Late '90's M lens designs

[gpwhite]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just curious about the design style underlying the Elmarit-M 24/ 2.8 ASPH and Summicron-M 90/ 2 APO ASPH. Do any of our history enriched forum members know if either of these lenses is considered a Mandler design?

 

In particular, the Elmarit 24 renders with such delicacy and dreamy OOF, its images look Mandler-like to me.

 

Thorsten has written somewhere that it is very interesting and useful to have both Karbe and Mandler lenses, as though the photog can choose the right brush for the right composition. So, I am just wondering if these two lenses are attributable to either Mandler or Karbe?

[UliWer]

...to either Mandler or Karbe?

 

I'd say: the lenses are just glass, and Mandler's innovation was computerized lens design.

 

Mandler worked in Canada and retired in 1985. During the late 90s, the lens designs didn't come from Canada any more. Walter Mandler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Karbe may have been employed by Leica during the late 90s, but he wasn't head of the optical department from the very beginning.

[tobey bilek]

If memory serves correctly, 21 2.8 pre asph and 28 2.8 version 3 which has 49 mm filters were the last wides. He did the 75 Summilux and the 50 Summicron that came out in `79. The last 50 should be considered with modern lenses in performance. Also the pre ash 90 summicron.

 

The 1979 50 has been updated mechanically, however the optics are unchanged. Mostly an integrated hood was added.

 

No mermory of 35 mm lenses. Still have my V4 and 21 and 28 from above.

[Rob Roskopp]

The Leica-Wiki of this forum may help you to answer this question:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Main_Page

[4X5B&W]

Neither the 24 ASPH or 90 ASPH were Mandrel designs. I doubt that any of the ASPH were his. In fact one of his classic designs was the 50mm 1.0Noctilux, a lens that replaced the 50 1.2 Noctilux…….that was an Aspherical design.

 

I believe his last production Leica lens was the 80mm 1.4 Summilux-R, a modification of his previous design, the 75mm 1.4 Summilux-M.

[lct]

Just curious about the design style underlying the Elmarit-M 24/ 2.8 ASPH and Summicron-M 90/ 2 APO ASPH. Do any of our history enriched forum members know if either of these lenses is considered a Mandler design?...

None AFAIK. See http://tllg.net/maxa.

[gpwhite]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Leica-Wiki of this forum may help you to answer this question:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Main_Page

 

Thanks. I consulted the wiki (as I do quite often) before posting my query, but the lens attributions are about as complete as the serial number sequences

 

But the information from posts here is very interesting to me, as it suggests that Mandler's impact is likely less than I had understood... and Peter Karbe's is larger, considering he was on the design team at the end of the millennium.

[gpwhite]

Neither the 24 ASPH or 90 ASPH were Mandrel designs. I doubt that any of the ASPH were his. In fact one of his classic designs was the 50mm 1.0Noctilux, a lens that replaced the 50 1.2 Noctilux…….that was an Aspherical design.

 

I believe his last production Leica lens was the 80mm 1.4 Summilux-R, a modification of his previous design, the 75mm 1.4 Summilux-M.

 

Very interesting, thank you. Your comment about the Summilux-R 80/ 1.4 makes me feel quite a bit better about the money I just spent to bring one from Germany... I am pretty sure I over-spent for the indulgence of a mint, end-of-run piece.

 

Incidentally, I am not disparaging Karbe. My two favorite lenses, different as they might be, are the Elmarit-R 19mm and the Summicron-M 50/ 2 APO ASPH.

[Berth]

It looks to me like he designed my Summicron 50mm, but not my Elmarit 28mm Asph.

[MarkP]

Time to bump up this outstanding thread by Andy Piper on some of the Mandler lenses, although I would have liked to read more about the 35mm Summicrons (esp v4) and Summiluxes, and the 40 Summicron.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/45854-praise-mandler-lenses.html

[4X5B&W]

Very interesting, thank you. Your comment about the Summilux-R 80/ 1.4 makes me feel quite a bit better about the money I just spent to bring one from Germany... I am pretty sure I over-spent for the indulgence of a mint, end-of-run piece.

 

Incidentally, I am not disparaging Karbe. My two favorite lenses, different as they might be, are the Elmarit-R 19mm and the Summicron-M 50/ 2 APO ASPH.

