planning to bring a Leica M with either a 28mm (or 21 & 50) & the Perkeo ll. 6x6. Then again each one of us frames the world differently.
(Photo w Leica MP & 21mm)
 
Last edited:
I tried using film and digital cameras on the same trip, but I ended up favoring either film or digital but not both. Is your Leica M a film camera?
 
35, 1.4 Day and Night. Perhaps a monopod for better stabilization and picture clarity, so as to have Cropability (my own word!). I was going to suggest the 50/1 but you seemed to enjoy the 35.
 
I am a huge fan of 35mm. IMO, it is the perfect travel lens. Wide enough for streetscapes and landscapes. Not so wide to distort portraits. I believe it was James Marshall who said something like with a 35mm lens it is like you are part of the conversation.
 
There is no need to overthink it as I am keeping things as simple as possible. If all fails, I still have my iPhone camera as a back-up.
Lux+Heliar 50 2 or maybe Lux+Heliar 50 3.5.
I can flip a coin.
 
raid said:
. . . Lux+Heliar 50 2 or maybe Lux+Heliar 50 3.5.
I can flip a coin.
Click to expand...
Now you're talking haha. I could probably get by with just the 35mm lux. Shooting it wide open would give a dreamy look, and for variety using it stopped down it's plenty sharp and contrasty. But for a second lens the Heliar 50mm f3.5 would be spectacular. It's one of my favorite lenses for image quality. Seems to me to be in the same league as modern APO formulas without the size and weight penalties.
 
I was also thinking along this line. When the light is good for a slower lens, the 50/3.5 will do well. For less light, the Lux will be more suitable. Both lenses are small, and both lenses can help me produce interesting looking images.
 
I know this is counter to your original idea of one camera for simplicity but if you still have an M9, I'd consider mounting the faster 35mm lux on it and put the slower 50mm f3.5 on the M10 since it is better at higher ISOs. You've saved so much weight and size going with the smaller lenses. Both cameras should easily fit in the tiniest of camera bags and that way you'd never have to worry about changing lenses or getting dust on your sensors. I just did this with a pair of M9s on a recent trip to Yosemite. It was so nice not having to worry about changing lenses. Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
brusby said:
I know this is counter to your original idea of one camera for simplicity but if you still have an M9, I'd consider mounting the faster 35mm lux on it and put the slower 50mm f3.5 on the M10 since it is better at higher ISOs. You've saved so much weight and size going with the smaller lenses. Both cameras should easily fit in the tiniest of camera bags and that way you'd never have to worry about changing lenses or getting dust on your sensors. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
This also would require the battery charger and batteries for the M9. I will check it out for bulk and weight. It may be too much for my plans. My camera bag has currently the M9 and the M10 in it, along with the 35mm Lux and 50mm 2.4 Hexanon. It was packed this way for local photography and not for the trip.
 
Last edited:
You don’t say where in Europe. In Italy, except for some grand streets of Rome and Milan, 35 is not wide enough. I reckon 28 is better in old cities and towns in Europe. The drawing of a lens hardly matters, considering the content. I would have liked the 21 as well, but made do with the 28. I had the sharp and contrasty 28 Elmarit M 2.8. A bit much for an Australian summer, but good in the shaded lanes of an old town in Europe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top