Tri Elmar 28-35-50 opinions

[Firefly]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, I have been thinking of adding a couple of lens to go with my MP.

I have been thinking about a 28mm Elmarit v3 and a 35mm Summicron v4 but i keep being drawn to the Tri Elmar 28-35-50.

I tend to take pictures in the daytime so maybe the max speed F4 is not too much of a problem for me but I do wonder if it's one of those things that looks good on paper but in reality doesn't live up to the rave reviews when released.

Guessing some of you have had these lens and I am wondering what your opinions are?

Carrying two lens is hardly a chore but I am taken by the three in one approach of the Tri Elmar so would value your experiences of these particular lens,

cheers Rob

[wda]

Rob, it would be worth searching on this forum because this lens has attracted a lot of interest and comments. Certainly many photographers have missed its continuing availability. It was not withdrawn on performance grounds.

 

Many potential users baulk at the MATE's (Medium Angle Tri-Elmar) slowish starting aperture of f/4. Yet for your purposes the lens could be an attractive option.

 

I have version 2, distinguished by improved mechanics but housing an identical optical unit. You can safely use the lens wide open and, with the high ISO tolerance of your M-P, it is perfectly usable indoors. I have the M9 and have been amazed at how well it performs for portraits in bright natural light indoors (not direct sun). At f/4 it has already reached its fine performance.

 

The lens is perfect for travel and removes the need for lens changing in many situations, useful if travelling in hot and dusty conditions. I usually add a faster prime, depending on my plans.

 

Optically, at all operating apertures, its performance is indistinguishable from contemporary prime lenses, certainly at 35mm and 50mm settings - the most popular choices. At 28mm, aberrations slightly diminish its performance which would go largely unnoticed in all the very biggest enlargements.

 

I hope this helps you; but do search and enjoy reading many arguments for and against.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Firefly]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply David, I should point out that I have the MP film camera rather than the M-P digital job, cheers Rob

[wosim]

The Tri-Elmar 28-35-50mm is my most used lens and that's telling a lot (not my Summilux-M 1.4 50mm Asph., Tri-Elmar 4.0 16-18-20mm, ...). Why? Because it's the most versatile lens for the type of photography I do - travel, landscape. The lightweight kit I am usually carrying around is: both Tri-Elmar lenses, the Summilux-M 1.4 50mm Asph. and the Tele-Elmarit-M 2.8 90mm. A really small package of stunning quality.

 

On my site you can find some reviews and many pics taken with the Tri-Elmar (https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/links-testberichte-reviews/testberichte-objektive-leica-lens-reviews-28mm-35mm). Take it, you will loved it's!

 

cheers

[MarkP]

I bought a virtually unused pristine 28-50 MATE (E49) less than two years ago. A few thoughts, similar to wda:

 

As 28 and 50mm are my most used focal lengths I was very attracted to this lens. It is very convenient as a general purpose, family snaps, travel lens, and especially in situations where one does not want to be changing lenses frequently.

 

I very much like the look of photographs taken with this lens. It does not resolve detail quite like the new razor-sharp ASPH/FLE lenses, but is more gentle with lovely colours. It still has excellent performance and resolution of detail from f-4.0 down. As wda mentioned I don't think the IQ would be inferior to any of the alternative fixed focal length lenses pre ASPH/FLE that you are looking at. My main complaint with it optically is that of some barrel distortion at 28mm. This is not not-picking but fairly obvious.

 

Although I was expecting the maximum aperture of f4.0 to be limiting it really is not in most situations. Like wda I'll often take along a single faster lens for backup in low light situations.

 

The ergonomics are fine but it takes a little but of time getting used to the third ring (for focal length) on the barrel. Focusing is a little bit more stiff than fixed focal length lenses. You need to be careful that you have locked the lens into it's correct focal length - ie once the correct frame-lines come up in the viewfinder. It is surprisingly light at 340g but longer that we would be used to for most Leica lenses at 67mm (excluding the round scalloped metal lens hood).

 

It can be 6-bit coded.