 

Good choice….the 80 is truly a unique lens, with the the "LOOK" that people love wide open, and exceptional optical quality as it is stopped down.

Fully comparable to the classic 110mm 2.0 Zeiss Planar for medium format cameras.

[pgk]

Just curious about the design style underlying the Elmarit-M 24/ 2.8 ASPH and Summicron-M 90/ 2 APO ASPH. Do any of our history enriched forum members know if either of these lenses is considered a Mandler design?

 

In particular, the Elmarit 24 renders with such delicacy and dreamy OOF, its images look Mandler-like to me.

 

Thorsten has written somewhere that it is very interesting and useful to have both Karbe and Mandler lenses, as though the photog can choose the right brush for the right composition. So, I am just wondering if these two lenses are attributable to either Mandler or Karbe?

The name says it all as they are aspheric designs which, as far as I can determine include 'moulded' aspheric element(s), something which Mandler was unable to use (previous aspheric lenses used 'ground' aspheric lenses - expensive, difficult and probably with a high reject rate - hence why they were not often used and when they were, were expensive to use.

 

I have a mix of pre-aspheric, Mandler lenses and have or have had several post-Mandler aspheric lenses. Reading through the forum will quickly suggest that the aspheric designs do provide lenses with very high 'resolving power' which yield accurate, precise images full of fine detail. Pre-aspherics are not as 'good' especially wide open, but have other characteristics which endear them, and often have a smooth tonality (the 80/1.4 is a good example) when stopped down which is extremely 'pleasing' to the eye.

 

Aspheric designs can have characteristics such as chroma on out of focus highlight edges which can be less pleasant and more obvious than that of pre-aspheric designs and their bokeh can be less smooth too.

 

I have 2 x 35 Summiluxes - the pre-aspheric and the pre-FLE ashperic - which I like and use when I want to produce different results, although I have to say that he differenes are usually subtle (except wide-open). These two lenses probably are the two which show the differences between a classical Mandler design and a post-Mandler aspheric design to its greatest extent.

 

Wide open the pre-aspheric is soft and suffers from coma. Images with highlights such as street lamps show substantial distortion of these light sources and can be quite unacceptable to even the casualist viewer. However the pre-aspheric can be used to produce fine photographs and suffers from little chroma anywhere in my experience. It also represents a state-of-the-art design from its era and a paper by leading (Elcan) lens designers concluded that with the glass types available when it was designed, would have been hard to improve.

 

The Pre-FLE spheric produces highly detailed images wide open but suffers from chroma in out of focus highlight edges, focus shift from f/2 to f/4ish (addressed by a moving group of rear elements in the more mechanically complex FLE design) and harsher bokeh. It delivers precise images though of high resolution which are sometimes referred to as being somewhat 'clinical'.

 

My own thoughts are that from what I have read, Mandler was not only a good technical lens designer, but he also became intuitively aware of what subtleties of changes in lens design would achieve and how these might interact and produce as good lenses as he could design within the constraints of glass, mechanical design and production costs he had to work within.

 

Today I suspect that designers have more glass type avalability, the option of aspheric surfaces, and can include technicalities which high precision engineering makes possible (such as FLE designs). Whilst such lenses are absolutely superb, they do come with specific characteristics (nuances) which are different from previous generations of lens and so the older lenses retain their place for those of us who are interested in them.

[gpwhite]

 

Today I suspect that designers have more glass type avalability, the option of aspheric surfaces, and can include technicalities which high precision engineering makes possible (such as FLE designs). Whilst such lenses are absolutely superb, they do come with specific characteristics (nuances) which are different from previous generations of lens and so the older lenses retain their place for those of us who are interested in them.

 

Thank you for your comments, Paul. Along the lines of your final, telling comment, here is my thinking that led to my thread... I shoot primarily WA, and, as much as I appreciate my 18 SEM, 24 Elmar and 24 Elmarit, images from my 19 Elmarit R have a unique, magical quality for me. So I am trying to learn more about these designs and be particularly aware of the 19 Elmarit's peers that might be lurking in the Leica line.

[Guest Mr. B]

The 90mm Tele-Elmarit M is a Mandler designed lens.

Mr. B

[derleicaman]

Lothar Kolsch headed the Optical Design Dept in Solms prior to Karbe. As far as I know, he is still involved with Leica lens design.