Hats off to Max Berek

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That little Elmar M 2.8/50 collapsible.. The design unchanged since the very first Elmar of 1925, just refined over the years. Lowly specs, a minimum of glass between the sensor and the subject... Each time I use it it impresses me more.

Sea Rising

 

[Mauribix]

I second every single word Jaap.... one of my most loved lens... i think many will cry for its passed production...

 

Best Regards

 

Maurizio

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ho_co]

I fully agree, and am sorry to see it go.

 

Remember that it shares a history with the Tessar, which Zeiss claims IIRC to be one of the most-often-used designs of all times.

 

And as you say, Jaap, Leica has refined and refined and refined. Puts says in his Leica Lens Compendium:

The Elmar has been in production for more than 35 years in countless versions, that make it a collector’s delight and nightmare. Almost half a million have been produced, which is more than 12% of all Leica lenses ever produced till 2000.

 

--HC

[ibogost]

I take it the current version of this lens has been discontinued? As of when?

[ho_co]

I don't know if it's official, but with the appearance of the 50 Summarit, the days of the 50 Elmar would seem to be numbered.

 

And I think I've seen reference to its removal from the European Leica price list as well.

 

--HC

[HetDraakje]

And I think I've seen reference to its removal from the European Leica price list as well.

 

And how about the summicron? also removed?

 

Boen

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Max Berek designed the original 50mm Elmar in 1925. It was redesigned in the early 1950's as the 'red scale Elmar'. The 2.8 version, which appeared in 1958, is very different. Instead of the classical Elmar signature with fairly high contrast on axis, with a marked fall-off toward the edges, the 2.8 has a very even performance across the entire field, but somewhat lower than the original's center definition. It was also designed to have definition largely independent of the reproduction ratio, so that it holds up well at close focus. It was in fact designed for enlargement and projection as well as for picture-taking.

 

And yes, it does work on the M8, but you should mount and dismount it extended only, not collapsed - though you can collapse it when mounted, in spite of the anathema from Solms. Given all this, I do prefer my Summilux ASPH.

 

The old man from the Age of the Tessar ...

[giordano]

[...] the 2.8 has a very even performance across the entire field, but somewhat lower than the original's center definition. It was also designed to have definition largely independent of the reproduction ratio, so that it holds up well at close focus. It was in fact designed for enlargement and projection as well as for picture-taking.

 

Thanks, Lars, I didn't know that ... helps explain the very satisfactory results I had the other day using a screw-mount 2.8 on a BOOWU on the M8. Plus of course the satisfaction of using lens and gadgets that are at least 50 years older than the camera.

 

Given all this, I do prefer my Summilux ASPH.

 

Can't use it on a BOOWU!

[ho_co]

And how about the summicron? also removed?

Don't know.

 

With the Elmar, the reasoning is that the Summarit is faster, costs less, and doesn't risk damaging the M8 since it can't be collapsed.

 

As for the Summicron, there are the price and speed differences; and Puts' comparison shows a certain difference in the 'footprint' of the lenses. I haven't seen speculation on the Summicron/Summarit question.

 

But remember, this is all speculation. Check for the new price lists at the beginning of 2008, and see what's in and what's out.

 

--HC

[jaapv]

Max Berek designed the original 50mm Elmar in 1925. It was redesigned in the early 1950's as the 'red scale Elmar'. The 2.8 version, which appeared in 1958, is very different. Instead of the classical Elmar signature with fairly high contrast on axis, with a marked fall-off toward the edges, the 2.8 has a very even performance across the entire field, but somewhat lower than the original's center definition. It was also designed to have definition largely independent of the reproduction ratio, so that it holds up well at close focus. It was in fact designed for enlargement and projection as well as for picture-taking.

 

And yes, it does work on the M8, but you should mount and dismount it extended only, not collapsed - though you can collapse it when mounted, in spite of the anathema from Solms. Given all this, I do prefer my Summilux ASPH.

 

The old man from the Age of the Tessar ...

 

Interestingly he designed it very shortly after he designed the ELMAX, which is a similar design but with a three-lens rear element. That it had in common with the very first Leica lens, the Anastigmat. There is speculation that the this had to do with patent issues with the Zeiss Tessar, which was of similar design as the Elmar, but the timeframe makes this unlikely. Anyway, that the basic design of these lenses held up for over seventy years must surely say something about the genius of the designers.

[gyoung]

Max Berek designed the original 50mm Elmar in 1925. It was redesigned in the early 1950's as the 'red scale Elmar'. The 2.8 version, which appeared in 1958, is very different. Instead of the classical Elmar signature with fairly high contrast on axis, with a marked fall-off toward the edges, the 2.8 has a very even performance across the entire field, but somewhat lower than the original's center definition. It was also designed to have definition largely independent of the reproduction ratio, so that it holds up well at close focus. It was in fact designed for enlargement and projection as well as for picture-taking.

 

snip

 

It makes a very good enlarging lens, I have used it quite a few times over the years on a Focomat 1a. I did some compaisons with the other possibles at one time (about 20 yrs ago) and it was quite a lot sharper at full aperture than the other three. (50mm 2.8 enlarging lenses by Schneider, Rodenstock and Nikon)

 

Gerry

[Mauribix]

Don't know.

 

With the Elmar, the reasoning is that the Summarit is faster, costs less, and doesn't risk damaging the M8 since it can't be collapsed.

 

--HC

 

With current version of elmar 50 , there's no way to damage the sensor collapsing it.

 

Best

 

Maurizio

[xjr]

My first £eica lense, the most loved, the....cheapest and the most used and every picture a gem!!! and all these with 4 pieces of optical glass !