Tri Elmar 28-35-50 opinions

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rob, now that you have added in the cost factor that does bear heavily on your decision. Ironically, I bought my MATE to go with my new M6, one of the last made. Only later did I see how useful it would be with my M8 and later, M9. In fact the MATE was initially designed for film cameras because no digital range-finders existed.

[efreed2754]

The MATE question arises often. And as in this case collector/rare samples have driven the price so high it's difficult to rationalize its purchase just for use.

 

For the record agree with the comments offered by the earlier posters.

 

I purchased my ver2 three+ years ago for $4,000. Have 10 lenses including two 50s, and a 35. Still use the MATE for vacations and love having it, especially for M9 and M.

 

Just today took company on alligator Everglades boat tour. While brought a 24, 90,135 just used MATE. Was on right side of boat when guide attracted a playful male to come alongside our boat. There was no room to move closer or further away. No problem switched to 35 from 50 to take in full critter. May have missed image if had to change lenses.

 

One only "needs" one lens to take pics. Having a choice of lenses to me is a plus. Having the MATE is not necessary but very, very, vey nice to have. So believe no right or wrong answer here.

[Advertisement]

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

[MarkP]

Many thanks for all your replies, it really has helped me come to a conclusion.

As I stated I have a MP film camera which I purchased fairly recently having been away from Leica ownership for some years and some of you may have read my previous post on why I settled on an MP, basically I wanted a metered M film camera to last me out and I figured that the MP ticked more boxes than the others.

 

In that vein it struck me that the MATE is a somewhat complex design which will quite probably need in the future more attention than a regular prime lens to keep in good order, another factor is the F4 max aperture, all this talk of cranking up the ISO is not an option for me with the MP and the ability to have it converted to 6 bit is in my case a total irrelevance.

 

Finally I do not have unlimited funds, I wish I did but there you are maybe I should have studied harder at school but it's too late now. Having viewed prices it looks like even a V1 MATE will cost more than a 35 CRON V4 and a 28 Elmarit V3 put together, possibly more than a 35 Summilux and 28 Elmarit put together, I already have a 50 Cron V4 which these should compliment nicely.

 

Many thanks again, cheers Rob

 

 

I think that's a sensible decision - the MATE is a great lens but I would choose prime lenses first. I still view the MATE as a supplement rather than a 'core' lens.

[wlaidlaw]

I have been a V2 MATE user for the last 8 years. Mine was one of the very last made at the end of 2006, with factory coding from new, for the 30% discount offered to early buyers of the problem M8's. Whereas I hesitate to disagree with the very knowledgeable Mr. Puts, I don't think that all focal lengths are totally wonderful. The 50mm IS very good indeed. The 35mm length is pretty good and for most purposes, especially on a film camera is just fine. It is probably at the limit of its abilities on the M240 in resolution. The 28mm is noticeably soft in the corners at anything below f8 on the M240 and IMHO is the main weakness of the lens, along with its fragility, especially to mounting damage. I had the resolution of the 28mm checked during its last visit to Solms to cure a sticking framelines cam and it was pronounced OK. However all that said, it is a great holiday lens and I am taking it to Taiwan with me this week.

 

I am very surprised that Leica has not brought out a replacement, based on a stepped zoom (like the WATE), rather than the very complicated mechanism of the MATE (5 or 6 concentric sleeves). With the improved lens computations they can do nowadays, I am sure they could cure the weakness at 28mm and maybe even extend the range to 25 to 75mm with not too much of an increase in size. I am sure that would be a big seller. I would certainly buy one if they bring it to market at £5000 or less. If it was to be solely aimed at M240 and T users with the EVF's, it would not even need to be RF coupled or have a framelines cam.

 

I investigated the possibility of getting Japan Exposures to convert a Contax G 35-70 Vario Sonnar to non-RF-coupled M mount but Mr Miyazaki felt that it was just too difficult to get the focusing mechanism correct.

 

I do use a Contax 28-85 f3.3 Vario Sonnar on my M240, with a Novoflex LEM/CONT adapter and the results are excellent, with first class resolution at all lengths, minimal distortion, very high micro and macro contrast plus typical Zeiss warm rendition. However it is very large, heavy and unbalances the M240 quite noticeably, especially at wide zoom, when the lens is fully extended on its zoom/focus trombone (unlike what you would expect, the lens is at its physical shortest at the longest focal length).

 

Wilson

[Firefly]

Well I have spent part of the day looking at various Dealers websites and have left a deposit on a 35mm Summilux M pre ASPH complete with box, hood and caps at The Classic Camera, hopefully I will get there Saturday to pay the balance and pick it up. There seems to be quite a few 28mm Elmarits around so I can have a mooch round and hopefully pick one up somewhere the same day, thanks again for all your opinions, regards Rob

[marknorton]

Do be aware that this lens exhibits focus shift as you stop down; this was first demonstrated by Tim Ashley a few years ago and while you can compensate on an M240 by focussing through the EVF/LCD with the lens stopped down, it remains a difficult lens to use with the OVF.

[Firefly]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have spent a lot of time now reading loads of threads on this part of the forum and it appears that every lens get praised or pulled apart to the nth degree, often within the same thread. Having made my choice I will live with it, cheers Rob

[wlaidlaw]

Do be aware that this lens exhibits focus shift as you stop down; this was first demonstrated by Tim Ashley a few years ago and while you can compensate on an M240 by focussing through the EVF/LCD with the lens stopped down, it remains a difficult lens to use with the OVF.

 

Maybe Tim is very unlucky because his lenses always seem to focus shift more than anyone else's.

