Lens Minimum Focal Length

[minks73]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi.

 

I own a Leica M8 with a Summilux 50mm f1.4 version 2 and a Summicron 35mm f2 pre-asph. My Summilux seems to have a minimum focal length of 1m and my Cron seems to have a minimum focal length of 70cm. Is there a lens (or what is the lens) with a lower minimum focal length?

 

In addition, I have read that Pre-ASPH Lux and ASPH Lux have a decreased minimum focal length of 70cm. I would be interested in hearing people's views on whether 1m minimum focal length and 70cm minimum focal length have material differences and whehter it results in the newer lenses being better. Thank you.

[lct]

...I own a Leica M8 with a Summilux 50mm f1.4 version 2 and a Summicron 35mm f2 pre-asph. My Summilux seems to have a minimum focal length of 1m and my Cron seems to have a minimum focal length of 70cm. Is there a lens (or what is the lens) with a lower minimum focal length?...

You mean which lenses have shorter minimum focus distance values i guess. 0.7m for the latest pre-asph Summilux 50 (code # 11856, 11868 or 11869) for instance and 0.2m for the Hologon 15/8 (code # 11103). See below:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

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

[ho_co]

Mink--

The M3's rangefinder didn't focus closer than 1 m, so that was standard it its day for lenses as well.

 

The M2 et seq allowed .7 m close focus, so the way was cleared for lenses to focus closer.

 

The Dual-Range Summicron allowed close focus by means of a special focusing cam and close-up 'goggles,' on M3 and later cameras.

 

Today's 90/4 Macro Elmar with close-up attachment also focuses closer with rangefinder coupling, while the 16/18/21 Tri-Elmar will focus closer without rangefinder coupling (while maintaining rangefinder coupling down to the camera's limit).

 

Generally of more interest is the greatest reproduction ratio a lens allows. You can check both numbers for current lenses by reading their spec sheets as published by Leica online.

 

In general, the problem is that lenses are designed for infinity; maintaining adequate correction into the closer range creates some design difficulties. Later designs can often be focused closer than earlier ones (50/2 for example). Sometimes Leica will choose not to correct the lens for the close range because the choice wouldn't pay in terms of size and complexity.

 

You ask, 'is one better?' Some people prefer modern designs based on MTF computations, others prefer the special Leica look of older lenses.

 

Read Erwin Puts' publications and lens reviews (Tao of Leica) for a good understanding of the factors involved.

Edited March 28, 2009 by ho_co

[adan]

1. "Is there a lens (or what is the lens) with a lower minimum focal length [close focusing distance]?"

 

Leica rangefinder cameras are limited to .7 meters close focusing (except the M3 = 1 meter unless modified). The only Leica lenses that focus closer are the old dual-range 50 and the modern 90 Macro, which through the addition of goggles to change the geometry of the RF/VF, allow closer focusing then .7 meters (2' 4"), but disable infinity focusing temporarily while mounted.

 

As Hoco says, tight framing is a function of both focus limit and focal length. The tightest framing M lens - without goggles - is the 75 Summicron, the longest lens that focuses all the way down to .7 meters.

 

2. "whether 1m minimum focal length and 70cm minimum focal length have material differences"

 

IMHO yes. The extra .3 meter closer to the subject makes for a 30% tighter image all by itself.

 

And there is a secondary effect that means the real difference is larger than that. When a lens is focused closer, it is moved away from the image plane (film, sensor). Just as in moving a slide projector away from the wall, this makes the image larger in its own right.

 

Example image posed below. 50mm at .7 meters and 1 meter. That's a pretty material difference in cropping to my eye - almost like switching from a 50 to a 90.

 

3. a couple of extra points.

 

a) Some lenses do degrade in image quality when focused close. The non-ASPH 50 f/1.4 is one. It is not horrible, but details do develop a "glow" around them from growing impact of spherical aberrations. Leica "limited" this lens to 1 meter for 35 years after .7 meter focusing was available in the cameras, because they just thought it got too "dreamy". The Summicron 50 , by comparison, is very good close-up.

 

Some lenses focus to exactly .7 meters and no closer - others focus several mm past the .7m focus mark on the lens barrel. Depends mostly on era of manufacture. Either Leica was more precise back then, or decided to give photographers more leeway to get close in the past 20 years or so.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[minks73]

Thanks all for your feedback! I now crave for a Lux 50mm with a 70cm focal length...

[earleygallery]

Focal length is the field of view of the lens!! You mean minimum/close focus distance. If that is a feature which interests you then surely and SLR camera will be better for you.

[Finnkare]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One choice for close-ups is buying a (>50mm) screw mount lens and mounting it on a M42 SLR body with an adaptor. The body is thicker, so it will create the same effect as bellows: shorter minimum focusing distance (not focal length) and losing the longest focusing distances.

[gyoung]

 

snip

The Dual-Range Summicron allowed close focus by means of a special focusing cam and close-up 'goggles,' on M3 and later cameras.

 

The Elmarit 90mm which I have focuses down to 1 metre so you can get the same magnification as the dual range Summicron at the closer distance without all the hassle of the goggles. The extra working distance by using the 90 mm lens is often useful when doing nature subjects and gives less parrallax problems. I assume other 90 mm lenses are capable of focusing down to 1m as well?

 

Gerry

[jaapv]

yes

[peter_n]

I would be interested in hearing people's views on whether 1m minimum focal length and 70cm minimum focal length have material differences and whehter it results in the newer lenses being better.

As has been very well illustrated above there is a difference in spite of the apparently minor differences in the lens' focusing. I use a v.2 pre-ASPH 50 Summilux and both ASPH 50 Summilux and ASPH 75 Summicron. Both the ASPH lenses are excellent at their closest focus of 0.7M, presumably because of their floating element.

 

The v.2 pre-ASPH 50 Summilux is a terrific lens but my problem with it is that I'm always moving backward because I'm too close. I recently bought the v.3 pre-ASPH 50 Summilux which has a closest focus of 0.7M and will be very regretfully selling the v2. I've got so used to the 0.7M closest focus on my 24, 35 and other lenses using one that only focuses to 1M isn't practical any more.

 

[bcorton]

<Is there a lens (or what is the lens) with a lower minimum focal length? >

 

If close focus is what you want, how about the Macro-Elmar-M 90mm? It focuses down to .77 meters, or with the macro adapter down to .5 meters. That's a reproduction ratio of 1:3 on 35mm film.

 

Leica Camera AG - Photography - LEICA MACRO-ELMAR-M 90 mm f/4

 

Brent

[markgay]

In the opinion of Mr Puts, the close up performance of the 50mm Summicron outstrips the Summilux.

 

The close up performance of the Summicron is definitely better than that of the new Summilux and if you do not need the high speed, it still has its virtues.

 

Summilux1.4/50 asph