Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M Lenses and Images

View Poll Results: Which of the following do you have or plan to acquire for your 35mm RF?
15mm 62 19.20%
18mm 33 10.22%
21mm 173 53.56%
24mm/25mm 99 30.65%
28mm 157 48.61%
WATE or similar (as if) 14 4.33%
All of the above 3 0.93%
None of the above 32 9.91%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 323. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 08-17-2017   #41
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 62
Posts: 518
MCTuomey: This was written some time back. I went ahead and pulled in a 21mm Zeiss ZM lens. Very happy with it. That said, I shoot 90% or more with a 35mm lens. Almost never carry the 50mm, and mostly it is just the 35mm. If I carry another, it's the 90mm. The 21mm offers some accent angles the 35mm does not. I have a 135mm.... but frankly it offers very, very very little and I should probably get rid of it. Unlike a 135mm on an SLR, the point of a 135mm is to remind you how much the 90mm defined the outside reach of working with a RF.
__________________
-JW Mersereau ("Skip")

"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
“There’s nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-17-2017   #42
Steve Bellayr
Registered User
 
Steve Bellayr's Avatar
 
Steve Bellayr is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,942
Since I do not use a 28mm often & do have a 24mm on a Nikon I opted for the Zeiss which was at the time about half the price of a Leica, though much larger. E. Puts in his reviews rated, again, at the time, a good number of years back the Zeiss over the Leica. But, to reiterate, since I do not use one much I opted for cost over size.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-26-2017   #43
BillBlackwell
Registered User
 
BillBlackwell's Avatar
 
BillBlackwell is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 871
I've owned all of these ZM lenses - and their Leica counterparts - at one time or another, including the latest CV 15. The Zeiss Ms are all wonderful lenses and well worth a look.

The 18mm Leica Super-Elmar, for example, has nothing whatsoever over the recently discontinued 18mm ZM - except price (something I thought I'd never say when comparing Leica and non-Leica glass). Only slight differences in color renditions exist between them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-10-2017   #44
ACullen
Registered User
 
ACullen is offline
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 158
I use ZM 25, 35Biogon & 50Planar on my M2. Having thought 25mm was wide enough for me on impulse recently I added a CV15 LTM. I figured whilst the ZM 18 was probably a better fit - it'd work out at three times the cost and still be an 'occasional' lens. The ZM21 struck me as too close to 25mm to worth adding to my bag.

The additional bonus of the LTM CV15 is of course that it'll go nicely on my Leotax F.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-15-2017   #45
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 65
Posts: 3,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
MCTuomey: This was written some time back. I went ahead and pulled in a 21mm Zeiss ZM lens. Very happy with it. That said, I shoot 90% or more with a 35mm lens. Almost never carry the 50mm, and mostly it is just the 35mm. If I carry another, it's the 90mm. The 21mm offers some accent angles the 35mm does not. I have a 135mm.... but frankly it offers very, very very little and I should probably get rid of it. Unlike a 135mm on an SLR, the point of a 135mm is to remind you how much the 90mm defined the outside reach of working with a RF.
Glad to hear, Skip. I used to shoot a ZM 21/2.8 on an M9, loved it for things like long exposure night shooting in NOLA. Plenty sharp (esp in center), zeiss colors, nice star points at night, pleasing size and weight. Like you, I'd carry a 35mm and the 21mm, and only carrying a fast 50 for club shooting. Longest FL I use on M-mount is a 75mm, as I can't focus 90 or 135 reliably at wide apertures.

