pgk Posted November 5, 2014 Share #21  Posted November 5, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) .....It seems make sens to have just 2 focales. ? If you agree the next question will be: 28 or 35 and 75 or 90mm.  The discussion is open! OK, thinking about this from several points of view, here's my take on the idea (which I think is actually quite good, but with one reservation). Firstly, trying to seperate focal lengths too far would make the lens designer's job very difficult so a 28/90 would probably end up with significant distortion at the 28mm end and potential resolution problems at the 90mm end. So I'd suggest a 35/75 bi-??? might be the better option (I'd happily work with these) and its hardly a design that has not been worked on before so an improved design should be quite possible. Secondly, size. Using f/4 might enable a very small lens, which would work well with the M 'ethos' and whilst the aperture would be limiting, it would be fine for many situations and become less limiting as sensors improve in sensitivity. Thirdly, such a small neat lens could take small filters (E39 or E46) so would work in a line-up with other Leica lenses.  My reservation would be that such a lens would easily be capable of offering the 50mm setting too, so could be a Tri-???..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 5, 2014 Posted November 5, 2014 Hi pgk, Take a look here Proposal Bi-Elmar-M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
flyalf Posted November 5, 2014 Share #22 Â Posted November 5, 2014 I would propose a Dualcron 35-50/2 ASPH FLE since these are my two most used focal lenghts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted November 5, 2014 Share #23 Â Posted November 5, 2014 While this is not one of the choices offered by the OP, my desire would be for a 28 + 50mm ASPH zoom, with a maximum aperture of f/2.0 although slower (f/2.8 or 3.4) would be acceptable too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 5, 2014 Share #24 Â Posted November 5, 2014 @Paul in #21: Sensitivity of the sensor is no argument for 4.0. You perhaps followed the great disappointment here in the forum at the introduction of the VarioX because it's almost 4.0 as widest aperture: that was so non-Leica-like! Â I agree with flyalf @ #22 that a Dualcron, Twincron, una DopioCrone, would be worth the effort. Â I really don't think Leica will come back with a 4.0 (that's nice for the Cosina guys) because all M lenses introduced by them are crossing boundaries of the hitherto impossible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 5, 2014 Share #25 Â Posted November 5, 2014 @Paul in #21:Sensitivity of the sensor is no argument for 4.0. You perhaps followed the great disappointment here in the forum at the introduction of the VarioX because it's almost 4.0 as widest aperture: that was so non-Leica-like!.... Yet many initial 'doubters' have since discovered what a highly useful camera the X Vario is proving to be. Willing acceptance of usable higher ISOs overcomes many of those objections. The X Vario remains a very useful camera in the current Leica line-up. Â I agree that faster initial apertures in a hypothetical new Bi-Elmar would be high on most photographers' 'wish lists'. But looking at it realistically, satisfying that desire would violate many valid ambitious parameters which would be very costly to produce; and bulkier and heavier than many would tolerate. I fear a compromise would be inevitable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 5, 2014 Share #26  Posted November 5, 2014 Did Leica ever compromise in the M line except with the Summarits? They rather produce a Noctilux 0.95 or Scron APO 50 for 6-8000€ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem331 Posted November 5, 2014 Share #27 Â Posted November 5, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I personally would not buy a 35-50 mm, I think I would prefer to just carry one prime. I think you need to go to 28-50 mm or 35 -75 mm to make it really attractive. F2.8 would be fine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlingmm Posted November 5, 2014 Share #28 Â Posted November 5, 2014 Why not a continuous zoom when the M has live view? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 5, 2014 Share #29 Â Posted November 5, 2014 Why not a continuous zoom when the M has live view? That would limit its use to the latest generation of M-rangefinder cameras. And future ones, of course. There is a considerable number of older bodies which should be able to use any new lens launched. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted November 6, 2014 Share #30 Â Posted November 6, 2014 I really don't think Leica will come back with a 4.0 (that's nice for the Cosina guys) because all M lenses introduced by them are crossing boundaries of the hitherto impossible. Size matters - a really small 35/50/75 f/4 would be well worth considering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted November 6, 2014 Share #31 Â Posted November 6, 2014 Interesting thread. Â Advocates of new lens ought to reconcile that on M camera various focal lengths engage different frame lines. For reasons of, I suspect, mechanical complexity 28-35-50 was discontinued while 16-18-21 still goes strong as it engages single set of frame lines. Â So any new bi-elmar/Elmarit/Summicron to be true M lens and mechanically feasible to make ought to engage single set of framelines, take your pick; Â 28-90 35-135 50-75 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 6, 2014 Share #32 Â Posted November 6, 2014 If coded, the TE will bring up the correct framelines and record correctly in the EXIF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted November 6, 2014 Share #33 Â Posted November 6, 2014 Hello Everybody, Â A combination 90mm & 135mm, F2.8 Apo-Asph which is the size & weight of the current 90mm F2 Summicron would be quite interesting. Â Along with a larger magnification Range/Viewfinder for Digital M Cameras. Â Best Regards, Â Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted November 7, 2014 Share #34 Â Posted November 7, 2014 If coded, the TE will bring up the correct framelines and record correctly in the EXIF. Â The framelines are switched pure mechanically by a lever in the lens mount. The lens coding gives a focal length to the EXIF data. And it delivers data to the camera firmware to correct some lens properties after taking the picture. Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted November 7, 2014 Share #35 Â Posted November 7, 2014 I used to use a MATE but have sold it in favor of either 35mm Summilux or 50mm Summicron. Â As opposed to just two focal lengths, why wouldn't Leica more likely offer a zoom for use with the EVF? They have already shown a willingness to offer lenses unusable without EVF (Macro Elmar with new macro adapter). So why not offer a 28-90 zoom? They did it years ago for the R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted November 7, 2014 Share #36 Â Posted November 7, 2014 I consider the EVF a cool gimmick to use on occasion with the M240, to make use of my 70-210 R lens I picked up for $200, or my 400/6.8 I've had for ages, or my set of manual Nikkor F lenses that basically sat around gathering dust since I switched to EOS in the 90s. But to pay a King's ransom for a new lens than can only be successfully employed with the EVF, no way. I'm sure it would sell though, as there always seems to be a bunch of people willing to step up with however much money Leica charges for whatever spec lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neli Posted November 8, 2014 Share #37 Â Posted November 8, 2014 Â Â Leica hast grosser Fisch zum fritten! Note the Capital F in Fisch as it's a noun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted November 8, 2014 Share #38 Â Posted November 8, 2014 ... So why not offer a 28-90 zoom? They did it years ago for the R. Â The 28-90mm Vario-Elmarit R is my favorite lens on my R9. Not the typical size of an M lens, but a magical lens on a SLR. I really do miss the R10! Â Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted November 9, 2014 Share #39 Â Posted November 9, 2014 I would like to see a 21-24-28 Tri-Elmar f/4 lens... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted November 10, 2014 Share #40  Posted November 10, 2014 The 28-90mm Vario-Elmarit R is my favorite lens on my R9. Not the typical size of an M lens, but a magical lens on a SLR. I really do miss the R10! Guy  It also produces spectacular files on the M240, albeit a bit awkward to use compared to an M-lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.