« The Mother... Logic Board | Main | Open Mike: Define 'Quixotic' (OT) »

Sunday, 07 March 2021


I have been told by lawyers that I'll be getting an inheritance of ~$2000 later this year. For me, this is big money. My plan is to get a Leica M240 as it's the best Leica digital I can afford with that much money. I won't be able to afford even a first generation Summicron (50 for me, that's my preference) but I plan to buy a Summitar 50/2 from the upcoming stimulus check so that I have a good Leica lens to use with it. A fancy modern 'cron would be glorious to be sure, yet I already know that the Summitar can do having owned one previously. Insane wide open, sharp and well controlled stopped down. The best of all worlds in many ways. So I hope to get one of them, a Leica digital and to continue on with my landscapes :)

You didn't miss the forest for the trees. The *price* is the forest, the quality of the lens is the trees, because there are other lenses that cost a fraction of the Leica lens, and are just as good, if slightly bigger. As another commenter said, the lens isn't jewel-like, it is a jewel, and has the same practicality as, say, a five-carat diamond. It signals status both to people see it and say, "Mmmm, rich" and those who see it and "Mmmm, idiot."



"To have a diffraction-limited lens that is tiny and light is indeed a wonderful accomplishment, and maybe even a landmark in the history of camera lenses."

Really, and only 8000-plus Dollars. I'm sure a lot of real world photo journalist will be diving on the ground and crawling thru mud with this lens on their chest, covering wars and disasters.

I saw on another thread where someone said they bought a Leica 28mm f/1.7 for only $4000 and it came with a free camera. What self respecting photographer would be caught slumming with that setup?

As noted in the comments to the earlier post, the even smaller and lighter, but still superb, 35 Summicron ASPH (v.2) is still in the product line, selling for $4500 less. Same approach for the 50 APO M Summicron and the ‘standard issue’ 50 Summicron. The less expensive M Summarit lens line was unfortunately discontinued recently. These were stellar lenses, in some ways outperforming the standard Summicrons, but never marketed as such.

Mike, I hope you enjoy the 50 R experience. If you are into panoramics, the 65:24 format is the same as the Xpan and quite nice. Lenses I love include the 50/3.5, 30/4. The 45 and 63 are great, I just don't use them as much. Looking forward to hearing about your experience.

Eight thousand bucks. It took me 2 weeks to decide to spend 399.00 on the new Fujifilm 27mm and I know I’m going to feel guilty for weeks.

What’s the smallest camera you can use with the Pentax 35mm Macro?

I’m hardly a paragon of virtue myself, but is there a point where an amateur should ask themselves if there’s somebody close by who could use some or all of $8,000?

The pentax lens is a funny one, I ended up selling it on for being too 'clinical'. I have others covering the same focal lens, that is when I will dust off the DSLR (I am too busy right now).

Pentax lenses are not always well known, but a great amount of them deserves recognition specially if you enjoy photography more than gear.

Way back when, I remember an ad campaign in photo magazines (that long back when!) for a new Leica telephoto (R series, for the SLRs, I'm pretty sure).

The ad showed the photographer getting out of a car, maybe a VW station wagon thing? With his camera and this lens.

The text explained that, if you bought the lens, they would throw in the car for free.

It's an interesting idea, advertising that people can't afford your products! (Clearly Leica had already committed to that road quite a long time ago.)

This new 35mm Summicron-M is yet another reason why if I bought a digital Leica, it would be the Q2. No reason to join the Leica lens chase.

I recently got a new 50mm Summarit f2.4 for a very good price. It's now my only lens for my Leica M6 TTL. A test roll of Fuji Acros II proved the lens to be very sharp when making 6x9 inch prints. Beyond bragging rights, how sharp does a lens need to be?

My favourite lens of late is the Sony Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA Lens which is smaller and lighter than the above Summicron and quite possibly just as sharp/contrasty etc. Oh, and did I mention it is 1/10th the price. :)

Interesting that you say that you would choose the Summarit 35mm f/2.4. As someone who owns that lens (and the Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 Biogon, and Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon), I would choose the new APO instantly. From the tests I have seen it does outperform everything else. I take it as a promise for the future from Leica: when the 200 mega pixel monochrom comes out in 20xx, this lens and others will be there in support.

I take issue with John Camp. Nobody, but absolutely nobody will look at this lens and think you either wealthy or an idiot, as even someone familiar with Leica lenses would need to examine the writing on the front to tell what made it any different. If you want to show either wealth or idiocy, then the funds would be better spent as a down payment on a Rolex Submariner or some such.

More interesting, perhaps, than the size and price is the close-focus ability, going beyond the rangefinder coupling of M-mount cameras down to 0.3m, perhaps the main advantage over the new Voigtlander 35f2 APO? Whether that's worth the price difference is up to those that want & can afford one of these lenses.

It's hardly surprising that disparaging the price of new Leica products is the only comment of many folks, but insulting the photographers who can afford & choose to buy & use them reeks of sour hypocrisy. We all spend money on things we think are worth it and others don't. For me, the SL2-S was worth the cost (using it happily with the Sigma 45 f2.8), the SL lenses are not. I would never spend money on your pool table endeavor, Mike, although I'd enjoy playing pool with you on it!

Hmmm. I suspect the real trouble with the $8k 35mm is that in order to afford it, the people who disparage it would have to sell all their other 35mm lenses. and what self-respecting hobbyist could get by with only one lens of a given focal length/fstop combination?
(full disclosure alert: I used to own 35/2 lenses for both Leica-M and Nikon-F mount; as posted earlier, I had to sell the Leica gear ten years back.)

I always felt that the most useful class that I had in high school was a typing class. As I recall, the typewriters that we used had no letters on the keys.

Smallest is probably the recently discontinued KP, which is well loved by many of its owners.

The smallest Pentax you can currently get for the 35 Macro is the KP. It makes a beautiful match, as it does with the 21mm, the 31mm, the 40mm pancake, and the 43mm pancake, or the 20-40mm zoom. All metal, all small, good.
I'm quite excited about the new APS-C K-3ii coming, though it's delayed. It's going to be a mini-K1, with the big selling point supposed to be an OVF that is the size of, or nearly the size of, a full-frame OVF.

I still prefer an OVF to an EVF if given the choice. But back to the lenses, I think they each have a lovely character, and Pentax really do know how to design software to make the files look more like film out of the box. Most of the older designs are screwdrive, which is fine by me, less weight in the lens and smaller size.

For the price of one of the Leica lenses you can buy the entire system. Thanks for reminding people this little gem still exists.

How does it do re vignetting? Compact dimensions necessitate a few compromises.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007