rramesh Posted November 5, 2015 Author Share #81 Posted November 5, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) It depends whether it would be an improvement, I guess. Does an old lens always needs to be improved so as to become clinical in its rendering of images? My read of this and other forums is that many Leica users actually like the rendering of old lens. It's what gives character and options to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 5, 2015 Posted November 5, 2015 Hi rramesh, Take a look here Leica to rework older M lenses?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
james.liam Posted November 6, 2015 Share #82 Posted November 6, 2015 Does an old lens always needs to be improved so as to become clinical in its rendering of images? My read of this and other forums is that many Leica users actually like the rendering of old lens. It's what gives character and options to them. How about reducing flare and improving scratch resistance with upgraded, harder coatings, controlling for chromatic aberrations, improving color fidelity with apochromatic glass, using lighter materials, reducing focus shift so what you intend is actually recorded (WYSIWYG)? All else being kept the same, I'd call these useful improvements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted November 6, 2015 Share #83 Posted November 6, 2015 How about reducing flare and improving scratch resistance with upgraded, harder coatings, controlling for chromatic aberrations, improving color fidelity with apochromatic glass, using lighter materials, reducing focus shift so what you intend is actually recorded (WYSIWYG)? All else being kept the same, I'd call these useful improvements. The problem is keeping all else the same (weight, size, bokeh, etc.). The current aspherics are optically improved but little remains the same other than maximum aperture and focal length. Some optical improvements are probably possible with differing glass types and improved coatings, but these are unlikely to dramatically improve optical performance to the level of aspherical designs (which is probably what we see with the diminutive Summarit designs). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMJ Posted November 6, 2015 Share #84 Posted November 6, 2015 They would be a downgrade on the already available Summarits. Which are excellent lenses. I beg to differ, as the Summarits are not finished or optimised to the same level as the Elmarits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted November 6, 2015 Share #85 Posted November 6, 2015 Does an old lens always needs to be improved so as to become clinical in its rendering of images? My read of this and other forums is that many Leica users actually like the rendering of old lens. It's what gives character and options to them. An old lens doesn't need to be improved if you are happy with it. But I often prefer the style of the new lenses. You call it clinical, but I feel they're doing what good lenses should do, in being as accurate as possible. Is it accuracy and a lack of faults that you call clinical? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 6, 2015 Share #86 Posted November 6, 2015 How about reducing flare and improving scratch resistance with upgraded, harder coatings, controlling for chromatic aberrations, improving color fidelity with apochromatic glass, using lighter materials, reducing focus shift so what you intend is actually recorded (WYSIWYG)? All else being kept the same, I'd call these useful improvements. This is all very well in theory but for my taste it's likely to strip the lens of its essential character (some would call this its 'soul'), which is often fed by under-corrected optics. There are some subjects that shine brilliantly in the view of a near-perfectly corrected lens and I'll happily use mine for those but there are subjects that I believe are more attractively portrayed by older, less corrected lenses that inject a certain something (je ne sais quoi) that gently improves the end result to my eye. I accept that others' and your mileage may vary. I include an example shot with an early coated lens whose character I would like to see in a modern lens for variety at the very least or to offer a different 'paintbrush' if you like. I like the 'modern' ultra-corrected lenses but if that was all that was available I worry that perhaps our pictures might start to look a little similar in some way. My 2p for what its worth. Pete. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/252231-leica-to-rework-older-m-lenses/?do=findComment&comment=2922313'>More sharing options...
