Reading mode: Light Dark

M10 and Summilux (go big) or go home

Go to last post
T

thiefofpresence

Leading Member
Messages
985
Reaction score
641
Location
New York, NY, US
After creating quite a stir asking about Q being worth it , I have another question for the community.

Suppose I want an authentic Leica experience. Clearly buying an M10 and pairing with 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 Summilux would qualify.

The question is can that experience be moderated? Could I buy a used M240 or M9, and could I get Elmarit lenses (or even - gasp - Voigtlander glass) and does that experience qualify?

I've already had the pleasure of owning Fuji's homage X-100T, which many may know and appreciate if not draw any false equivalences.

Alternate title to the post: Is a compromise Leica kit (older body and budget glass) worth it?

If so, can any recommendations be made of which body, and which series of glass to buy used?

If not I may go home until that next big bonus or moment of liquidity.
 
If you want a true and authentic Leica experience, you need to start by shooting a film Leica. A Leica M3 and a collapsible 50mm Elmar would qualify. If you want to shoot digital on a budget, I'd recommend a M262 and 35/2 Summicron ASPH.

Leica doesn't skimp on optical quality. The faster lenses aren't necessarily considered better. A prime example is the 50/2 APO-Summicron, which costs more than double the current 50/1.4 Summilux. As such, many Leica shooters select their lenses based on size, ergonomics and character.

Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses are excellent. Alot of their lenses are equivalent or in some cases (ie Zeiss 35/1.4 or Voigtlander 35/1.7) even exceeds their Leica counterpart in technical IQ. However, you'd lose 6-bit coding and superior ergonomics. And only Leica lenses draw like a Leica.
 
Last edited:
I think the M240 and M9 absolutely give the authentic Leica experience. I’ve used a number of Voigtländer lenses, they are excellent, but if you can swing it... I’d try and get the 35 or 50 summilux’s, they are both in a league of their own.
 
thiefofpresence said:
After creating quite a stir asking about Q being worth it , I have another question for the community.

Suppose I want an authentic Leica experience. Clearly buying an M10 and pairing with 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 Summilux would qualify.

The question is can that experience be moderated? Could I buy a used M240 or M9, and could I get Elmarit lenses (or even - gasp - Voigtlander glass) and does that experience qualify?

I've already had the pleasure of owning Fuji's homage X-100T, which many may know and appreciate if not draw any false equivalences.

Alternate title to the post: Is a compromise Leica kit (older body and budget glass) worth it?

If so, can any recommendations be made of which body, and which series of glass to buy used?

If not I may go home until that next big bonus or moment of liquidity.
Click to expand...
If we believe Leica is a company can evolve with time, improve over time then logically the later main-stream camera model or lenses should provide some improvement over previous ones so in general we may use the same logic to apply to M10 over M240 or M9. Of course there are people swear one type of sensor is better than another, well, that is individual argument, and it does not matter because the brightest brains in the world are busy working in the laboratory making next generation of product and try to improve on something from the past to make something for the future.

Leica is a wonderful tools because it allows more user interaction with the camera than letting camera do the most of jobs and by that the camera requires time after time to be master on it, and by that, capable of making certain image character that is somewhat different than using other tools, hopefully.

Leica makes very good lenses, regardless Summilix or Summicron, Elmarit or Elmar, may be not each one is not the best of what is available but certainly all can produce master images and those did decades ago.
 
This recent thread also discusses the choice of lenses:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4307678

Personally I use mostly (CLA'd and calibrated) Jupiters on my Monochrom because I like the rendering. I also have a few Summicrons and a 1952 Summarit 35 3.5, which are excellent lenses in their own right.

Another very popular lens is the 7artisans 50mm 1.1 although I do not own that one (yet?)

I don't think there's a wrong or right choice re. lenses. If you make images that please you, then the lens/camera combination is good.

One area where Leica-lenses are without doubt superior is the mechanical quality.

As for camera's, of course the M10 is more refined, etc but that does not suddenly mean earlier camera's are useless. The price difference between the M10 and (used) M9/M240 is significant and that money can easily get you one or more lenses.
 
Last edited:
Any Leica M body and M mount lens.
 
I've got an m240 with the 50 summilux 1.4 and the voightlander 50mm 1.5. Honestly the voightlander is 90% quality of the leica and looks better too. That said, leica lens is a bit special, but the voightlander folks arent missing out. IMHO the leica experience is more about the rangefinder focus and enjoying the physical beauty of the camera. The images are absolutely beautiful.
 
thiefofpresence said:
After creating quite a stir asking about Q being worth it , I have another question for the community.

