firstlight Posted February 13, 2013 Share #1 Posted February 13, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Dear Leica Community, As you all know, the Summilux 35 FLE was officially announced as "optimized for digital sensors" (Leica M Digital). Is the combination of the M240 and this "optimized for digital sensor" lense somehow special? Any thoughts or even "experiences" would be much appreciated. Cheers! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 13, 2013 Posted February 13, 2013 Hi firstlight, Take a look here Digital Combo: Leica M240 + Summilux 35 FLE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted February 13, 2013 Share #2 Posted February 13, 2013 Its the Leica M, by the way. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted February 13, 2013 Share #3 Posted February 13, 2013 Its the Leica M, by the way. And in future all incremental firmware updates will be known as new FW 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rirakuma Posted February 13, 2013 Share #4 Posted February 13, 2013 Wouldn't that include the M8, M9, etc in comparison to MP, M7 and the previous film models? Although I don't think anyone can or be bothered to proof if this is true or not. It probably has more resolving power than the previous models which is not much of a surprise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 13, 2013 Share #5 Posted February 13, 2013 Dear Leica Community, As you all know, the Summilux 35 FLE was officially announced as "optimized for digital sensors" (Leica M Digital). Is the combination of the M240 and this "optimized for digital sensor" lense somehow special? Any thoughts or even "experiences" would be much appreciated. Cheers! Not the way you think. Sensors are more critical to focus differences for a number of basic theoretical reasons. So the slight focus shift the original Summilux 35 asph exhibited was not relevant on film, but did show up from the M8 onwards. So Leica introduced a floating element to minimize the focus shift. That is all; for the rest the lens is virtually identical to its predecessor.. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Chen Posted February 15, 2013 Share #6 Posted February 15, 2013 Not the way you think. Sensors are more critical to focus differences for a number of basic theoretical reasons. So the slight focus shift the original Summilux 35 asph exhibited was not relevant on film, but did show up from the M8 onwards. So Leica introduced a floating element to minimize the focus shift. That is all; for the rest the lens is virtually identical to its predecessor.. Japp, I second you. I think that floating elements not only alleviates the focus shift problem in M8, M9 but also extend the focus range based on the observation toward my ELMARIT R 28 f/2.8 and M 16-18-21. Do you think that on M240, thanks to focus peaking, we don't need a floating element for precise focusing? All the best, Thomas Chen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstlight Posted February 15, 2013 Author Share #7 Posted February 15, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do you think that on M240, thanks to focus peaking, we don't need a floating element for precise focusing? Yes - but you need the EVF. In the EVF you see what you get. I for myself don't buy a Leica Rangefinder to ignore it's primary funcitonality: The Rangefinder 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Chen Posted February 15, 2013 Share #8 Posted February 15, 2013 Yes - but you need the EVF. In the EVF you see what you get. I for myself don't buy a Leica Rangefinder to ignore it's primary funcitonality: The Rangefinder Mr. Firstlight, (if it is wrong please correct me) Thanks for advice. Why we need a EVF ? can't we see the focusing by Live View on the LCD? I guess for wide-angle lense, rangefinder should be Okey. However, for R-Zoom lenses and tele-lenses LV should work better ? Regards, Thomas Chen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted February 15, 2013 Share #9 Posted February 15, 2013 Dear Chen, I get the impression that you are worrying too much about the technical aspect of photography. If you are seriously interested get an M and then move on to the creative part. Regards, Steve 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 15, 2013 Share #10 Posted February 15, 2013 So Leica introduced a floating element to minimize the focus shift. I think it would be helpful for a newcomer's understanding when you'd stop spreading the myth that floating elements were a countermeasure against aperture-related focus shift. Instead, they eliminate, or at least reduce, spherical aberrations at close focus range. So they tackle aperture-related focus shift as indirectly as, for example, aspherical lens elements do. That is all; for the rest the lens is virtually identical to its predecessor. It's a new lens design. Sure it's based on the predecessor, which it is very similar to—but there are more changes than just the introduction of a floating elements group. And now for the original question: Is the combination of the Leica M (Type 240) and this "optimized for digital sensor" lens somehow special? No. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 15, 2013 Share #11 Posted February 15, 2013 And why did Leica reduce spherical aberration? Right - to reduce focus shift... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 15, 2013 Share #12 Posted February 15, 2013 And why did Leica reduce spherical aberration? Right—to reduce focus shift ... And why did Leica introduce aspherical lens elements? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 15, 2013 Share #13 Posted February 15, 2013 :rolleyes:Does the 35 FLE have more aspherical elements than the original asph? Does the original asph have more focus shift than the FLE? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 15, 2013 Share #14 Posted February 15, 2013 Does the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (non-FLE) have less focus shift than the Summilux 35 mm? If so, how much less? How much focus shift would a purely spherical Summilux 35 mm (FLE) have? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 15, 2013 Share #15 Posted February 15, 2013 What came first? The chicken or the egg? It sure will be nice when Winter ends and people can get out shooting on a daily basis. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 16, 2013 Share #16 Posted February 16, 2013 The egg. Proof Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 16, 2013 Share #17 Posted February 16, 2013 The egg. Proof Thanks, zygote it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
firstlight Posted February 18, 2013 Author Share #18 Posted February 18, 2013 Why we need a EVF ? can't we see the focusing by Live View on the LCD? Live View / EVF will show the same - But I'd prefer EVF over Liveview: + Stabilization unless you're using a tripod + The Sun is killing all the fun on LiveView (I had a NEX-5 for a year without EVF so I know what I'm talking about ) Does the 35 FLE have more aspherical elements than the original asph? Does the original asph have more focus shift than the FLE? [...] Does the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (non-FLE) have less focus shift than the Summilux 35 mm? If so, how much less? How much focus shift would a purely spherical Summilux 35 mm (FLE) have? hehe you made me laugh..... but just a bit. I own the Summilux 35 fle since a week.It's my first Leica lense (others are Zeiss) but ...WOW - what a performer! Hey and finally the sun is comming out today since weeks - let's go shooting guys! Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 18, 2013 Share #19 Posted February 18, 2013 Does the Summilux-M 35 mm Asph (non-FLE) have less focus shift than the Summilux 35 mm? If so, how much less? How much focus shift would a purely spherical Summilux 35 mm (FLE) have? That is quite beside the point. The FLE is practically the same formula as the previous asph, except for the incorporation of a floating element. The focus shift is reduced by this mechanism. Whether other optical design parameters would have influenced focus shift or not is moot, as Leica did not introduce them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted February 18, 2013 Share #20 Posted February 18, 2013 That is quite beside the point. The point is, aspherical elements reduce aperture-related focus shift, too. In fact, focus shift is caused by spherical aberration, so any measure to reduce spherical aberrations also reduces focus shift. Contrary to common belief, floating elements do not directly handle focus shift. Instead, they reduce all kinds of aberration, in particular spherical, at close focus range. The FLE is practically the same formula as the previous asph, except for the incorporation of a floating element. No, it isn't. The focus shift is reduced by this mechanism. No, it isn't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.