The next lens from Leica

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I doubt they would produce one but a 24mm Summicron would be nice too, suspect there would be no point as it probably wouldn't be much smaller looking at my ideally sized Elmarit. I use 24mm quite a lot and think it's a great focal length.

 

BTW I assume my new (to me) 18mm SEM is a posh Summarit too ?!

[UliWer]

28 Lux seems quite natural

 

...

 

I'd still call it an unnatural monster.

 

I know that a 28mm Summilux is the hobby-horse of the international forum and I know that all my predictions have been wrong.

 

Though - a 28mm Summilux would cannibalize the 28mm Summicron, and there is no realistic hope that a wider opened lens at this focal length would be better than the present desgin. There are already people who say that the Summicron is insufficient:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/296144-tim-ashley-m240-28-cron.html.

 

I admit that I cannot understand this opinion, but to hope that a Summilux would not suffer from "bad" resolution at the edges (???) has no foundation - even at the double price.

 

Viewfinder intrusion is the second reason which speaks against a 28mm Summilux. 28mm is the widest you can use - uncomfortably - with the M rangefinder. The Summicron is already intruding considerably. A Summilux would necessarily do so to a much more disturbing amount. A seperate viewfinder or liveview are no convincing arguments in favour of a new M-lens.

 

I know that I always have been wrong with my predictions.

[lct]

...28mm lens have to avoid blocking the built-in viewfinder (not an issue for the 21 or 24 Summiluxes, which use accessory finders)...

Not an issue for any lens with EVF.

[Stein K S]

I'd still call it an unnatural monster.

 

I know that a 28mm Summilux is the hobby-horse of the international forum and I know that all my predictions have been wrong.

 

Though - a 28mm Summilux would cannibalize the 28mm Summicron, and there is no realistic hope that a wider opened lens at this focal length would be better than the present desgin. There are already people who say that the Summicron is insufficient:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/296144-tim-ashley-m240-28-cron.html.

 

I admit that I cannot understand this opinion, but to hope that a Summilux would not suffer from "bad" resolution at the edges (???) has no foundation - even at the double price.

 

Viewfinder intrusion is the second reason which speaks against a 28mm Summilux. 28mm is the widest you can use - uncomfortably - with the M rangefinder. The Summicron is already intruding considerably. A Summilux would necessarily do so to a much more disturbing amount. A seperate viewfinder or liveview are no convincing arguments in favour of a new M-lens.

 

I know that I always have been wrong with my predictions.

 

Thanks!

 

Really learned something today concerning the potential view finder "monster" a 28 lux would probably be! I am one of those limiting my wide angles to 28 due to my "resistance" to needing the external viewfinders....

 

However, still have a hard time understanding why Leica could not make a decent 28 lux... The 21 and 24 luxes are quite ok, arent' they... even if I have no personal experience with any of these...

 

Regards, Stein

[IWC Doppel]

I like my 21/25 Voigtlander metal viewfinder which is good enough for me (21,24), they do a nice 28 too

[algrove]

Couldn't say what the next lens will be, but today in the factory the guys in the "development production" area seems to be very busy spitting out new parts based on Karbe's instructions.

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

 

However, still have a hard time understanding why Leica could not make a decent 28 lux... The 21 and 24 luxes are quite ok, arent' they... even if I have no personal experience with any of these...

 

...

 

Well of course they could make a decent lens of this desgin. The present Summicron is already more than decent. You may call it outstanding, while others - linked above - call it boring.

 

But there is just no foundation to expect a lens at 28mm with f/1.4 way better than a lens with f/2 - only if you are prepared to pay the multiple price. The f/0.95 Noctilux is better than the traditional f/2 Summicron - at more than four times the Summicron's price.

 

Mulipy the 28mm Summicron price by four and you might get an idea of a 28mm Summilux which is really better than a 28mm Summicron.

For 28mm the problems to achieve a considerably better lens wider opened are extraordinarily higher than for 50mm This does not mean its impossible - but it will cost far, far more than the already extremely high price of a 28mm Summicron.

 

One may say a 28mm Summilux may even be a very good lens for the 21mm or 24mm Summilux's price if it was a little bit weaker than the Summicron. Though should we really call for a new lens a little bit weaker, but much more expensive.?

[adan]

Not an issue for any lens with EVF.

 

I thought of that. However, I just giggled at the idea of putting a 28 f/1.4 on an M body, using the EVF/LCD, and getting what amounts to a $15,000 D-Lux 6.

[lct]

Ha ha! You're severe with this poor EVF. The next M will have a faster refresh rate hopefully.

[philipus]

I hate to break the news - but the 21/24 Super-Elmars ARE "Summarits" for all intents and purposes (lower-cost alternatives with limited speed). Check current new Summarit prices, and the Super-Elmars are 40-50% more. Just as the 21/24 Summiluxes are 40-50% more than the 35 Summilux. 50% premium for "super-wide" is the norm - in each category.

 

I slightly disagree, Andy. True, based on the comparison you make, and also on the lens line-up as a whole, the three (Super-)Elmars do hold a Summaritish (terminus technicus) place in that they're slow compared to what else exists in the lineup on a given (where available) focal length. But I don't think they really are Summarits.