Good shooting!
__________________
--Mike

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-29-2017   #46
creenus
Registered User
 
creenus is offline
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 154
Have a Zeiss 25mm Biogon ZM and use it on my Milolta CLE, with no finder required. I just compose to the very edge of the frame and this works well. I only shoot B&W, so there's no color shift issue. Extremely sharp, fairly rugged. I'd love a Leica 24mm f3.8 Elmar-M, but this will do in the meantime. =)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2017   #47
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,277
Recently added the ZM 15 to my kit. Haven't had a bunch of time with it yet, but expect it to be a fine replacement for the Contax G Hologon I just sold.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2017   #48
Dguebey
Registered User
 
Dguebey is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 108
I am great supporter of 24mm. But... with a 28mm (FOV 75°) you can do the same job than a 35 (63°), and it is a true wide angle. So I understand 28 partisans. A 18-28-50 combo would deserve attention.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #49
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,136


Out to Lunch, on Flickr. Saigon skyline. November 2017. Leica M-E - Zeiss 2.8/28.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-21-2018   #50
dp13
Registered User
 
dp13 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 27
In order of purchase. All were bought used:

ZM 50/2
ZM 35/2
ZM 85/4
CV 21/1.8
CV 28/2

I use the 28 and the 35 most of the time with a slight preference for the 28.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2018   #51
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,494
I was using the first version 35mm Summicron for many years first, then I got the second version Summilux. More recently I got the (modern) Zeiss 35/2. Three amazing lenses, but I wanted also to try the exotic Zeiss Hologon 16/8, which I bought a few weeks ago. I don't have any Zeiss or Leica lenses for 21mm or 24mm or 28mm.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2018   #52
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,494
My only ZM is a 35/2. I was curious how a modern lens renders things differently from an older lens such as the pre-asph 35/1.4 Lux.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-05-2018   #53
skucera
Registered User
 
skucera's Avatar
 
skucera is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Harrisburg, Oregon, USA
Posts: 270
The M3 I inherited came with a 35mm Summaron with goggles, along with a 50mm collapsible Summicron, a 90mm LTM Elmar, and a 135mm Tele-Elmar. These lenses have completely met my needs, and the viewfinder is clear and bright... well, except the goggles on the Summaron muddy the view slightly. If I feel a need to go wider, I use other cameras where I have options as wide as 24mm, but that's not a Leica lens.

Scott
__________________
1917 No. 1A Autographic Kodak Junior
1940 Kodak 35 Rangefinder
1955 Leica M3
1969 Canon New Canonet QL17-L
1976 Konica Autoreflex T3n
1977 Canon 110ED 20
1979 Minox 35 GL
1979 Olympus XA
1980 Pentax Auto 110
1987 Polaroid Spectra
1996 Canon EOS Elan IIe
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2018   #54
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,494
I could not find among the options a 16mm/8 Hologon in M mount!
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2018   #55
ktmrider
Registered User
 
ktmrider is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: el paso, texas
Age: 66
Posts: 1,153
I just added the 25f2.8 ZM to keep the 35f2.8 C Biogon company. I am finding the 21 is too wide and I loved the 24f2.8 on my Nikon F. Am hoping to like it on the Leica's.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-17-2018   #56
narsuitus
Registered User
 
narsuitus's Avatar
 
narsuitus is offline
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by narsuitus View Post
I use two 35mm rangefinder systems.

Leica M6 body with 21mm f/1.4 Leitz, 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss, and 90mm f/2 Leitz

Contax G1 body with 21mm f/2.8 Zeiss and 28mm f/2.8 Zeiss, 45mm f/2 Zeiss, and 90mm f/2.8 Zeiss
Updated my previous post with this image.


35mm Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-30-2018   #57
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,033
Hmm. Is this a currently active thread?

Anyway, I've been through a lot of wides in the <35mm range. I've ended up with a WATE and a Voigtländer 28/3.5 in M mount and I'm happy with those. I don't spend a lot of time analyzing them; I just like the photos I make using them.





G
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2018   #58
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,494
I added a Zeiss ZM 35/2 to try out a more modern 35mm lens. It is a "close to perfection" lens.

I recently got a Zeiss Hologon and had Don Goldberg convert its mount to M. Unless I learn how to use with the M9 some software to cut down on color smear or vignetting, such as Cornerfix, this lens is better suited for film cameras or for B&W conversions of digital images from the M9. With the M8 I get nice looking color images with a 21mm crop. This lens has zero distortion. This is why I bought it. It is challenge to use it.


