28mm History

[Allen in Montreal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does anyone know the history of the 28mm M lens series.

ver 1, 2 made in Canada etc etc?

 

Thank you,

 

Allen

[Xmas]

Hi

 

type I 65-72

type II 72-79

type III 79-93

type IV 92-05 (think)

 

Some are labeled as Ge or Ca only a collector interested in this distinction, premium on the Ge labeled type I, even the Ca label is a collector, low volume, type I as good (perhaps better) as shooter as the type II, if you dont need the M6 or M5 TTL camera metering.

 

Noel.

[Advertisement]

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

[cbretteville]

The list above are all 28/2.8 Elmarits. Then there is the Elmarit 28/2.8 ASPH that replaced the type IV and the Summicron 28/2 ASPH which is in a league of its own.

 

There are some older, LTM ones as well.

 

Carl

[tobey bilek]

My type 111 is a pretty good lens, just large with 49mm filter size.

 

They tell me hood is difficult to find. I am using the original that came with the lens in the 1980`s.

 

Shade blocks VF, but I use an Aux finder anyway.

[Allen in Montreal]

Thank you,

is there a list of serial numbers that separate the versions?

 

I sold my 28 2.8 when I bought the 24 2.8, back when the 24 was first launched.

I would like to get a 28 again, for B+W on an M6.

[adan]

Serial numbers will not be perfectly trustworthy, because Leica tends to assign them in blocks - and sometimes keeps on using a pre-assigned block even when a lens design changes.

 

But there is a guide here: Leica 28mm M Mount Lens Price and Information Guide

____________________

 

I'd avoid the v. 1 and 2, personally.

 

The V.1 is a symmetrical "true" wideangle which will block M6 metering - and a very expensive collectible.

 

The v.2 is a bit weak in the corners compared with other versions - Leica's first attempt at a retrofocus M lens to allow metering.

 

My favorite is the v.3 - sharp but with gentle contrast. Pictured and reviewed here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/45854-praise-mandler-lenses.html

 

If you LIKE contrast, v.4 and v.5 (ASPH) have lots more. They are also smaller than the v.3 with less finder blockage - especially the ASPH.

Edited April 18, 2011 by adan

[plasticman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My favorite is the v.3 - sharp but with gentle contrast. Pictured and reviewed here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/45854-praise-mandler-lenses.html

 

That is a great thread - which I'd originally missed - thank you very much for that!

 

A side-question, which I hope doesn't hijack the thread, is whether anything can be done about the close-focus of the 28 on earlier cameras, such as the M2? I was surprised to find that the rangefinder coupling doesn't extend all the way through the close-focus zone, and I believe I recall reading somewhere that this can be modified (my searches haven't unearthed the original thread, unfortunately). Does anyone have any information about this?

[luigi bertolotti]

That is a great thread - which I'd originally missed - thank you very much for that!

 

A side-question, which I hope doesn't hijack the thread, is whether anything can be done about the close-focus of the 28 on earlier cameras, such as the M2? I was surprised to find that the rangefinder coupling doesn't extend all the way through the close-focus zone, and I believe I recall reading somewhere that this can be modified (my searches haven't unearthed the original thread, unfortunately). Does anyone have any information about this?

 

Hum... are you sure your issue refers to the 28s ? 28s have closest focus distance of 0,7 m / 28" which isn't a problem with M2 (on the contrary, M3 couples to 1 meter); maybe you were thinking of the Elmarit 21, which in its first version had a focus scale extending to 0,4 m / 1,3 ft, not coupled to RF in the 0,7/0,4 m range.

Edited April 18, 2011 by luigi bertolotti

[plasticman]

Hum... are you sure your issue refers to the 28s ? 28s have closest focus distance of 0,7 m / 28" which isn't a problem with M2 (on the contrary, M3 couples to 1 meter); maybe you were thinking of the Elmarit 21, which in its first version had a focus scale extending to 0,4 m / 1,3 ft, not coupled to RF in the 0,7/0,4 m range.

 

In that case I wonder if there's a problem with my M2 or my 28?

