Jump to content

Proposal Tri-Elmar 21-24-28 f/4 ASPH


rosuna

Recommended Posts

Small, versatile...

 

 

Yes, but those Tri-Elmars appear to be difficult to make. Leica's only done it twice.

 

In addition, with the M now having live view/evf capability I wonder whether Leica would (gasp) do a zoom M lens usable only with EVF. They have shown that they have thought about M only lenses with the new Macro-Elmar 90 and adapter. I am not advocating this, just observing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether Leica would (gasp) do a zoom M lens usable only with EVF.

 

I think you will find that the M240 replacement will have AF capabilities and there will be some M series AF zoom lenses........

 

There have been some indirect clues about this here and there if you have been observant.

 

Leica is good at using it's various platforms to trial new things and then they trickle down to the M ......... the T is not only a fine camera ..... but has some bits that will certainly get used again ..... and the processing parts of the S3 will certainly find their way into the M..... as the S2 processor and rear screen did with the M240 ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find that the M240 replacement will have AF capabilities and there will be some M series AF zoom lenses........

 

There have been some indirect clues about this here and there if you have been observant.

 

Leica is good at using it's various platforms to trial new things and then they trickle down to the M ......... the T is not only a fine camera ..... but has some bits that will certainly get used again ..... and the processing parts of the S3 will certainly find their way into the M..... as the S2 processor and rear screen did with the M240 ;)

 

Don't count on AF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tri-Elmar 21-24-28 f/4 ASPH would be a true zoom lens, just like the Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 f/4 ASPH.

 

So it is less complex than the Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 f/4 ASPH, which is a tri focal lens and has to activate appropriate framelines.

 

No AF, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

In terms of focal length, I agree with the OP. Lets not forget that the 16-18-21 WATE was created during the M8 era. 21 to 28 is much more useful for most FF shooters. The problem would be cost, because I suspect you could pick up a 21 f3.4 and a 28mm f2.8 for the the same or less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would enjoy 24-35-50 or 24-35-75 since we already have 21mm in the Tri-Elmar. Or even 28-50-75 which will work easier with built in viewing.

I use the WATE very often and when you are getting used to it a 50mm feels like you are using a 135mm on a DSLR.

 

/Harry

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...