Leica R on EOS

[DaveS]

In your estimation, which R lenses are worth using on a 5D (And possibly a 5DII eventually)?
I'm not talking about which ones can be used (I have a list from 19-9.net), but which ones are brilliant, and which are, shall we say, "not up to Leica standards"
I'm thinking,
35 f/2
90 f/2
180 f/2.8
Possibly 35-70, but not sure
Wider, I'll probably look at Zeiss (Sorry )
Not all at once, of course, and the main reason for going manual is for cine work with the 5DII.
Cheers,
Dave

[TimF]

It does depend on what you mean by not up to standard really. The older generations of lenses range from good to great for their time. In the intervening decades other manufacturers - and Leica themselves of course - have surpassed most of those earlier efforts.

Of those you list, the 180 is probably the easiest to deal with. The older f/2.8 lenses are, according to Thorsten Overgaard's Leica pages not especially better than lenses from other makes. If you want a Leica lens in this focal length and speed, then you'll need to seek out the recent APO-Elmarit optic (one of four R lenses rated as top class for Canon by Lloyd Chambers; not shown on this page, but also raved about elsewhere on his site is the 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R). There's also a 180mm Zeiss/Contax lens to be found on the used market. On the other hand, the legendary Leica 180mm f/3.4 APO-Telyt-R might be of interest to you.

The 90mm is always a goody. The last APO-Summicron-R version is also included in Lloyd's list of course. Other Leica lenses around this focal length are the superb 80mm f/1.4 Summilux-R and 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro-Elmarit-R (the latter also on Lloyd's list).

The 35mm is a very good lens, but perhaps not outstandingly better than alternatives from Zeiss (in their ZF range) for example. This shouldn't be surprising as the design is now over 30 years old.

As for Leica zooms, I'm sure you know that many of the earlier designs are actually from Sigma and Minolta, but made to Leitz standards. I don't know the 35-70mm f/4, but Peter will be able to tell you about that, used on film. Users say it's as good as the primes it "replaces" although a couple of stops slower.

[DaveS]

Thanks Tim. The 90 was near the top of my purchase sequence if I go ahead, it's also one of the more "affordable" S/H from ffords, the 35 f/2 is considerable more expensive.
I think I'll buy a couple of adapters from SRB-Griturn, and see how my finances hold up.
Cheers,
Dave

[Benchista]

I've got the 180mm f2.8 Zeiss/Contax lens, and it's no better than the 200mm f2.8 L Canon lens IMVHO. The C/Y Zeiss lenses I really rate of the ones I own are the 28mm f2.8 - a real bargain; the 50mm Planars, both 1.7 and 1.4, the 85mm f1.4 and the 135mm f2.8 - that's all of them EXCEPT the 25mm f2.8 and 180mm f2.8.

[DaveS]

I may not need the 180. I already have the Canon 135 f/2 which is razor sharp.
Nick, is the 25mm Distagon really not up to scratch? I had it on my wish list but...
I also have to take note of which lenses are physically compatible with the 5D / 5DII, which a bit iffy with some "Foreign" lenses.
Cheers,
Dave

[Benchista]

Well it's OK. The new one may well be better, but it's not a really great lens. That said, it always divided opinion, and there was plenty of talk in Contax circles that later ones were better than earlier ones. I don't believe it myself. Thing is the 28 f2.8 is SO good (and the 28 f2 even better) that it suffers in comparison. I suspect the relative weakness of the 25 is one thing that made the 21 even more expensive.

[TimF]

I picked up a copy of the 28mm f/2 a while ago. Unfortunately I don't have an adapter, so can't show anything from it on the 1Ds whilst I still have that body.

[zx9]

I have a 25mm C/Y Distagon which works well on my 5D, but I am comparing it to a EF 28-70 f2.8 L which it far out performs, having said that my abused 50mm f1.7 Planar is so much better. I sold my 28mm f2.8 Distagon a few years ago because I did not think it was any better than the 25mm, perhaps I had a bad copy of the 28mm and a good copy of the 25mm.
I can tell you the C/Y 18mm f4 AE Distagon will not work on the 5D, the mirror hits the 'horns' that protect the rear element. My camera then displayed ERROR00 and locked up until the battery was removed, no real damage done that could not be repaired with some matt black paint from my son's model kits. Perhaps that is why you can buy them for under £300, still it works well on my RTS but not in the same league ( contrast and fine detail) as the 50mm.

