Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Lens Advice Requested
From: "M.E.Berube - GoodPhotos" <>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 10:31:58 -0400

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As I've mentioned I am looking forward to the purchase of an M6 .85 in the 
near future. I currently am shooting Leica-ly with a nice user CL a 40/2 
Summicron and an older Elmar 9cm/4 (with an LTM>M adapter.)

When I buy the M6, I am looking into what is suggested that I get for the 
most complete setup at the most reasonable cost (of course.)
My inclination is to buy a 28mm (either an Elmarit 2.8 or a CLE version) 
and possibly trade up the Elmar for a faster 90mm experience. (which I 
should have done in the first place and just used it at f/4 or slower with 
the CL.) Maybe in the future (after my wife has forgiven me the costs that 
I'm about to incur soon for the M6) I will pick up a 135, but I rarely use 
greater than the 90 now and so will plan all else first.

I am thinking of NOT getting a 35 or a 50 as the 40 falls nicely right in 
the middle of that range and I find it superb with the CL. I have been told 
that the 40 for the CL is incompatible with the M6 in terms of focus (I 
realise that it will conjure up 50 frame but like using the 28 with the M6 
.85 I think I will work around that) and I've also read that this claim was 
more the marketing guys at Leitz trying to stay employed than a truism in 
practice. I'm not going to rid myself of the lens anyhow (I really LOVE it 
on the CL) and I would be safe to just try it to find out myself, but I 
would like to hear from any of you* who have any experience, good or bad, 
using the 40mm on the larger M bodies. (* in addition to Stephen Gandy's 
comments...whom I thank here for the very informative site!)

Thank you.
Carpe Lumen,
Michael E. Berube