__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-10-2018   #59
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,136
Nice picture Raid!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-12-2018   #60
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 5,946
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
I added a Zeiss ZM 35/2 to try out a more modern 35mm lens. It is a "close to perfection" lens.
Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2018   #61
jamin-b
Registered User
 
jamin-b is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .
I only have and have used the biogon. It is without doubt the sharpest lens I have used it can be sharp to a fault in digital, but I actually quite like it for film. I chose it for the smaller size and lower price.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2018   #62
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .
If I were mainly using B&W film (and not digital), I may have favored the 35/2.8 over the 35/2 based on posted comments and images from both lenses. When you have tried so many lenses, there is no real mysterious ora covered lens left to try out and use. Maybe the Hologon has a special magic attached to it?
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2018   #63
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard G View Post
The 18/4 is big but sometimes indispensable for architecture. For me it works like a poor man's tilt shift giving parallel vertical lines, and I then lop off the foreground.

I know what I mean about getting used to a 28. I've learnt new lenses by walking around for a couple of weeks with only that lens on the camera. I did this with the 21 before I was digital. I now use the 28 where I'd often want the 21 but I can go all day with just a 28. I would not have thought that possible when I started.
Try a 28 R in Leitax mount or Nikon TS with Nikon to M adapter.

No live view? Use a matt plastic where the film goes, pan up and measure degrees, and figure where top of frame is . Then find the proper shift to accomplish the same. Live view is better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2019   #64
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,136
I have the 4/18 Zeiss and have concluded that the younger CV 4.5/15 Super-Wide-Heliar III is the better lens, especially when used on digital bodies.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2019   #65
micromontenegro
Registered User
 
micromontenegro's Avatar
 
micromontenegro is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Caracas, Venezuela
Posts: 620
L1002132 by Aguaitacaminos, on Flickr

Verano2013 347 by Aguaitacaminos, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #66
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,136
Not sure ...and so?
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #67
james.liam
Registered User
 
james.liam is offline
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
Raid, how did you decide between the ZM f/2 vs. the f/2.8 c Biogon? The latter seems to have acquired some sort of mystique in the minds of photographers; but the f/2 is only another $50 or so, and some say it's just as good (and a stop faster). I've been thinking of getting one of them myself, and I'm not sure which to get.

The answers I've seen are like, "You want smaller and lighter, get the f/2.8. You want f/2, get the f/2." But people ascribe magical qualities to the f/2.8 C Biogon . . .
The f/2 Biogon is just not at its best @ f/2.

Focus shift—the lens is optimized for f/2.8, not unlike the 1,5/50–lower contrast wide/open because of its symmetrical design and way larger. The C resists flare better, renders at higher contrast & resolution from 2,8 and I have not detected focus shift in slightest.
Lots of “punch” in the image, glorious Zeiss color and small. For years, no one paid much attention to it. The ‘cult of speed’ I suppose, less needful now with better sensors and so this true gem is suddenly appreciated.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #68
taffy
Registered User
 
taffy's Avatar
 
taffy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by james.liam View Post
The f/2 Biogon is just not at its best @ f/2.



Focus shift—the lens is optimized for f/2.8, not unlike the 1,5/50–lower contrast wide/open because of its symmetrical design and way larger. The C resists flare better, renders at higher contrast & resolution from 2,8 and I have not detected focus shift in slightest.

Lots of “punch” in the image, glorious Zeiss color and small. For years, no one paid much attention to it. The ‘cult of speed’ I suppose, less needful now with better sensors and so this true gem is suddenly appreciated.


Hi I just bought the ZM 35/2.8 and use it with my M8. I&rsquo;m currently shooting it to see if it can replace my Summarit 35/2.5. After a few weeks with it I find it crazy sharp. Hoping to see more of the 3D qualities people talk about. Those qualities I&rsquo;ve seen in my ZM 25/2.8.

What do you shoot it with?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #69
james.liam
Registered User
 
james.liam is offline
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 177
M6 and an M10
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #70
taffy
Registered User
 
taffy's Avatar
 
taffy is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by james.liam View Post
M6 and an M10


Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:34.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.