lct Posted November 6, 2015 Share #87 Posted November 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Many pre-M8 or even pre-M9 lenses, especially wides, will be hardly compatible with the SL610 due to soft corners at infinity i suspect. If i were Leica i would be tempted to update some of them like 21/2.8 asph, 24/2.8 asph, 28/2, 28/2.8 asph and 35/2 asph among others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayek Posted November 6, 2015 Share #88 Posted November 6, 2015 Zeiss' design philosophy has found a way to bridge this divide with many of their current line. The one that comes to mind is the ZF 1,4/35 from my Nikon days. It is highly corrected for color, unlike Leica legacy glass from the 1930's-60's, while leaving in uncorrected spherical aberrations at wider apertures. The end results were accurate yet gentle colors and sumptuous skin tones without the clinical severity I would see with other modern lenses, like the Z* 2/35 or Nikkir 24-70. I presently only have a Monochrom and shoot the 50 Rigid and 35 8-element f80% of the time. When shooting color on an M6, FM2 or a borrowed M240, I'd rather use other glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted November 7, 2015 Share #89 Posted November 7, 2015 May get interesting when Leica would reconsider some older lenses. All the possible and impossible variants are mentioned in this thread already, but one lens I would love to see with modern glass is the second version Elmar 4/90mm (the three elements), a Mandler design which is a lovely lens. But I am still wondering what Kaufmann may have had in mind, because so many old lenses are on the market. Lex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwesi Posted November 15, 2015 Share #90 Posted November 15, 2015 No need to look any further than these two: 1992-LEICA SUMMICRON 50mm f/2 Non- Apo (The performance gap is too great between the APO and Non -APO versions) 1996-LEICA 35mm f/2 ASPH ( Field curvature issue should have been corrected by now) are two very popular lenses that desperately need to be brought up to modern standards. Sorry about the bold letters - could not disable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted November 15, 2015 Share #91 Posted November 15, 2015 They should make one ultra pancake f2.8 with outstanding build (black paint over brass) ala perar designs. I don't buy perars as they seem too cheapish. But I would jump on Leica ones. That would be my ultimate street lens. A truly pocketable camera + lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 15, 2015 Share #92 Posted November 15, 2015 They should make one ultra pancake f2.8 with outstanding build (black paint over brass) ala perar designs. I don't buy perars as they seem too cheapish. But I would jump on Leica ones. That would be my ultimate street lens. A truly pocketable camera + lens. Wow, Ned, I wouldn't have had you down as a lens snob! I recently acquired a black paint 24/2 Perar and the build quality is surprisingly good considering its comparatively low price. It's certainly up to Hexanon and Kobalux quality and it's so tiny you just might find that you like it. For a Cook triplet design it performs very well - low distortion, moderate vignetting (around 1.5 stops without M correction enabled) and reasonably controlled CA for a lens with only three elements. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted November 15, 2015 Share #93 Posted November 15, 2015 Speaking of Perar, there's a new one due out; 35mm ƒ/1.4 Apoqualia. Does the "Apo" imply just that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #94 Posted November 16, 2015 Wow, Ned, I wouldn't have had you down as a lens snob! I recently acquired a black paint 24/2 Perar and the build quality is surprisingly good considering its comparatively low price. It's certainly up to Hexanon and Kobalux quality and it's so tiny you just might find that you like it. For a Cook triplet design it performs very well - low distortion, moderate vignetting (around 1.5 stops without M correction enabled) and reasonably controlled CA for a lens with only three elements. Pete. Yes, sadly I'm a lens snob. A victim of my own mind playing tricks, as if owning an exclusive item would make me exclusive. The deal I've done with myself, though, is the following: as long as I'll be shooting to the best of my abilities, print all my best, and be totally devoted to my craft, I'll allow myself to indulge in owning "the best" even though I know I'm lying to myself. But life is so short Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted November 16, 2015 Share #95 Posted November 16, 2015 They should make one ultra pancake f2.8 with outstanding build (black paint over brass) ala perar designs. I don't buy perars as they seem too cheapish. But I would jump on Leica ones. That would be my ultimate street lens. A truly pocketable camera + lens. Totally agree with that! And, to top it off, why not make a re-issue 40/2? ! Now THAT would settle once and for all all the lens cravings at 35 and 50 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted November 16, 2015 Share #96 Posted November 16, 2015 why not make a re-issue 40/2? ! Now THAT would settle once and for all all the lens cravings at 35 and 50 A lens without the appropriate frame lines. Great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 16, 2015 Share #97 Posted November 16, 2015 Would be sold with a dremel to file the flange...with a red dot and drill bits in diamond of course Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted November 16, 2015 Share #98 Posted November 16, 2015 A lens without the appropriate frame lines. Great. Electronic ones might do the job, no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted November 16, 2015 Share #99 Posted November 16, 2015 Electronic ones might do the job, no? Optimized for the next generation of M and beyond. No backward compatibility, other than the M240/246 and an EVF or LV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 17, 2015 Share #100 Posted November 17, 2015 I hope any reworking retains backward compatibility. While the M(240) has live view and the optional EVF, I do hope Leica retains the optical crf as a core function. If Leica is of a mind to revisit old designs, it would be great if some of the excellent R designs make it across to the SL platform - I'm not convinced they all need to be AF. I know this is OT, but what criteria do people see for AF, as opposed to non-AF? The Otus lenses are non-AF ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.