michaelwj Posted March 26, 2014 Share #21 Posted March 26, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) The trend to wanting fast lenses all the time leaves me cold, I can hear the comments about 'creamy bokeh' now, and find it hard to justify all that money on a characteristic of the lens that shows no detail or interest. So how about some slower (smaller) lenses, maybe f/3.5 or f/4 that are instead optimised for using stopped down, and where f/16 or f/22 can be more fully utilised without so much diffraction? Steve Agreed, I'd love a few smaller options, but you're never going to beat diffraction, that's out of their hands. On the other hand, the 28/2.8, 35/2 and 50/2 are all quite small, I'd like to see a new, smaller 90/2.8 and a 75/2.8, all with E39 filters like the old 90 T-E. Even a 21 SA replacement, so we could go from 21 - 90 all with E39, all small. Lovely. Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 Hi michaelwj, Take a look here Next lens Leica is likely to update?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted March 26, 2014 Share #22 Posted March 26, 2014 I do think there is a place for lenses which work on the M(240) with Liveview, but not on the film or previous digital M cameras - a focal length longer than 135 (I always found 180 mm a very useful tele range without image stabilisation), a proper macro (maybe an alternative to the MEM 90/4?) and a mid range f/2.8 zoom, say 24-70? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted March 30, 2014 Share #23 Posted March 30, 2014 John Sent you a PM a few days ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted March 31, 2014 Share #24 Posted March 31, 2014 I do think there is a place for lenses which work on the M(240) with Liveview, but not on the film or previous digital M cameras - a focal length longer than 135 (I always found 180 mm a very useful tele range without image stabilisation), a proper macro (maybe an alternative to the MEM 90/4?) and a mid range f/2.8 zoom, say 24-70? John, What you are wishing for are R lenses! Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 31, 2014 Share #25 Posted March 31, 2014 John, What you are wishing for are R lenses! Guy Yes, because you always have to open the apperture for focussing. I have built two rings for my 2.8/100 so that I can stop down to a predetermined f: value with one fingertip and without looking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted March 31, 2014 Share #26 Posted March 31, 2014 Yes, because you always have to open the apperture for focussing. I have built two rings for my 2.8/100 so that I can stop down to a predetermined f: value with one fingertip and without looking. Neat! Could we see, please??? Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted April 1, 2014 Share #27 Posted April 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, because you always have to open the aperture for focussing. I have built two rings for my 2.8/100 so that I can stop down to a predetermined f: value with one fingertip and without looking. I had to do this with my first camera, a Zenith E with preset diaphragm (hard to do with moving subjects) -- it seems that Leica have offered an R solution firmly rooted in the 1950s. Was there no possibility of building in some electromagnetic auto-stopdown mechanism into the R-to-M adapter. They managed something far more sophisticated with the Leica S-Adapter that allows the Contax 645 lenses to be used on the S camera. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.