Hello everyone... have been a 'lurker' for the past year, and am about to purchase a leica M6 and 35/1.4 summilux. just spent last 5 years paying off my med student loan, sooooo.... have a bit of expendable income (finally!!!). I have read just about every single line of this forum and by and large I think it is outstanding. however, my question may have been answered b4 so don't flame me if I am covering old ground...

here goes... assuming I have my 35 summilux, what would be your recommendation for a second lens for a wedding scenario... if in fact I need one. I was thinking noctilux or is a 90mm better, or anything else. could even go to two more lenses, but I guess I am asking what lens would you choose above others. curious about this particular type of scenario. cheers guys (and gals?) for your advice and thanks for the amazing amount of info here

Stefan

-- Steffan Eriksson (drlurve_se@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002

Answers

what do you mean by wedding scenario? will this be non-payed for friends journalistic type shooting, posed formal shots...

-- Matthew Geddert (geddert@yahoo.com), February 14, 2002.

Stefan:

A good wedding pair could be either the 35/50 or 35/90. I personally would opt for the 35/90, becuse I think it would give the most flexibility. Be advised that if you are new to the system, rapid framing with the 90 can often be challenging -- the nature of that little 90 window in the M viewfinder lends itself to automatic "centering" of the subject in the frame. Not what you often want while shooting people!

Enjoy! ;-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 14, 2002.

Dear Steffan: Welcome to the brotherhood of Medicine! I own a few R8s and 6 R lenses but I can try to extrapolate to the M system. I would recommend either the 90mm or 75mm lens as the next one to purchase as they are outstanding portrait lenses. The M6 TTL should have the .72 rangefinder which is a compromise and straddles both lenses. Before you buy however, consider waiting for the M7 and why don't you also rent an R8 outfit for a weekend as well before you kiss the SLR world goodbye!! Have fun in your internship!(8>))--

-- Albert Knapp MD (albertknappmd@mac.com), February 14, 2002.

Sorry, meant friend's informal i.e not getting paid and mostly doing it for myself.. they have not requested me as photog tho' I can have liberties at wedding, not with bride tho! :-( , mostly hoping to do candids at reception when people relaxed, few groups milling about drinking, and bride and groom un-relaxed b4 wedding without me intruding...

stefan

-- Steffan Eriksson (drlurve_se@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002.

The only time I've used a 90 at weddings is to get ceremony shots while staying out of the way. I use a 50 for the vast majority of photos. I find that the narrower angle of view and more limited depth of field are very useful for keeping attention directed toward one or two people (especially true in crowded or ugly reception areas). Since they're your friends, you can probably keep the images reasonably intimate even with a 35.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 14, 2002.

Thanks Mike, Albert, and Jack, did not expect answers so fast, can probably start practicing sooner than later!!! BTW Mike, that was the sort of photo I would love to take at the wedding, was that a 50?

Stefan

-- Steffan Eriksson (drlurve_se@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002.

Greetings Steffan- I shoot a lot of weddings with my M system- about 25 a year. I use three lenses for this- a 28, a 50 and a 90.

I will agree with both Jack and Mike on the limits of the 90- it does take a while to get to where you can frame well with the 90, btu I find it very usefull. Personally, I don't use the 35mm focal length all that much- I know this might make me a Leica heretic, but I find that if I want to go wide, I use the 28- otherwise, I use the 50. My 50 lenses get me about 50% of my photographs. So I would strongly recommend this length as your second lens, and suggest a 90 for your eventual third purchase.

Congrats on getting your student loads paid off, and good luck as an intern!

Mike- nice shot, as ever. Keep it up!

-- drew (swordfisher@hotmail.com), February 14, 2002.

Yep, that was with a 50 (Schneider-Kreuznach Xenon--maybe I'll be forgiven for posting a non-Leica photo since it's a German lens. The wedding section of my site is woefully out of date, and I have very few Leica wedding images scanned.)

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 14, 2002.

Stefan, congrats on the student loans - I'm still working on mine...

I'm in a similar buying situation, and from my tests/experience I think the 35 along with a 90/2.8 makes a great starter kit.

cheers,

-- Patrick (svenburg@yahoo.com), February 14, 2002.

When I was shooting weddings professionally a few :-) years ago, I rarely used anything but a "normal" lens. Back then it was an 80mm on medium format. If I was going to use a Leica to shoot wedding candids without flash, I would get a 50 Summilux without hesitation.

A 90 is just too long for wedding shooting. Most of the pictures - eespecially the candids - are taken "up close and personal". The only application I can think of for a 90 would be getting shots of the bride and groom during the ceremony.

I wouldn't use a Noct because it's just too bulky. If you use 800 or even 400 ISO film, there's not much you can't shoot at 1/30 at 1.4. Or even (heaven forfend) use a flash once in a while :-)

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), February 14, 2002.

I still have a few years of student loans left, but I didn't have the discipline to wait to buy my M6. I've only had it a few months, but the lens combo that I bought was the 35 Summilux ASPH and a gently-used 90 TeleElmarit. I've often wondered if I bought the right lenses, and everytime I conclude that, yes, I did the right thing. I wouldn't do anything differently if I could do it over again today.

