Jump to content

Ten errors that carry through history


zapp

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Books have been written about the geniune inventions by Leica people.

Not much is available about the 10 most signigican flwas in Leica history that still cause trouble as of today - I am starting a list, let`s collect more infos

 

1. The invention of SLR cameras makes the issue above even worse. All lenses above with less than 35 mm focal length are retro focus designs and mirror slap is a major issue comaperas to rangefinder cameras. Digital SLRs still outnumber rangefinders - time to invent a quick real time digital viewfinder to replace the shortcomings of the rangefinder, but keep the advantages of the SLR.

 

2. Leica M5 and Leica CL used a little flag that swivels away during exposure for measuring exposure values. As a result, all lenses with a focal length of 28 mm and less are retro focus designs, meaning that Leica M users have to life with more distortion than necessary for cameras designed in the last 25 years. In order to calculate a distortion free 28 mm (as digital 35 mm equivalent) Leica had to sacrifice image quality.

Leica sales people may tell you that retro focus design lenses are more suitable for digital sensors, but they will stop telling you about this issue as soon as Leica has solved their technical problems - others have.

 

 

can anyone come up with more issues, decisions taken in the past that pose trouble today - hopefully something better than the 2:3 or 3:4 discussion

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just pulled out an SL2 and an M5. Both are great and both have their uses. The M5 is still my favorite metered M. It was not a Leica mistake. It was a brilliamtly designed camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actually quite happy with the "sacrificed" image quality of my Summicron 28mm lens. Do let me know if you think there is a better lens of that focal length out there.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

 

Andreas,

 

Most amusing. 28/2 has NO distortion, is sharp out to the edges, has a magical look, little vignetting, and out-performs my 35/2 regularly. What COULD he be talking about? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M5 and CL are both more than 30 years old, so I would imagine that lenses made in the last 25 years need NOT be retro-focus to suit obsolete models.

 

However, this does not mean what you said is not correct.

 

The first question to ask is: "does the meter cell protrude so far out that it is than than 28mm from the film plane?" because only then would a retro be necessary. Of course engineering reality would dictate that the actual distance be a bit less than 28mm.

 

Assuming the answer to above is yes, then the second question to ask is: "can the modern 28s be used on the M5?" I do remember some lenses cannot be used on the M5 but I can't remember which ones.

 

If both answers are yes, then those lenses have a high CHANCE of being retros, but not certain. Only Leica can be definitive.

 

There are people who claim that the retros are every bit as good as the non-retros. I don't know myself.

 

But why is that a flaw? The SLR's all suffer from it (assuming what you said is true). They would just be on level playing fields.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M5 and CL are both more than 30 years old, so I would imagine that lenses made in the last 25 years need NOT be retro-focus to suit obsolete models.

The modern wide lenses are retrofocus. They need to be so the metering cell can take proper readings. Of course, if you can obtain correct TTL readings with an unmodified 21mm/3.4 Super-Angulon (for example), I'll withdraw the above. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Books have been written about the geniune inventions by Leica people.

Not much is available about the 10 most signigican flwas in Leica history that still cause trouble as of today - I am starting a list, let`s collect more infos

 

 

can anyone come up with more issues, decisions taken in the past that pose trouble today - hopefully something better than the 2:3 or 3:4 discussion

 

 

I wouldn't know of any bothering me to an extend worth mentioning. If I had, I wouldn't be here.

 

To me this poll goes into the top ten useless threads.

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andreas,

 

Most amusing. 28/2 has NO distortion, is sharp out to the edges, has a magical look, little vignetting, and out-performs my 35/2 regularly. What COULD he be talking about? :D

He is talking about the 2/28 which does distort. Although, I admit not as much as a the even shorter focal length lenses like the 16-21-24 mm gang. Be imaginative and you may understand what I am talking about.

 

I understand that the Leica user group is happy with their equipment, as am I, but if you just send replies to tell me that the Leica history is flawless you really make me smile big time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He is talking about the 2/28 which does distort. Although, I admit not as much as a the even shorter focal length lenses like the 16-21-24 mm gang. Be imaginative and you may understand what I am talking about.

 

I understand that the Leica user group is happy with their equipment, as am I, but if you just send replies to tell me that the Leica history is flawless you really make me smile big time.

And what exactly is your point? I still don't get it. Wait, now I know:

 

Top flaw: MP black paint wears way to fast...

 

Joking aside: if you want to know what is bugging people search the site for key words like "problem" or "issue". Up to you. Or shall we discuss the front wheel driven Porsche issue...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read the OP's ramblings a few times and I still don't get it. The title says 'Ten errors' and yet I only see two, and then they don't make any sense to me. Whoever said that Leica invented the SLR? Does the OP have any ideas for how designers should get around the 'problems' he mentions?

 

Zapp has sapped my energy in responding to this thread and should be zapped! Go make some pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distorsion with the Summicron 28/2?

Either you've got a bad copy and you should send it in for repair or you don't have a clue of what you're talking about.

 

Greetings LCT!

 

Agreed, obviously clueless. My second best and still favorite lens. Best corrected lens I have for veiling glare. Some vignetting on rare occasions, but otherwise flawless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distorsion values FWIW:

 

Elmarit 21/2.8 asph: 0.24%

Elmarit 24/2.8 asph: 0.33%

Sumicron 28/2 asph: 0.14%

Summicron 35/2 asph: -0.10%

ZM Biogon 21/2.8: 0.21%

ZM Biogon 25/2.8: 0.18%

ZM Biogon 28/2.8: 0.17%

ZM Biogon 35/2: 0.03%

 

(Chasseur d'Images # 290)

loupe_anim.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...