 

I also have a late version 21 Elmarit, so I can try that lens on the M2 tonight (I don't remember what the closest focussing distance on my version of the lens is).

 

I haven't done any scientific test with the 28 - I put it on the M2 for the first time on Saturday, and used it all weekend - but straight away I noticed that the coupling only seemed to work down to around 80-90 cm or so, and then there was a further focussing range that had no effect on the rangefinder patch, whatsoever.

 

The camera works fine with the Summicron DR that's been on it since I bought it a couple (or so) months ago, and the 28 works fine on the M6 and M8. So the incompatibility (if that's what it is) between the 28 and the M2 therefore seems a bit of a mystery.

[Allen in Montreal]

Thank you Andy, that is a big help.

[luigi bertolotti]

In that case I wonder if there's a problem with my M2 or my 28?

 

I also have a late version 21 Elmarit, so I can try that lens on the M2 tonight (I don't remember what the closest focussing distance on my version of the lens is).

 

I haven't done any scientific test with the 28 - I put it on the M2 for the first time on Saturday, and used it all weekend - but straight away I noticed that the coupling only seemed to work down to around 80-90 cm or so, and then there was a further focussing range that had no effect on the rangefinder patch, whatsoever.

 

The camera works fine with the Summicron DR that's been on it since I bought it a couple (or so) months ago, and the 28 works fine on the M6 and M8. So the incompatibility (if that's what it is) between the 28 and the M2 therefore seems a bit of a mystery.

 

That's strange, indeed... I tend to think of something out of register in the M2 RF... probably no practical problem with a 28, but a bit annoying by sure... have you some other lens with focus to 0,7 ? Of course, the best test is to try with such a lens and see if the problem still emerges... the Summicron DR goes to 1m (0,5 when in near range) and is not a reference.

[plasticman]

That's strange, indeed... I tend to think of something out of register in the M2 RF... probably no practical problem with a 28, but a bit annoying by sure... have you some other lens with focus to 0,7 ? Of course, the best test is to try with such a lens and see if the problem still emerges... the Summicron DR goes to 1m (0,5 when in near range) and is not a reference.

 

Thanks Luigi for your help - and apologies to the OP for hijacking his thread - I should've started a new thread, and I hope I didn't obstruct the course of this one.

 

Just for the record, I tried the 21 on the M2 and that also slipped past the coupling at around the 80cm point - leaving the lens turning to focus the final 10 or 15cm without registering any change in the rangefinder.

I assume there's something slightly out-of-register on the M2 - but strangely it focusses perfectly when using lenses that travel down to 1m.

 

Incidentally, I tried the 28 on the M8 and then the M6 - and the lens was a bugger to get on and off the M6, but slid perfectly on and off the M8. I've never noticed so much inconsistency on different cameras with any other lens.

[UliWer]

I think the original question was, where the different 28mm Elmarits were produced. Adan's link gives the places of design, which might differ from the places of production during the 60s and 70s.

 

The sources I know are not very clear about this:

 

Lager says, the first version was mainly produced in Canada, though some were engraved "Wetzlar". He doesn't give information about the site of production of the other versions. Laney (Leica Collector's guide) says, the first version was produced in Wetzlar; the second in Canada, which corresponds with van Hasbroeck. I don't find any information about the 3rd and 4th version, though I think that at least the 4th version was produced at Solms, as at this time there wasn't much lens-production in Canada.

 

The current Elmarit-M 2.8/28mm Asph. is certainly produced at Solms.

Edited April 18, 2011 by UliWer

[luigi bertolotti]

I think the original question was, where the different 28mm Elmarits were produced. Adan's link gives the places of design, which might differ from the places of production during the 60s and 70s.

 

The sources I know are not very clear about this:

 

Lager says, the first version was mainly produced in Canada, though some were engraved "Wetzlar". He doesn't give information about the site of production of the other versions. Laney (Leica Collector's guide) says, the first version was produced in Wetzlar; the second in Canada, which corresponds with van Hasbroeck. I don't find any information about the 3rd and 4th version, though I think that at least the 4th version was produced at Solms, as at this time there wasn't much lens-production in Canada.