And remember, you'll eventually have every lens you want. If you're going to buy a 35 as your principal lens, the 90 is the best choice for the next one. I'll second what everyone has said earlier: the 90 is a difficult lens. Nonetheless, the keepers I've made with my TeleElmarit have been quite good. I'm considering buying the 1.25 magnifier to use on my .72 body when using the 90, but it will be a while before I treat myself to another piece of Leica gear.

Congratulations, best wishes, and I look forward to hearing from you again in the Leica lounge.

-- Luke Dunlap (luked@mail.utexas.edu), February 14, 2002.

Stefan, It sounds like you are planning an expensive purchase just to shoot one wedding. I don't know as I would do that, but the 90 can still be a good choice if you think you'll use it after the wedding. I used a 35/90 combo for a few years before expanding my Leica lens range. There's a bit of a "hole in the middle" owing to the nearly 3 to 1 ratio of focal lengths; but I found it manageable. It forces you to rethink every shot into either a tight composition or a wideangle one. Not a bad exercise.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 14, 2002.

Hi Stefan,

I routinely do wedding photography, for free and for money, but only for people I like. It is a fun exercise, with crucial moments where you have no right for failure or even for bracketting.

My advice is simple: take the fastest lenses you can. The 35 'lux is fine for group shots, dynamic images during ceremonies/party and wider views of settings.

I would advise you to go Noctilux next, for the simple reason that wedding ceremonies are often very poorly lit (Russian orthodox weddings I have covered recently are barely candle lit). Same for night parties.

I do not have the Nocti but rely on the 75 'lux, which does a magnificent job, and that you might covet as your 3d wedding lens. I do not have the 35 f1.4, and I constantly curse on the f2 limitation of my 35 'cron.

Forget the 90s, especially the f2.8 one. Remember that the faster the lens, the shorter the shutter speed and the easier it becomes to freeze your vibrations as well as the subject movements (unbelievable how jerky attendees become after 10 minutes of church rituals).

You'll find yourself shooting wide open most of the time, even at f1...

Try and avoid flash. When well balanced, it "flattens" the series of pictures (equal light and illumination throughout the ceremony or party makes things look contrived and boring, even if quality is there). When not so well balanced, flash brings your Leica pictures down to same level as cousin John's cheap point and shoot snaps...

However, I complete my wedding gear bag with a SLR+180 f2.8 and monopod: this gives me the needed reach in church or town hall to get tightly framed heads & shoulders without constantly spoiling the fun of others by moving around close during key atmospheric moments. Also good for candids in those settings.

Faster film in the SLR (t-max 3200@1600 for low light churches); slower film in the M (400NC or t-max 400 in low light church and parties, 160NC or t-max 100 when possible). B/W is very immune to light colour temperature. Again churches have a mix if warmish lights that force filtering (and speed loss) or tolerance for red pics.

An old working Rolleiflex TLR (or similar) with high res neg (Portra 160NC) is also useful for the formal portraits, if those are required, in order to allow poster size enlargements. I usually hate those, but newly weds and their parents seem to like to hang such things on the walls. For the 1st couple of years anyway. Do those outdoors. I use a Yashica-Mat on tripod.

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), February 15, 2002.

I am not so dismissive of the 90mm. I used my 90mm quite a bit during receptions to isolate people and also to highlight the bride and groom from the crowd, without always having to push to the front. I used to use my Summicron-R 90mm, now use my 80 'lux. But I agree with Jacques that speed is always good, so 75 or 90 APO would be my choice. Still if you can afford a Noctilux, that would be an enviable lens to pick next. I would certainly go for either the 35/75, or the 35/50 combo if you only had two lenses.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 15, 2002.

For weddings you need 35/50/90. When I photographed weddings I used the Hassleblad system and used 50/80/150. You will find that 80 to 90% of your pictures will be with the standard. However, you should try for some "head shots" of the bride with the short telephoto. You will need the medium wide for some large group shots indoors.

Good luck and regards,

-- Alan Purves (lpurves@mnsi.net), February 15, 2002.

Wow! fantastic response! guess I should have expected that from this forum. certainly much food for thought. next step is a lottery ticket tomorrow so lens issue becomes redundant :-) actually it would probably make things more difficult...

will definitely be back, thanx once again everyone who replied.

Stefan

-- Steffan Eriksson (drlurve_se@hotmail.com), February 15, 2002.

A bit late answer but.... i shoot weddings professionally and also as a friend.i think fast lenses sound great but one needs sharp photos with depth...i tend to use a lot of flash,forget the real candids.Some of those are nice but the wedding couple want to see good colour and details.i use Leica M's mainly,augmented with some SLR.The 50mm is my most used lens.A 28mm OK but remember that "civilians" do not understand about distortion!The 90mm is good for portraits and some tight groups. One thing that i use that is "amateur" is films....no soft muted miserable no contrast films for me!I want my photos as bright as the photos taken by other non-pros on the wedding day. The 50mmf2.0 fast enough.The high speed lenses cost an arm and a leg! You are still a young doctor not a surgeon.Save the expense... I have done weddings shooting only wth the 50mm.Different angles and viewpoints can make all the difference

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), February 20, 2002.