 

We've had discussions here before about what animal the Summarits really are. Leica insists on placing them in their own category on the website (which really doesn't need to mean anything, since they are listed in the Lenses list, too), some have rubber rings (the horror) and the ergonomics are a little bit different when compared to other lenses - from narrower aperture rings, placed awkwardly close to the focus ring, to generally flimsy-feeling mechanics. Ignoring, for the sake of argument (because there really is no other reason to ignore it), their eminent optical qualities, these aspects do make them seem cheap, to be blunt, as if Leica wanted to provide inexpensive instep models, much like premium car manufacturers do. The whole Summarit range exists in the price span (using Red Dot's prices) 1070-1365£. Unless I am entirely mistaken, there is no other Leica lens in the entire line-up in that range. This suggests pretty strongly that Leica has made a business decision to keep the Summarit financially accessible to a larger segment of photographers. Of course, Leica makes whichever decisions it wants about where to draw the lines between ordinary/premium lenses and non-dittos/Summarits. But I suggest that that line goes around 1365£. As an aside, that Leica does seem quite interested in this segment of photographers is shown also by the launch of the M-E, which was introduced in the press release as "an ideal entry- level model for photographers wishing to experience the fascination of M-Photography in its purest form".

 

My point was only that there is a gap in the wide-angle end of the line-up within the Summarit price range. It may be economically unfeasible or impossible to manufacture, say, a 21 mm f4.5 Summarit and that this is why Leica has decided to leave this end of the focal length spectrum uninhabited by Summarits proper. Fair enough, though I don't believe it since Voigtländer has managed to build a 21mm f1.8 which sells for the equivalent of 980£ (1140€ at Leicashop). What I don't understand is why Leica leaves this end of the spectrum to other brands. They've already dipped their toe in the pool where those who can't buy 4000€ lenses swim. In fact, I'd say they've done much more than dip a toe and gone all in, cannonball style, by building four cheap and absolutely excellent lenses. So the absence of wider lenses can't be to maintain a pure impression of being a premium camera manufacturer. It may simply be priorities and design/production capacity. Personally I hope so because there are quite a few M users out there, likely most actually, for whom it makes a difference if a lens costs 1300£ or about 2000£.

 

I do agree with you that the former R focal lengths are likely to come our way. That seems logical to me. Since Leica has now made M users more generally (and not only those wielding the 21/24/50 "Noctiluxes") accept having large tubes on the front of their Ms, it is only reasonable to expect that they'd decide to cash in on these photographers' willingness to plunge cash into longer lenses. No idea what would come first, perhaps a 200mm and an updated APO 2x extender?

 

Cheers

Philip

[james.liam]

I'll raise the thought again...why not long lenses since the M has optional EVF? Longer tele APO R-lenses were never plentiful. Why not a 180 M Elmarit APO?

[Guest Marc G.]

I'll raise the thought again...why not long lenses since the M has optional EVF? Longer tele APO R-lenses were never plentiful. Why not a 180 M Elmarit APO?

 

they wouldn't be useable for older M models so only a very small base of customers would even consider it. with the ones using R or other lenses i think it wouldn't be worth the research cost.

[james.liam]

they wouldn't be useable for older M models so only a very small base of customers would even consider it. with the ones using R or other lenses i think it wouldn't be worth the research cost.

 

In the past, Leica has duplicated optical formulae for M & R lenses, as in the pre-APO 75 M Summilux and 80 R Summilux as well as the 90AA and so RR costs would be negligible. While there wouldn't be backward compatibility they have to look forward and the use of an EVF will persist into the foreseeable future. The demand will exceed whatever exists in moribund R's, especially if they aspire to create a complete M-system that incorporates a full range of focal lengths.

[lct]

Not enough demand for manual focus expensive lenses IMHO. There are still plenty of R 180 available and excellent lenses like the Nikkor 180/2.8 can be used on the M240 supposedly. Not sure if a lot of people would spend a little fortune to focus a mediocre EVF w/o a tripod anyway.

[james.liam]

Not enough demand for manual focus expensive lenses IMHO. There are still plenty of R 180 available and excellent lenses like the Nikkor 180/2.8 can be used on the M240 supposedly. Not sure if a lot of people would spend a little fortune to focus a mediocre EVF w/o a tripod anyway.

 

Have you looked at SLR sites, like Fred Miranda and the ALT blogs? Many of the best R's, particularly the tele APOs, have already been (reversibly) altered for use on Nikons and Sony Alpha with Leitax adapters. Others, still sporting their R mount are used by Canonistas, especially videographers who aren't like to part with them either.

 

As for the mediocre EVF, I'm sure that's likely to change as well. Another reality is that aside from FL of 90mm and longer, super fast lenses are more accurately focused on a mediocre EVF with peaking compared to a RF in low light.

[lct]

There is no future for expensive manual focus telephotos i'm afraid.

[Printmaker]

I guess I'll be keeping my "big ugly" 135 Elmarit.

[photoelch]

Summicron 135mm?

[jpk]

Apo-Summilux 75!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul J]

24mm Summicron?