[DaveS]

Thanks guys.
I've just ordered a couple of Leica and Contax adapters from SRB, now to find likely looking lenses at a price I can afford.
Saw ffords have a 85 1.4 Planar at a good price, hmm...
Um this has gone a bit OT from Leica to Zeiss , hope we don't attract the divine retribution

[zx9]

Saw ffords have a 85 1.4 Planar at a good price, hmm...

My wife bought me a S/H one of those when we were first going out, must be about twenty years ago. Not the sharpest tool in the box but I still love it, the lens that is

[TimF]

Saw ffords have a 85 1.4 Planar at a good price, hmm...

I'd say that's an extremely "good" price. You'd normally expect to pay around £400, which, even given the Exc + description, would make me cautious; unless of course it's become a real buyers market for those seeking to sell used kit to a dealer.

[zx9]

I think you are right Tim , E+ in the list but if you go to the item the description is ' signs of use' 'small marks on front element' So not excellent at all.

[Benchista]

It won't make the slightest difference photographically - as long as it's not a skating rink, anyway.

[TimF]

I think you are right Tim , E+ in the list but if you go to the item the description is ' signs of use' 'small marks on front element' So not excellent at all.

Yes, Nick's correct (in theory) - small marks should, unless as Nick says it's like a skating rink, merely lead to a small loss of contrast. I'd be more worried if the focusing was (a) stiff, or (b) worse, like a kangaroo, making it very hard to make small adjustments, or (c) sloppy; or if the mount was sloppy in some way. You do get a period of grace from ffordes of course, so caveat emptor. You might just get a bargain, which would be great.

[zx9]

Unless you like to shoot into the light, when it will have the same effect as putting on a cheep UV filter, and you would not do that to a T* coated lens. As Dave was asking about top quality glass, I assume he would be willing to pay for top condition as well. My point was that E+ to me would be slight signs of use but optically perfect, though to their credit they do mention the marks in the description.

FWIW my 50mm f1.7 has quite a bit of dust inside it and the coating is going right at the edge of one of the elements, it works fine most of the time but used wide open, into the light it suffers with lower contrast and flare.

[DaveS]

Hi, yes I am after, if not "top quality", then the best I can afford, not quite the same thing , which is why I'm taking Tim's advice and giving it a miss.
I do know the 85 1.4 Planar has a pretty good rep, but if it's been banged about a bit ?
I still haven't come to a purchasing decision yet, but the 90 f/2 Leica seems a good bet, as does the 21 f/4 Super Angulon.
Really considering my options at the moment, one of which is to sell or P/Ex my whole 5D + 24-105 kit for a 5DII body and Leica or Zeiss primes. A bit drastic perhaps but for cine work, maybe justified.
Lots of thinking to do ,
Dave

[Benchista]

Depends on the marks even then - coating marks will likely have no discernable effect at all, and even a serious scratch is unlikely to have anything like the effect of a UV filter. The front element of my Canon 300mm f4 L looks shocking, yet it's one of the best perfromers I've got, even into the light - a good hood does become more important, though. On which subject, I think the Zeiss recommended Hood 3 is too short for the 85mm Planar, and I use a 4 (if I've got it the right way round! ).

[zx9]

Nick, I do not know which hood Zeiss recommend but mine usually has a no brand metal screw in hood about 30mm long fitted.

[DaveS]

Might give ffords a bell, see what the chap has to say. But I may have to wait a while before buying anything expensive.
Dave

[TimF]

Depends on the marks even then - coating marks will likely have no discernable effect at all, and even a serious scratch is unlikely to have anything like the effect of a UV filter. The front element of my Canon 300mm f4 L looks shocking, yet it's one of the best perfromers I've got, even into the light - a good hood does become more important, though. On which subject, I think the Zeiss recommended Hood 3 is too short for the 85mm Planar, and I use a 4 (if I've got it the right way round! ).

Zeiss recommend the Hood 4 for the 85mm f/1.4. I'm amazed, but delighted, that the Kyocera pages on the Contax system are still available.