Thank you. I’d only be doing B&W with it. I’m still not clear - is the IIIx a screw mount or M mount? I indeed won’t be doing lens swapping on it if I can help it - mainly portraits. I clearly need to do some research on this as well.
When I changed residence from Ireland to England in 1969 good secondhand Leicas (etc) could be bought for very little money in Ireland. I spent a time buying
many cameras and lenses...an example was a Leica M2 in a Benser bag along with a 35mm Elmarit lens, 50mm Summicron and a 90mm elmarit which cost me £200
Sterling!!! I also bought a similar M4 outfit but with a Summilux 50mm for £250. In total I came to England with 17 cameras and many lenses. They included Linhof 6x9, various late Rolleis
and even a couple of large format field cameras. [My then wife 'borrowed' the M4 outfit for a trip to see friends in Rhodesia. She managed to loose the whole outfit
on the return journey]
At that time I lived in Dorset and the local 'proper camera' shop was Leslie Miller in Poole - run by Peter Walnes - who managed to convert my 'collection' to cash at a
great profit!
Now use an old Nikon D300 and a Canon 600D along with a few lenses. Still prefer old large format with basic Dagor lenses!
many cameras and lenses...an example was a Leica M2 in a Benser bag along with a 35mm Elmarit lens, 50mm Summicron and a 90mm elmarit which cost me £200
Sterling!!! I also bought a similar M4 outfit but with a Summilux 50mm for £250. In total I came to England with 17 cameras and many lenses. They included Linhof 6x9, various late Rolleis
and even a couple of large format field cameras. [My then wife 'borrowed' the M4 outfit for a trip to see friends in Rhodesia. She managed to loose the whole outfit
on the return journey]
At that time I lived in Dorset and the local 'proper camera' shop was Leslie Miller in Poole - run by Peter Walnes - who managed to convert my 'collection' to cash at a
great profit!
Now use an old Nikon D300 and a Canon 600D along with a few lenses. Still prefer old large format with basic Dagor lenses!
For the money, why not just pick old manual focus SLR lenses? You'll get 1960s/1970s/1980s build quality and have a lot of enjoyment (well I do) fooling around with bokeh.
It's not difficult to find them at low prices. Primes, certainly, and zooms can be even more of a bargain. A good place to start for primes is Pentax Takumars, though collectors are long on to that, and you won't generally find them at rock bottom prices. One of the famous bokeh lenses is the Soviet-era Helios 44, which is definitely a fun lens to play with and still highly affordable. You'll get less of the swirl in Micro 4/3 because of the crop factor, but I'm not convinced I want too much of that anyway, and even in diminished form, the Helios can give very dramatic effects. Not always in a good way, but rarely in a boring way.
There are so many lenses and brands out there to experiment with. I think the most expensive vintage lens I've bought so far would have been around $80, and the cheapest around $4 or $5. Surprisingly, some of the best-condition lenses I have bought were the cheapest. There are some focal lengths and lens types that are either too numerous, or people just don't want them all that much.
This is a great channel for all things bokeh:
You'll find information on some interesting lenses there, with some thoroughly detailed comparisons and roundups, though you won't necessarily find them at the prices mentioned, especially as some of the videos are already several years old. Don't let that put you off, there are plenty of lenses to go round, and some of the recommendations are still affordable.
[Edit: For some reason, I thought this thread was recently started, not several months old].
I got the 50mm F/1.1 in M43 mainly because it kept the camera compact. These Chinese lenses are actually very well made. Solid metal bodies, smooth focus rings, higher blade count irises than my Nikon 50mm F/1.2 and a lot more compact since image size is smaller. I tried my 50mm F/1.2 Nikon and F to M43 adapter. The setup was quite big and bulky. This is the reason I ordered a 25mm F/2 to get a 50mm equivalent all purpose walk around lens with slightly tighter field of view than my 20mm F/1.7. I lose autofocus, but I gain an aperture ring and all metal construction. Many of the modern lenses use some plastic in the lens bodies.
The Kamlan 50mm F/1.1 is very sharp. I was walking around DC and happened to be at the Lincoln Memorial when I saw this group of young people getting posed by their professional photographer for a group shot - I think they were heading off to prom after this. This is hand held ISO400 and 1/800th second. I was a good distance away (maybe 150 ft) on the steps of the memorial and the 100mm equivalent FOV is pretty tight. You can see that this $62 lens is tack sharp.
