Jump to content

New range of M lenses?


Hookeye

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was wondering if anybody share my view on this:

 

The discussion on Leica re-starting production of R lenses for the new M body is a side track. In my opinion it would be more logical for Leica to design and extend the range of M lenses into the telephoto and zoom domain. These new lenses can be used on the new M without an adapter and can be focussed with the aid of the optional external viewfinder.

 

Hence we may see the best of two worlds: The rangefinder is superior for focusing lenses up to about 100mm whereas the live-view or viewfinder will enable focusing and framing also of longer lenses, for those who are into that sort of thing :eek:

 

Cheers, HP

Link to post
Share on other sites

now that the body has been weatherproofed perhaps we will see a weatherproof zoom?

 

but will people be happy to use an uncoupled RF lens when they have an optical VF?

 

perhaps Leica will make a new tri-elmar type weather sealed lens... 28/50/75?

 

 

 

one shudders to think of the cost though... if you sell 3 focal lengths in one go you will want to get at least the value of two I would think... :cool:

 

But one lens with 3 focal lengths, RF coupled- and weather sealed- would seem to be a great option for the new M- ideal for light travel, etc. Now the ISO is better you can lose a stop or two in lens speed.... Perhaps if they designed the new lens so you had to manually set the focal length on the mount rather than having the complex system on the previous 'tri' lenses they could make it more robust (and less expensive?)

 

Such a lens could be a great option for someone getting into Leica for the first time- who is not a lens fetishist and just wants a simple- versatile system...

 

I must say- this damnable (weather sealed) new M is sorely tempting...

Edited by jaques
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, even Stefan Daniel in his recent video interview said Leica would think about new M-lenses in the telephoto range.

 

Though let's think twice. There are some people who really use them: Sports, Nature for example.

 

Before I had my first Leica I tried using some long lenses for birds: tripod, haze, patience, patience, patience...

 

Looking at one photo of Doug Herr @ http://www.wildlightphoto.com was enough for me to say: Give over, when you can hear Beethoven, it's not sensible trying to compose symphonies as an amateur, too hard work for holidays or weekends

 

Yes, you might find some excellent photos taken with long lenses by amateurs in this Forum. Though I am still sure, there a very few people who can do this and want to do it.

 

So the market for long lenses - expensive as they are - is very, very small. Leica - having produced many long lenses for the R - knows this. Even if they are doing well now, they are still obliged by economic forces to earn money. This is not to found on a very, very restricted market, if you are already producing in a small niche.

 

I don't think, we will see many long lenses by Leica in future.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering if anybody share my view on this:

 

The discussion on Leica re-starting production of R lenses for the new M body is a side track. In my opinion it would be more logical for Leica to design and extend the range of M lenses into the telephoto and zoom domain.[...]

 

While we realize that Leica is not a baby sitter, it still seem imprudent to introduce an M mount long lens that cannot possibly be workable on a traditional M body. It should remain a R mount. Just my two bits. 10

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello UliWer,

 

What if they made an auto-aperture, image stabilized, 180mm Apo-Elmarit not much larger than the last version for the R9?

 

The envelope might be pushed.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

 

So for that to work, do you figure they will need to make a future M model that has an electronic connection between the lens and body? At that point shouldn't it have an electronically controlled diaphragm and auto focus too? Consider that the lack of AF was not a big selling feature for long lenses on the R, or on other brands, once that became a common feature.

 

As for those suggesting new lenses in R mount... what would be the benefit of doing that? Since R lens owners stopped buying the old ones, forcing the line to be dropped, and owners' biggest issue was how to use the lenses they already own on a newer digital body.

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello pico,

 

What is wrong w/ some long lenses which are usable on the new "M" & other M's & Barnacks & Flex/R's? Just as some already existant M lenses are usable on Barnacks & Flex/R's.

 

You would need something like a Visoflex (optical or electronic) to focus your New "M" lens on your current Barnack/M. On a Flex/R you would only need an adapter.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Alan,

 

The future of all kinds of things, including diaphrams, focussing mechanisms, etc is electronic. Electronics usually gives people more options than mechanical in the same situation while @ the same time dropping the costs of manufacture dramatically.

 

40 years ago Alpa had a mechanical adapter that allowed Nikon lenses w/ automatic stop down diaphrams to be used from Infinity w/ functioning automatic stop down on Alpa's manual stop down metering cameras. It would probably not be that hard to adapt this idea to an M. New or old. Similar in operation to a Bellows R.

