Leica lens nomenclature?

[etanguero]

Allthough this might have been chewed through a million times in the old forum (I did not find it) I'd like to throw up this question as a Leica 'newcomer' (just recently bought my Leica Digilux 2):

Would someone be so kind to explain the system after the naming of Leica lenses?
Elmarit, Summilux, Summicron, Vario ... ???

Why are the lenses called a certain way? (the only thing I can work out is that "Vario" stands for a "zoom" lens - not to bad as a starter, right? )

And, perhaps even more important:
Which lens-naming refers to which quality? Which lenses (naming) are better than the other (naming)?

Does the lens naming also refers to manufacturing quality, or are all lenses manufacturing wise of the same quality? [And only the optical quality differs(?).]


Thanks for the help and deeper introduction into the system!
eT

[lct]

See:
http://www.leica-camera.com/cgi-bin/...ow.pl?2/221408

[etanguero]

Originally Posted by lct

See:
http://www.leica-camera.com/cgi-bin/...ow.pl?2/221408

wow ... not really the explanation I expected. not at all, actually!

thanks!
eT

[dsbarch]

Thanks for the question etanguero.

And thanks for the great answer by reference lct!

dsbarch

[lct]

Originally Posted by etanguero

...not really the explanation I expected. not at all, actually!...

OK, i'll quote what Justin wrote in the link above, you read it and you tell me precisely what else you want to know, right?

The names given by Leitz to their lenses have evolved over the years, and today follow the pattern set out by Andy. However to answer your question a little more fully I will confine my answer to the 50mm or 5cm lenses.

The first production lens was the 5cm Elmax f/3.5, a composition of the words Ernst Leitz Max (Berek, the designer of the lens). There was I believe some copyright issue with a lens of a similar name from Ermanox, and hence the Elmax became the Elmar after less than nine hundred were made. There was no hard and fast rule in the application of the name and it was applied indiscriminately as follows, although I think they were all triplet designs:

1930 Elmar f = 9 cm 1:4
1931 Elmar f = 13.5 cm 1:4.5
1932 Elmar f = 10.5 cm 1:6.3
1957 Elmar f = 5 cm 1:2,8
1960 Elmar 1:3.5 / 65
1960 Elmar 1:4 / 135

The next was the Hektor, which is said to have been the name of Max Berek’s dog! Again the lens naming does not follow a pattern that I can understand, and the optical construction varied considerably as did the apertures.

1930 Hektor f = 5 cm 1:2.5
1931 Hektor f = 7.3 cm 1:1.9
1933 Hektor f = 13.5 cm 1:4.5
1935 Hektor f = 2.8 cm 1:6.3
1954 Hektor f = 12.5 cm 1:2.5

In 1933 the Summar f = 5 cm 1:2 was introduced to be followed in 1939 by the Summitar f = 5 cm 1:2, but I know not why the name variation.

In 1953 we come to the Summicon, so called as it contained “crown glass”. From this point onward it seems that the names no longer related to the optical construction, but rather the aperture of the lens.

The Summilux f/1.4 drew it’s name for the Latin (Lux = light) and has been applied to all f/1.4 lenses.

Notwithstanding the 1957 Elmar f = 5 cm 1:2,8, Leitz introduced its first f/2.8 90mm lens in 1959 and called it the Elmarit. To be consistent the f = 5 cm 1:2,8 lens should have also been named Elmarit.

In conclusion to your question, there was in the early lenses similarity of design but in the later ones commonality of maximum aperture, and as you know purpose dictates the choice of focal length and aperture. The names do not designate a lens of higher quality, however it appears that each Summicron has always been the “best all-rounder” of a particular focal length for the duration of its manufacture.

[etanguero]

oooops,
just the part that the naming is on function of the widest apperture really surprised me ...
... just all so simple.

thanks, lct!
eT

[lct]

[firoze]

Christian, I'm glad LCT has answered your question adequately. But for what its worth, here is a little more info on Leica's current lens naming method:

A Leica lens with a max aperture of:

f/1 is called Noctilux
f/1.4 is Summilux
f/2 is Summicron
f/2.8 is Elmarit
f/4 is Elmar

The above names have no implication on how good a lens's optical performance is, they are just names to indicate the max aperture of the lens.

