28mm f2.8 Elmarit - is the Canadian made Leitz second best?

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm on the look out for a used example of the 28mm Elmatit for use on my M Typ 240.

 

I'm wondering:

Is the Leitz 'made in Canada' Elmarit as good as the Leica offering?

Is 6 bit coding just a nicety since the lens can be selected manually - albeit a slower work flow?

[dpitt]

There is no difference between a manual selected profile and a profile selected automatically by lens coding.

So you could regard the 6bit encoding as a convenience.

 

This works well for people that rarely change lenses. It gets tricky when you have multiple uncoded lenses, because then you might forget to change the code when mounting an other lens.

Differences between profiles are often not very noticeable, but for WA they can be...

AFAIK a RAW file with the wrong lens profile can not be easily corrected in PP to use the right in-camera profile.

 

Comment on 'made in Canada', IMO Leica quality control ensured a high standard wherever the item was produced, but that is just my two cents...

[Advertisement]

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

[Gregm61]

Steve, I think the main benefit of going with the just replaced 28mm f2.8 Elmarit ASPH is the size, as in, it is tiny. The pre-ASPH Elmarits are just not as small, but they probably do make up for it in being less expensive. I saw a late 28mm f2.8 pre-ASPH Elmarit one day last week on eBay that had the 6 bit coding added, and it wasn't all that cheap compared to a late, used and almost mint ASPH version.

 

I find the 6-bit coding very preferable for making it easy to change lenses and have the lens data in the file without having to remember to manually change it every time. One day a few weeks ago I used an uncoded 90mm f2 Summicron that dates from the mid 80's and spent the rest of the day capturing 200+ images with other lenses and completely forgot I had manually coded it in my M262, so every file showed it was captured with a 90mm f2 Summicron. That lens is now at Leica getting the 6 bit code mount added and I just received my 21mm f2.8 Elmarit ASPH back from having it 6 bit coded coded as well.

 

Even my late 135mm f4 Tele Elmar is 6 bit coded, even though they use the code for the 135mm f3.4 Telyt because there is no 6 bit code for the 135 Tele Elmar.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Gregm61

[bocaburger]

I'm on the look out for a used example of the 28mm Elmatit for use on my M Typ 240.

 

I'm wondering:

Is the Leitz 'made in Canada' Elmarit as good as the Leica offering?

Is 6 bit coding just a nicety since the lens can be selected manually - albeit a slower work flow?

The 2nd version and 3rd versions were both made in Canada.  The 3rd version is IMO better optically, and it also tends to be the least-expensive. 

[tobey bilek]

28 2.8 is fantastic.  Small and not to expensive.  

 

Mandler lenses were great for his time.

[Steve Ricoh]

Thanks to everyone for the replies.

 

Moving on from the original question, I'm also looking at the ASPH versions, the latest 11677 and the previous ASPH, product code 11606.

 

Apart from size, ie 11677 being smaller than the previous model 11606, is there anything optically significant between the two?

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I should have used the search function before posting my supplementary question above. The answer has been answered previously on this forum, sorry for any inconvenience.

[sdk]

The Canadian made 28mm/2.8 Elmarit M (or version III) is reputedly good, I have never used one, but it's not small. It's about the diameter of the current 28mm/1.4 Summilux M ASPH, takes a 49mm filter, but the 28mm/2.8 v.III is considerably lighter at 250 grams, versus 440g for the Summilux. The lens hood is quite large and obtrusive too. The 28mm/2.8 version IV and later ASPH 28mm/2.8 and 28mm/2 lenses are more compact, and optically better. Data on the various versions can be found in the wiki: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/M_Lenses_x_Focal_Length