 

This is a link to the original Leica spec sheet.(via L Wiki)

http://www.summilux.net/m_system/images/TriElmar.pdf

 

This lens is now very expensive. It is an extraordinarily complex mechanism so you need to be careful you get a good unit. I sent mine in to Leica Germany for 6-bit coding which was a saga in itself as I also asked for a CLA to check the smoothness of the focusing mechanism. After Leica's initial botched service (it came back 6-bit coded but the focus was more stiff and the aperture ring moved when I changed focal length - not a problem when I sent it in) they got it right. Reassuringly Leica did reassure me that it was the best MATE (including mechanically) they had seen for some time.

Edited October 25, 2014 by MarkP

[lct]

V1 user here. Handy lens indeed with negligible CA and vignetting but it flares a lot when there are light sources just outside the frame and it is significantly softer than current Leica lenses at f/4, especially in the corners. It is sharper than 28mm M primes in the corners when i use it on my Fuji X-E2 though.

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've just looked up the Erwin Puts compendium on the lens on which he waxes lyrical...

 

Outstanding performance from f4-11 (with some further improvement in contrast and definition from 5.6) and then contrast drops off at 16-22.

 

"The Tri-Elmar-M is clearly superior in all optical parameters to many Leica lenses of the 28,35 and 50 focal lengths. With the exception of the mentioned five lenses (28 4th and 3rd generation, 35 ASPH and immediate predecessor (7 element Summicron) and the current Summicron 50) the Tri-Elmar-M will outclass any other Leica lens of the 28, 35 and 50 focal length of previous generations by a large margin."

 

"Second surprise: it's performance in many picture taking situations is equal to the current Leica lenses of 28, 35, and 50 focal length."

 

Excellent close up performance.

 

Some distortion at 28mm.

 

He does comment that there are obviously some situations where f4 is just not fast enough.

[jdlaing]

I wouldn't be without mine.

[algrove]

Try to get the E49 version and get it 6 bit coded. Easy to use.

[bocaburger]

I had both versions. With the first one (e55 filter) I had no problems with the frame selection as some people have reported, but the front blocked an intolerable (to me) amount of the 28mm view, and an annoying amount of the 35mm. That was without a shade. Adding the 21/24 Elmarit-ASPH shade (which fit because the front part of the lens was the same for all 3 lenses) made it worse and didn't really shade the lens well. The most annoying thing was the lack of a DOF scale, which is important to my shooting preference. I repurposed a small wooden slide rule as a 3-focal DOF scale calculator, but it was a kludge at best.

 

The second version has a smaller front piece and a dedicated shade, and it blocked less of the finder but still was annoying to me. The focus tab was a nice addition but not all that important to me. However the DOF scale was a godsend despite its maze-like complexity which took some getting used to.

 

I regret selling it when I did, considering how much I could get for it now, but I don't miss it. I never had any desire to carry 28, 35 and 50mm lenses as they are a few steps fwd or back, and my standard kit is 21-35-90 (and occasionally 28-50-135) and I found myself always wanting at least one fast lens, so therefore I always ended up also taking a 35/2 with me.

 

In theory I expected the MATE to be the ideal travel lens, but in practice it disappointed in that regard.

[lct]

Try to get the E49 version and get it 6 bit coded. Easy to use.

I would have done this if i'd used the lens on my Ms more than i did i guess but i appreciate the little built-in hood of the v1 now that i use it on my Fuji X-E2 together with a CV 21/4 in the little 14825 case of the Leica CL. Fun to bring one body and equiv. 32, 42, 52 & 75 mm "lenses" in such a small package but f/4 is a limit for sure even though the Fuji is cleaner than the Ms at high isos.

[marknorton]

Important to know that it is probably the least robust of any M lens.

 

The mount is fearsomely complex with little nylon rollers running in grooves machined into the brass mount. All fine, but it will pay you to turn the focal length ring "As slowly as you can, as fast as you need to" which is what Land Rover like you to do when driving off-road. It is emphatically not the same as the focal length ring on a DSLR zoom lens, a fact you'll realise because the focal lengths are not in sequence as you turn the ring.

 

The reason is that you really do not want the focussing mount to fall apart as mine did when I dropped the lens from 18 inches in a padded bag. It cost something like £350 to rebuild.

 

I have both the V1 and V2 editions and marginally prefer to the handling of the second version which is optically identical.

 

Keep in mind that if you crunch the front lens element, it cannot be replaced which will write the lens off, so that might be a reason to use a 49 or 55mm filter to protect it, and I am hardly one to recommend their use.