 

I am not familiar enough w/ auto focus lenses to tell you if auto-focus would have advantages w/ long lenses or for close-ups.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Alan,

 

The future of all kinds of things, including diaphrams, focussing mechanisms, etc is electronic. Electronics usually gives people more options than mechanical in the same situation while @ the same time dropping the costs of manufacture dramatically.

 

I agree but since the M does not have electronic linkage in the body it will be difficult to power IS and work the aperture. (This might require a new body.)

 

The only way around this that I can think of is if they made a bottom attachment that used the link to the camera in order to connect to the lens in some external way. For automatic lens operation this connection would have to link to the aperture in order to communicate the F stop for open aperture metering and would have to then work an electronic diaphragm. Power can also be supplied to the lens stabilization. (Leica would be a prime candidate for sensor based AF.)

 

I think if Leica had anything like this in mind they would have built in electronic linkage into the M body. And if they did that they would plan ahead further to make sure this connection could support AF in future bodies and lenses.

 

Likewise, why would they go to all the trouble to make a new lens with an electronic diaphragm, IS, and some kind of electronic linkage to the camera... but not make the lens AF?

Edited by AlanG
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already stated before that a 180mm Apo-Telyt with a speed of about 3.4 would be a natural for the Leica M. Possibly a zoom too – Leica have proved that zooms can be as good optically as prime lenses. A good zoom will be a large, heavy and unwieldy thing however, and personally, I'm not interested.

 

But it is true that any lens on the M will have to be focused stopped down, or (if available on the lens) with manual pre-selection aperture (which many Visoflex lenses had). And as I have also stated before, the problem with that is not a darker finder – the automatic gain control of the EVF will take care of that – but that as depth of field increases with the stopping down, it becomes more difficult to ascertain exactly where the plane of best focus is! So everything hangs on the quality of the focusing aid, focus peaking or whatever, and on its technical limitations. And please not that I say this because I focused SLR cameras stopped down before the automatic aperturing existed, and it was a pain in the ass!

 

I do suspect however that in a couple of years, we shall hear of a new Leica camera with an EVF only and a M bayonet. And that bayonet will take all manual M lenses and allow manual focus with a finder focusing aid – as now – but it will also have electrical contacts for AF and maybe other functions too. And it will be the future. And yes, there will be lenses for it.

 

The old man from the Age of the Kine-Exakta (same year – 1936)

Link to post
Share on other sites

But it is true that any lens on the M will have to be focused stopped down, or (if available on the lens) with manual pre-selection aperture (which many Visoflex lenses had). And as I have also stated before, the problem with that is not a darker finder – the automatic gain control of the EVF will take care of that – but that as depth of field increases with the stopping down, it becomes more difficult to ascertain exactly where the plane of best focus is! So everything hangs on the quality of the focusing aid, focus peaking or whatever, and on its technical limitations. And please not that I say this because I focused SLR cameras stopped down before the automatic aperturing existed, and it was a pain in the ass!

 

I fully agree with you there Lars. But if they can get the focusing aid to work, you may then have the advantage of WYSIWYG with respect to DOF. And focusing with the lens stopped down and using the EVF would eliminate errors from focus shift when the aparture is changed, something that I have been struggeling with up to now, with some of my M lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble with d.o.f. is that, unlike what most people seem to think, it is not an area in which everything is just plain sharp – hooray! The best sharpness is at the plane of best sharpness, as before. What is to be regarded as 'sharp' on both sides of it, is simply a convention. But defocusing increases the more you remove yourself from the plane of best focus. When does this defocusing become unacceptable?

 

Clearly, focus peaking too rests on a convention. How contrasty must detail be in order to count as sharp? My minimal experience of focus peaking does not tell me if it might be possible for the user to select his own definition of the limit. Also, with a very flat-contrast subject, 'best contrast' may be very vague indeed.

 

We pay through our noses to obtain Leica lenses that can render fine detail with the best contrast in the market. Making use of this capability demands very precise focusing indeed. If the EVF can deliver that kind of focusing, well and good. Can it tell me that the focus of my 90mm lens at f:2.8 or even 2.0 is on the subject's right or left eye? This is what it takes. The ability to 'focus' a point-and-shoot is not enough.

 

Harry Truman used to say: "I'm from Missouri, show me!" Well, I say "I'm from Sweden, show me!" The proof of the picture is in the viewing.

 

Ye olde pudding-proofer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...