 

Wilson

[Peter Branch]

........Keep in mind that if you crunch the front lens element, it cannot be replaced which will write the lens off, so that might be a reason to use a 49 or 55mm filter to protect it, and I am hardly one to recommend their use.

 

I don't doubt for one moment that this is correct but I'm intrigued to know quite why?

 

Is it literally a write-off or is it an economic write-off?

 

Leica build any number of prototype lenses so I have to believe they could if they wanted to replace a front element or even build a new lens from scratch - the price would however be another matter altogether.

[wlaidlaw]

When my MATE came back after its last visit to Solms, I noticed a tiny mark at the very edge of the front element, which I am sure was not there before the visit. I got the expected "it was't us Guv" reaction but was also told that in any case, it could not be replaced as there were no spares. The blanks were apparently made by Leica Canada. It would be uneconomic for Schott (Zeiss) to tool up to press a few spare blanks, I assume. Luckily the mark is so tiny and being right at the very edge of the element, does not seem to have any effect on image quality.

 

Wilson

 

PS Leica does not have a good record on spare part supply. Viz. Screens and drivers for the M8 and rangefinder parts for older M's, both of which have run out.

[marknorton]

Maybe Tim is very unlucky because his lenses always seem to focus shift more than anyone else's.

 

Wilson

 

I accept that Tim Ashley is more than usually fastidious (that's the polite way of putting it) but mine certainly exhibits focus shift, clear to see using the LCD on an M Type 240.

[marknorton]

I don't doubt for one moment that this is correct but I'm intrigued to know quite why?

 

Is it literally a write-off or is it an economic write-off?

 

Leica build any number of prototype lenses so I have to believe they could if they wanted to replace a front element or even build a new lens from scratch - the price would however be another matter altogether.

 

I thought the glass blanks came from Hoya and for some reason became unavailable. Whether this was down to EU regulation which limited the amount of some metals in the glass because of radiation concerns (and may be why some lenses were only ever made in Canada) I do not know, I'm not as close to it as I once was.

 

Suffice it to say, if you damage the front element of a MATE to the extent that images are affected, there is no solution. Leica will not make a new element for you and I doubt they will release the specification of it for some other company to do it.

 

I remember that went through an exercise of trying to find a replacement glass, even with minor changes to other aspects of the lens but it was not possible. I expect the complexity of the mount simply added to the case for ditching the lens.

[MarkP]

Another reason for insurance - repair or value of replacement lens (if repair is not possible).

[Doc Henry]

Hi Rob and Hi All,

A very personal view

I went to medical humanitarian mission in SE Asia * last March, with my 2 digital M and my M7. I also brought lens in my two Billingham bags: a 28 cron asph, 35mm asph lux, 50 lux asph , an apo asph 90 cron, 90 ME, and apo Telyt 135. I have all used these lens , for various reasons

landscapes, portraits, clinical pictures of patients , architecture, flowers macrophotos etc....

It is true that there is lots of equipment , but I do not like the focal variables for a question of brightness and perhaps solidity and I need some time to shoot in the dark without flash.

 

Sorry to disturb your very interesting discussions.

Some review authors found fragile Mate , is that correct ?

Regards

Henry

* http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/325507-pictures-mission.html

Edited November 2, 2014 by Doc Henry

[South Bird]

I have the V2. It is an epic lens for the M240. With the ISO performance at 1600 it opens up using the lens at night, inside and at dawn. I just returned from a trip through the American Southwest. Carried the MATE, and also 18, 35, and 70-210R. I never took the MATE off. This was a good thing as it was windy and dusty.

 

It does flare more than the 50 summilux asph. You need to be careful shooting in the direction of the sun. Other than that limitation, it is the a great walk around lens for the M. It is now on my camera 95% of the time.

Edited November 4, 2014 by South Bird
error

[wlaidlaw]

Funnily enough I never really noticed how flare prone the 50mm length was until today. Using it in Taiwan today in misty but very bright sunlight, the flare was horrible. It must have been something to do with the quality of light, as my C112 was even worse, with no lens hood and was close to unusable.

 

Wilson

[MarkP]

Regarding the MATE on the M240, the combination of these older lenses and the M240 sensor results in glorious colours.

[wlaidlaw]

I have just checked my MATE on the M240 with the EVF on max zoom and focus peaking. On all three focal lengths, there is no aperture shift that I can detect at 2 and 4 metres, looking at fine print on a newspaper. Maybe I am just lucky and have a good one.

 

Wilson

[MarkP]

I have just checked my MATE on the M240 with the EVF on max zoom and focus peaking. On all three focal lengths, there is no aperture shift that I can detect at 2 and 4 metres, looking at fine print on a newspaper. Maybe I am just lucky and have a good one.

 

Wilson

 

This is my experience with my E49 MATE.

 

Maybe we are just lucky and have good ones .

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bocaburger]

I have the V2. It is an epic lens for the M240. With the ISO performance at 1600 it opens up using the lens at night, inside and at dawn. I just returned from a trip through the American Southwest. Carried the MATE, and also 18, 35, and 70-210R.

 

The 70-210 is a real sleeper, probably due to it's Minolta pedigree. I had one years ago, then got GAS and bought the 80-200/4 and was shocked and disappointed at how little improvement there was, plus it was much heavier and the 2-touch design was a lot slower in handling. I recently picked up a 70-210 again, this time for around $200 (about a third of what I sold the last one for) in bargain grade when I got my M240. I'm trying to improve my handholding skills though, as thus far my consumer 70-300 Canon lens gets me sharper results due to the IS.