I'm getting back into rangefinders, but am trying to keep the cost as low as possible. I'm not a brand bigot, though I find I enjoy Hasselblad and Leica cameras more than some of the other options (and therefore do better work with them). For me, a good lens is one that I can afford, that's "more than good enough" -- I'm disappointed when a lens lets me down, but I'm plenty happy with my Zeiss 150 f4 non-T* (for instance), even though I know that there are sharper, contrastier optics out there. Good enough is good enough, and beyond that it's all on me as a photographer.

I found a great deal on a Hexar RF outfit last night ($1160, new) and I intend to use the Haxanon 50 if it's anything like the lenses I've used on other Konica cameras. I would like to know which of the available (older used Leica, or new third-party) lenses are "best buys" in their respective categories.

How does the 28mm Hexanon compare? What about in the 21-24mm range? Is the 90mm Hexanon about as good as the 90mm f2.8 Leica, and how do they compare to the 75 Summilux (which I *love* after shooting only one roll with it, years ago)?

I'm trying to put together a list of the kit I'd like to have a year from now -- once I know what I'm looking for I can pay attention and look for bargains in the mean-time.

I don't know that the 50mm is my favorite lens, but most of the images that strike me have been taken with something close to a "normal" perspective, so I think this will be my every-day lens. Ideally I would limit my kit to two other lenses, something noticably wider than normal (21/24/28) and something a little bit longer (75/50). Maybe a 15mm too...

So, which are the best candidates? I know it would be easier if I could look at the available lenses in person, but there isn't a Leica dealer anywhere near here (Savannah, GA).

Thanks.

-- Derek Zeanah (derek@zeanah.com), March 23, 2001

Answers

It's great that there are options nowadays for M mount lenses! I have all Leica glass except for the Heliar, however there are some good options. I don't expect any of the Konica lenses to be bad, the Voigtländer 25, 35, 50 and 75 lenses have been getting good marks too.

The one that I have direct experience with is the 15mm: The Heliar 15 is one heck of a lens at am amazingly low price. I'd not say that it's a "use it all the time" kind of lens, but it's very sharp and contrasty, does a great job and won't influence your mortgage payments.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 23, 2001.

This site is an excellent resource on Leicas and other cameras:

http://www.cameraquest.com

It includes buyers guides on all the Leica, and Leica compatible, bodies and lenses.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), March 23, 2001.

My thought is that any economizing should be on the body, while making certain you have the best glass. I would rather spend years with only two lenses of outstanding quality, than to have a bag of glass that I am forever making excuses for.

That said, based on your preference for the "normal" look, I would certainly get a late model 50mm Summicron. The Konica lens might be almost as good, but the real thing is... well, the real thing. If the 50mm Summicron were in the price range of those out of sight lenses like the Noctilux, then it would make sense to look for an alternative. As it stands, the price to performance ratio make the Summicron a "best buy", and if you don't mind going used, you can no doubt locate a pristine example for less than a new Konica Hexanon.

With you favorite perspective covered by an outstanding optic... then start to look at those peripheral lenses from alternative sources.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), March 23, 2001.

I've seen side-by-side comparisons of the 28 and 90 Hexanon lenses against the immediate precursor (E49) of the current Elmarit-M (E46) and both the thin 90 Tele-Elmarit and current 90/2.8. Optically, the Hexanons are on the same page. Considering that a used Leica lens and a new Konica lens are the same price (about), I'd still go with the Leica lenses because they will lose less of their value (being already used). If I could find a used Hexanon, I would probably buy it rather than the (more expensive) used Leica lens. OTOH, with a new Hexar kit (and the 50/2 Hexanon) in hand, my first purchases (looking toward economy) would be a Tri-Elmar and a 15 Heliar. Then, probably a 135 Tele-Elmar. That would give me a comprehensive outfit at very reasonable cost. Next up would be a second body, either another Hexar or a used M6 0.72. Later on I'd round it out with a 90 and a 21, and eventually a 35/1.4 ASPH for low-light handheld shooting. The 75/1.4 is not a lens I have fond remembrances of. My hope is that Leica will eventually produce a 75-90-135/4 or 4.8 to complement the Tri-Elmar.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 23, 2001.

the real thing is... well, the real thing

The real thing is the photograph. No-one looks at a photo hanging on the wall and says, "You should have used a different lens." If they do, it means your photograph isn't interesting enough.

Maybe there's a gallery somewhere that hangs lenses on the wall, then there might be a way to make a statement like that. Otherwise, it's just another collector's view, not a photographer's view.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 23, 2001.

I would not buy the konica lenes but instead look into 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation leica lenes. They will be about the same price as the Konica stuff is new and better build and optical qualty. I know because this is what I did and I am very happy.

-- jon harkness (harkness@wt.net), March 23, 2001.

and better build and optical qualty. I know because this is what I did and I am very happy. <0p>

You tested all the Konica lenses? I'm impressed.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 24, 2001.

A secondhand Leica lens will depreciate less than a secondhand or a new Hexanon - I see that as a fact of life, right or wrong.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 27, 2001.

I've never met a photographer who worried about resale price of a lens. Either it does what it's supposed to do and you beat it into the ground, or you're a collector or dilletante.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 27, 2001.

Real Leica photographers use ELMARs.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), March 28, 2001.

Real Leica photographers are out in the street.

-- R. Watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), March 28, 2001.

All you need is a good used leica body and lenses and Kodachrome film ; all can be had reasonable . Leica equipment produces slides that are of a special quality that pretenders are not going to duplicate , so why bother !

-- Donald bonamer (b3435@webtv.net), April 02, 2001.

I agree with Jeff. Nobody will ask the photographer, "with a leica, your photo will be perfect" or conversly "your picture is perfect because you use a leica." Ridiculous is it not? Go and shoot films with whatever you have. There is no precondition that to get a good photograph you have have such and such a brand. Photography is not a mathematical equation.

-- WONG KH (DOSI@maxis.net.my), August 05, 2001.