On the other hand:

ASPH means that the lens has one or more aspherical elements, to correct optical errors to a higher degree; the implication being that the lens is of very high optical performance.

APO means that the lens is apochromaticlly corrected, i.e. all the wavelengths of light focus at the same point and there is no colour fringing. This implies a lens of ultimate performance. In Leica's case an APO label is given only if the lens is able to deliver apochromatic performance over virtually the entire image field at any aperture and focus distance. Other manufacturers do not adhere to this standard quite so strictly.

Regards.

[lct]

Originally Posted by firoze

...A Leica lens with a max aperture of:... f/4 is Elmar...

Thanks to make it simple, Firoze, but as you know there are f/3.5 and f/2.8 Elmar lenses as well.

[etanguero]

Originally Posted by lct

Thanks to make it simple, Firoze, but as you know there are f/3.5 and f/2.8 Elmar lenses as well.

Could this be due to the fact that some some lenses ("vario", right?) do not open maximally through the whole range of lenght of the lens? According to the above posting (thanks!) I would understand that Leica would be that strict to itself only to apply the 'worst' opening to a name (and not the 'best' at some end of the focal length range).

If I understood it right the best lense would be "Name + Ashp. + Apo", right?

eT

[lct]

'Vario' means simply zoom lens.
For instance a Vario-Elmarit lens is a zoom lens the widest aperture of which is f/2.8.
'Asph' and/or 'Apo' mean that the lens uses one or more aspheric and/or apochromatic elements, hence is amongst the sharpest available, but not necessarily the 'best' lens from a subjective standpoint.
Some people prefer normally sharp lenses with smooth out of focus rendition ('bokeh') over super sharp ones with harsher bokeh.
For instance i prefer the last version (4th) of the pre-asph Summicron-M 35mm ('Summicron' = f/2) over the asph one for this very reason.
Leica lenses are like vintage wines, outstanding but rarely cheap alas...

[etanguero]

Originally Posted by lct

'Vario' means simply zoom lens.
For instance a Vario-Elmarit lens is a zoom lens the widest aperture of which is f/2.8.
'Asph' and/or 'Apo' mean that the lens uses one or more aspheric and/or apochromatic elements, hence is amongst the sharpest available, but not necessarily the 'best' lens from a subjective standpoint.
Some people prefer normally sharp lenses with smooth out of focus rendition ('bokeh') over super sharp ones with harsher bokeh.

Thanks a lot again for this clarification. I learnd a lot in this thread!

Originally Posted by lct

Leica lenses are like vintage wines, outstanding but rarely cheap alas...

So true. And the "worst" point is that taste can change over the time. Or according to the situation and /or location. [As in the high territories of the north-west argentinian andes I'd prefer a Malbec or even a Tannat (both biological cultivated, of course) over a Chateau Margaux which on other occasions I might appreciate a lot.]

eT

[firoze]

Originally Posted by lct

Thanks to make it simple, Firoze, but as you know there are f/3.5 and f/2.8 Elmar lenses as well.

Correct LCT, maybe I kept it a bit too simple

Regards.

[john_f]

The term "Vario" is used in Germany due to trademark issues (the term "zoom" is a registered trademark).

As for the APO prefix, it should be mentioned that there is currently no legal definition of what it refers to. In other words, the use of the term "APO" on a lens from manufacturer x may refer to a kind (and level) of optical correction completely different than that of another manufacturer. Not all "APO" are created alike. Buyer beware!

In the case of Leica, the term APO is used only if the lens in question meets the "classical" definition of apochromatic (i.e. a lens corrected for three color wavelengths - not two as is the case with other competitors...) and if the degree of correction of other optical "abberations" (the technical word for a "design" flaw if you wish - there are no perfect lenses!) in both the center and the corners of the image is of a VERY high degree - much MUCH higher degree of correction than even the best non-APO Leica lenses.

In other words, when you buy a Leica APO lens, you are getting something very, very special !