 

The current Elmarit-M 2.8/28mm Asph. is certainly produced at Solms.

 

With any evidence, Lager is right about the first (9 elements) version : they appear regularly on the market, both in Wetzlar (rarer) and Canada version. 2nd and 3rd are all Canadian, while me too think that the 4th was only made in Solms... the "switch" 3 to 4 (around 3.55x.xxx) occurred indeed in a period of very little batches... but 3 and 4 are so different that seems to me uneven that the surely completely new toolings for the 4th version had been replicated (or transferred) from a factory to the other; moreover, I think the 4th version was designed at a time when the Ontario factory was already no more owned by Leica.

 

Btw, I have a first version made in Wetzlar... it's in perfect conditions, but its performances (sharpness and contrast) are definitely lower than a 3rd version from 1982 I too have...

Edited April 19, 2011 by luigi bertolotti

[Xmas]

Btw, I have a first version made in Wetzlar... it's in perfect conditions, but its performances (sharpness and contrast) are definitely lower than a 3rd version from 1982 I too have...

Hi Luigi

 

There are 20 years of optical design between the two lenses and the type III was a statement lens in it s day, But at 5.6 or smaller there is not much to separate the two lenses apart from flare and contrast. The type I will pastel the colors more.

 

If youonly want to take photos the ZM or CV (latter LTM only) are a lot easier on the pocket material.

 

Noel

[TheBeep]

Reviving an old thred here...

Just bought a Type 4 in excellent condition for my M240 with hood for 870€, which sounded like a great deal to me. Made a few testshots andi might post them here later on.

Hope it makes a great addition to my Summicron 50 and Elmarit 90.

What do you think? Good deal?

[luigi bertolotti]

Good price indeed - it's definitely under the current asking prices.

[pgk]

I'd avoid the v. 1 and 2, personally.

 

The v.2 is a bit weak in the corners compared with other versions - Leica's first attempt at a retrofocus M lens to allow metering.

I'm reviving this thread having obtained a copy of v.2 which is as Adan says somewhat weak in the corners (but which I failed to avoid as it was cheap enough not too). That said, my first impressions are not unfavourable, especially if its stopped down and relevant adjustments made to the RAW file to optimise it. The images feel 'old' though and I suspect some SA, perhaps a little coma and probable and significant image field curvature, as the distant corners are softening whilst closer are not as bad. Given the current interest in older lenses on digitals I do wonder if this is an underrated lens with its old fashioned look and rather awkward S7 filter-in-the-hood (as on the 3.4SA which I also like)? Physically its not so huge until the 1501 hood is added but I rather like its appearance even with the hood and handily, the new 21mm viewfinder with its integral M8 framelines works for both this and the SA.

[uhoh7]

I have the v3 and while I've always been impressed by shots I've seen with that lens on the M8, my M9 does not care for it at all. Having read many threads on the elmarits, I would get the v4 if I needed one. My take was the asph is nice and small but the V4 is the strongest technically.

 

I do shoot a ton at 28, and because of that I invested in a cron a few years ago.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest]

On 4/18/2011 at 6:33 AM, adan said:

Serial numbers will not be perfectly trustworthy, because Leica tends to assign them in blocks - and sometimes keeps on using a pre-assigned block even when a lens design changes.

 

But there is a guide here: Leica 28mm M Mount Lens Price and Information Guide

____________________

 

I'd avoid the v. 1 and 2, personally.

 

The V.1 is a symmetrical "true" wideangle which will block M6 metering - and a very expensive collectible.

 

The v.2 is a bit weak in the corners compared with other versions - Leica's first attempt at a retrofocus M lens to allow metering.

 

My favorite is the v.3 - sharp but with gentle contrast. Pictured and reviewed here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/45854-praise-mandler-lenses.html

 

If you LIKE contrast, v.4 and v.5 (ASPH) have lots more. They are also smaller than the v.3 with less finder blockage - especially the ASPH.

Is version 2 better build quality? in images and video that appears to be the case.