Suppose I want an authentic Leica experience. Clearly buying an M10 and pairing with 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 Summilux would qualify.
Click to expand...
indeed.
thiefofpresence said:
The question is can that experience be moderated? Could I buy a used M240 or M9, and could I get Elmarit lenses (or even - gasp - Voigtlander glass) and does that experience qualify?
Click to expand...
the Cosina Voigtlanders are excellent. Have a few, the 35mm f1.7 Ultron VM, 21mm f1.8 Ultron, 15mm f4.5 III. Great image producers but today I rarely use them, preferring the handling and 6 bit coding of the M lenses Leica makes for the system. That’s more than half the draw of the system for me.
thiefofpresence said:
I've already had the pleasure of owning Fuji's homage X-100T, which many may know and appreciate if not draw any false equivalences.

Alternate title to the post: Is a compromise Leica kit (older body and budget glass) worth it?
Click to expand...
Only you can convince yourself of that. I’ve done my experimenting and made my decision.
thiefofpresence said:
If so, can any recommendations be made of which body, and which series of glass to buy used?

If not I may go home until that next big bonus or moment of liquidity.

--
https://www.instagram.com/thiefofpresence
Sony A7iii | Sonnar 55/1.8 | Sony 16-35/2.8 GM, Tamron 28-75/2.8, Sony 70-200/2.8 GM
Click to expand...
You look to have a perfectly good Sony outfit there to keep yourself happy for a while.

--
"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights
 
Last edited:
My Leica experience depends mostly on the Leica body even though some will say the reason for having Leica is to use the lenses. That was certainly true in 1959 when I bought my first M3 and DR Summicron. But, these days, computerized lens technology has narrowed the lens performance gap. But the Leica is still gives you one of the few genuine rangefinder experiences to be had,

Not yet mentioned is the Leica M 262. One could argue that it is more authentic without so many modern features. It costs a little less, too. I have a 50mm f2.4 Summarit, which is excellent. But the 35mm f1.2 V2 Voigtlander stays on the M 90% of the time.
 
Voigtlander and an older Leica digital definitely 'qualify'. In fact of the best Leica cameras going for value is the M262 and one of the best lenses I have used is the 35mm F2.5 Skopar (£300)...

The Leica experience is the rangefinder mechanism and the exception enjoyment it gives me. You dont need an M10 for that.

--
http://www.shootingstills.co.uk/
https://500px.com/candidshooter
 
Last edited:
Don't get a M9 or older. The self-destructing Kodak sensors were quite mediocre anyway.

There are plenty of outstanding non-Leica lenses available in M mount, like the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 C-Biogon. The 50mm Summicron is not that much more expensive than a 50mm Summarit, I would opt for the Summicron. It's not as razor-sharp as the 50mm Apo-Summicron ASPH, but it has lots more character.
 
Fazal Majid said:
Don't get a M9 or older. The self-destructing Kodak sensors were quite mediocre anyway.
Click to expand...
With respect, I couldn't disagree more I've owned M8, 9, 240 (hated it), 262 and 10. Low-light considerations aside, get it right with the M9 and you won't get better anywhere The M9 is still capable of stunning colours and IQ.
Fazal Majid said:
There are plenty of outstanding non-Leica lenses available in M mount, like the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 C-Biogon. The 50mm Summicron is not that much more expensive than a 50mm Summarit, I would opt for the Summicron. It's not as razor-sharp as the 50mm Apo-Summicron ASPH, but it has lots more character.
Click to expand...
You can't go wrong with a 'cron of any sort. 35 or 50. Both are wonderful
 
thiefofpresence said:
After creating quite a stir asking about Q being worth it , I have another question for the community.

Suppose I want an authentic Leica experience. Clearly buying an M10 and pairing with 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 Summilux would qualify.

The question is can that experience be moderated? Could I buy a used M240 or M9, and could I get Elmarit lenses (or even - gasp - Voigtlander glass) and does that experience qualify?

I've already had the pleasure of owning Fuji's homage X-100T, which many may know and appreciate if not draw any false equivalences.

Alternate title to the post: Is a compromise Leica kit (older body and budget glass) worth it?

If so, can any recommendations be made of which body, and which series of glass to buy used?