This is the same spot where I used the GX1 and 50mm F/1.1 lens but taken with my phone to give perspective.
The Kamlan 50mm F/1.1 is very sharp. I was walking around DC and happened to be at the Lincoln Memorial when I saw this group of young people getting posed by their professional photographer for a group shot - I think they were heading off to prom after this. This is hand held ISO400 and 1/800th second. I was a good distance away (maybe 150 ft) on the steps of the memorial and the 100mm equivalent FOV is pretty tight. You can see that this $62 lens is tack sharp.
This is the same spot where I used the GX1 and 50mm F/1.1 lens but taken with my phone to give perspective.
Last edited:
My comment was bokeh-heavy because I dipped into this thread mid-commute, not reading it all, and saw one of the early responses ripping into the bokeh. Which in my view, is up to the taste of the photographer. It was a bit jarring seeing someone telling you it does not have beautiful bokeh and that "that bokeh is bad". There are no real rules for out of focus areas.
I used to make unsharp masks by hand for my 4x5! A laborious technique with stunning results.
Some beautiful stuff here
https://erickimphotography.com/blog/2016/03/11/film-street-photography-manual/
https://erickimphotography.com/blog/2016/03/11/film-street-photography-manual/
The IIIx series (IIIa, IIIf, all of them) are LTM M39 threaded screw mount. 50mm is ok-ish for portraits.The stock lens is nice but a Canon LTM 50mm f1.8 is actually a super good lens for under $300. Convenience on size here is up to you.
What is better is 90mm. Facial features are more flattering when you are not artificially stretching them. Yes you cannot stand too close with a 90mm, but for portrait shots they are great on the outcome side. The downside is the longer the focal length the more your depth of field becomes a concern getting closer. Generally speaking for portraits it is desired to have bokeh, so that means shooting wide open. The issue is the longer the focal length the smaller the wide open focused depth you get. I forewarn you though focusing 90mm is a little bit challenging on a Rangefinder; exactly why I would only do it on ones with the best viewfinders. The M body's rangefinder is MUCH better than the III series or just about anything ever. You want to focus on their eyes, not their nose. That will give you very nice portraits. If you are doing them in varied light conditions the non-SLR will aid you in pulling off shots, especially if you use some really nice ASA 50 film like Efke, so long as you can find focus. Ironically though in a little lower light sometimes the Rangefinder is the only way you can see focus, sometimes not.
Both a Leica M2 and M3 can do 50mm and 90mm.
Minolta CL is tempting for cost savings to an M body, but the viewfinder is not as bright, just an FYI.
You could be pretty happy with a 50mm, but 90mm is the more pro way to go. Nice lenses.
IIIx, any of the stock lenses like Elmar f3.5 50mm is actually good. Canon LTM 50mm f1.8 is the "japanese summicron". And you can also get a nice 90mm under $300 by getting a Minolta M-Rokkor 90mm f/4 lens (just get a hood with it). If you want to shoot color you can get lens filters to improve the Canon so it is more like a modern lens. In fact lens filters are a lot of fun with B&W because you can make different colors dark or light with color filters.
In short you'll have fun no matter what but the III you'll find very challenging for wide open shots up close on average (portrait style), because the rangefinder is simply like peering into a miniature peep hole that someone covered most of the light source on, then switch to the viewfinder for framing. Where as a good M unit can be crisp and beautiful like it was made yesterday - makes candid shots very fast and easy.
thanks for that. So M series Leica is what you recommend? The M series are a lot more expensive than the III from what I can tell.
I have some very nice F1.4 50/55 mm Pentax lenses, but I’m really interested on getting my hands on a Leica and doing some film photography again (last time was c. 2002/3 with my now 30 year old Canon!)
I have some very nice F1.4 50/55 mm Pentax lenses, but I’m really interested on getting my hands on a Leica and doing some film photography again (last time was c. 2002/3 with my now 30 year old Canon!)
Clearly really behind the times! They were soft at full open and also given to bad flare.
For you Leica M mount enthusiasts who only dreamed of a 50mm F/0.95 Noctilux. 
Check out this review. Looks like copy of same formula since standard correction profile for original lens in Lightroom works.
It appears to be available in M/Z/Sony/etc mounts for $350 now. What an amazing price. The construction quality looks quite nice too.
Check out this review. Looks like copy of same formula since standard correction profile for original lens in Lightroom works.
It appears to be available in M/Z/Sony/etc mounts for $350 now. What an amazing price. The construction quality looks quite nice too.