[wda]

Mark I know you speak from experience and I respect your cautionary words. But I would like to believe that most users treat their lenses with reasonable respect while getting maximum use and pleasure from them. You were singularly unlucky.

 

The TriElmar is complex and it is a tribute to Leica for actually designing and making the lens. With sensible care the lens is a viable substitute for two or three matching prime lenses in travel situations. The fact that the market is not flooded with used samples suggests to me that most owners are well pleased with their MATEs.

[thighslapper]

The fact that the market is not flooded with used samples suggests to me that most owners are well pleased with their MATEs.

 

..... yes .... I had to pay a healthy premium for a mint, late, 6 bit coded V2 .... and it is one of a few Leica lenses that I will never sell ......

 

I doubt if Leica will ever produce a lens as mechanically complex again ......

[dem331]

I had the v1. Did not like the feel of it ( sounds pathetic, but it is important to me) and f4 was too limiting in my Provia days. Traded it in for a 28 mm summicron asph. Do not really regret it, although in these high ISO days I would think about buying a v3 again if it was .ever produced.

[marknorton]

David, I don't disagree at all - I bought my V1 lens from Robert White on 12th May 1999 when it first came out though it feels longer than 15 years ago. Cost then? £1456 including tax.

 

I have seen people using them without an appreciation for the underlying mechanical complexity and turning the focal length ring more quickly than I do.

[jdlaing]

I have found in practice that if you point the lens down it will change focal lengths very smoothly for whatever reason. It's a habit I got quickly into. As far as finder blockage it doesn't matter to me at all. My version one came 6 bit coded as well.

[wda]

David, I don't disagree at all - I bought my V1 lens from Robert White on 12th May 1999 when it first came out though it feels longer than 15 years ago. Cost then? £1456 including tax......

How interesting Mark. Mine also came from Robert White in March 2001, is Version 2 and cost me £1320 with VAT (I have checked my receipt). As far as I can recall, it was not on promotion so I am puzzled why the price for mine was lower than yours bought two years earlier; unless Leica had already covered their costs (we will never know) or the £ sterling exchange rate was more favourable for buyers of Leica lenses in 2001. Whatever the reason, they are worth quite a lot more today. Mine has since been 6-bit coded by Leica which adds to its utility.

[henning]

I got my v1 used just after the v2 came out; had it 6bit coded and have been very happy with it after using a plastic tie wrap as a diy focussing tab. I didn't like the hood specified for it so I use an old filter ring with the glass removed as a slight shade and finger print preventer. I've not had any mechanical problems on any body, and for an initial investment of just over $1500 couldn't be happier. As it's been used fairly heavily it might not be worth the commonly asked stratospheric prices, but that's beside the point as I'm not about to sell.

 

I usually carry a fast 35 or 50 as well, but I usually also carry two bodies so I can have the same focal length on two bodies if I wish. I find the optical performance excellent, and not really behind current fixed focal lengths, except for the 28mm setting, where it is closer to (but still better) the pre-asph Elmarits at f/4 than the current Summicron. In any case, I never leave it at home when travelling with Leicas. It's up to the demands of the Monochrom, and that's saying quite a bit.

 

Henning

Edited October 26, 2014 by henning

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Firefly]

Many thanks for all your replies, it really has helped me come to a conclusion.

As I stated I have a MP film camera which I purchased fairly recently having been away from Leica ownership for some years and some of you may have read my previous post on why I settled on an MP, basically I wanted a metered M film camera to last me out and I figured that the MP ticked more boxes than the others.

 

In that vein it struck me that the MATE is a somewhat complex design which will quite probably need in the future more attention than a regular prime lens to keep in good order, another factor is the F4 max aperture, all this talk of cranking up the ISO is not an option for me with the MP and the ability to have it converted to 6 bit is in my case a total irrelevance.

 

Finally I do not have unlimited funds, I wish I did but there you are maybe I should have studied harder at school but it's too late now. Having viewed prices it looks like even a V1 MATE will cost more than a 35 CRON V4 and a 28 Elmarit V3 put together, possibly more than a 35 Summilux and 28 Elmarit put together, I already have a 50 Cron V4 which these should compliment nicely.

 

Many thanks again, cheers Rob