If not I may go home until that next big bonus or moment of liquidity.
Click to expand...
If you really are looking for an answer in an Internet forum to the question “Is XYZ worth it?”, especially as it relates to “authentic Leica experience” (whatever the heck that is), I suggest it is time to go home...

If not, you’re trying to stir stuff up and you’ll no doubt enjoy all the well-meaning people here trying to help you.
 
RaajS said:
If you really are looking for an answer in an Internet forum to the question “Is XYZ worth it?”,
Click to expand...
Based on the feedback, no longer. Quite happy with my kit and thoroughly unconvinced by any of the answers given or the research I've seen.
RaajS said:
especially as it relates to “authentic Leica experience” (whatever the heck that is),
Click to expand...
If you have no idea the question was not for you.

As far as I can tell it means using excellent glass that is great but not five times greater than comparable optics of other systems (while costing five times more), while being forced to methodically manual rangefinder focus subjects. All while enjoying the I-dont-know-whatness of german engineering (by far the most compelling attribute, although not a deal-maker for me)

So home it was after all. Crying all the way back to the system in my signature.
RaajS said:
If not, you’re trying to stir stuff up and you’ll no doubt enjoy all the well-meaning people here trying to help you.
Click to expand...
Actually I could enjoy all the well meaning feedback without having any such intention. I am free to see how people think, take what I find helpful and discard the rest, like anyone here.

--
https://www.instagram.com/thiefofpresence
Sony A7iii | Sony FE 28/2, Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4, Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8, Sony 85/1.4 GM | Tamron 28-75/2.8, Sony 70-200/4 G
 
Last edited:
Any Leica M and M mount lens will get you the "Leica Experience". You'll be using a rangefinder to focus--manually. You'll be setting your aperture on the lens. You'll either be in "aperture priority" exposure mode or fully manual. Leica hasn't made a "bad" lens in a really long time, and most of the Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses for M mount are also really good. Doesn't matter whether you are talking Noctilux, Summilux, or Summarit. With a few exceptions that can't make the transition to digital (particularly ultrawides) it doesn't matter whether you are talking lenses from the 1950's or current day.

Yes, there have been incremental improvements in the bodies as you move from the M8 to the M8.2 to the M9 to the M(240) to the M10, but the fundamental experience is the same for all of them. If what you can or want to afford is an M(240) with Cosina Voigtlander glass and want the Leica Experience you'll be getting it in spades.
 
Jared Willson said:
Any Leica M and M mount lens will get you the "Leica Experience". You'll be using a rangefinder to focus--manually. You'll be setting your aperture on the lens. You'll either be in "aperture priority" exposure mode or fully manual. Leica hasn't made a "bad" lens in a really long time, and most of the Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses for M mount are also really good. Doesn't matter whether you are talking Noctilux, Summilux, or Summarit. With a few exceptions that can't make the transition to digital (particularly ultrawides) it doesn't matter whether you are talking lenses from the 1950's or current day.

Yes, there have been incremental improvements in the bodies as you move from the M8 to the M8.2 to the M9 to the M(240) to the M10, but the fundamental experience is the same for all of them. If what you can or want to afford is an M(240) with Cosina Voigtlander glass and want the Leica Experience you'll be getting it in spades.
Click to expand...
The rest depends on the person behind :)
 
As mentioned above, M9 or M240, or M262 is perfectly fine. As for lenses, if Leica seems out of your reach, Carl Zeiss ZM lenses optically rival and in some cases (1.4/35 and 2.8/15) supersede Leica counterparts (WATE in the latter case).

That being said, older Summicrons are quite affordable, and you can get 2/35-IV, 2/50 Pre-APO and 2/90 Pre-ASPH for the price of a new 1.4/50 ASPH. Not only you will save some serious dough, you will get lenses of excellent image quality and distinct signatures that newer aspherical lenses lack.
 
thiefofpresence said:
After creating quite a stir asking about Q being worth it , I have another question for the community.

Suppose I want an authentic Leica experience. Clearly buying an M10 and pairing with 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 Summilux would qualify.

The question is can that experience be moderated? Could I buy a used M240 or M9, and could I get Elmarit lenses (or even - gasp - Voigtlander glass) and does that experience qualify?

I've already had the pleasure of owning Fuji's homage X-100T, which many may know and appreciate if not draw any false equivalences.

Alternate title to the post: Is a compromise Leica kit (older body and budget glass) worth it?

If so, can any recommendations be made of which body, and which series of glass to buy used?

If not I may go home until that next big bonus or moment of liquidity.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top