Jump to content

New Vario-Elmar-M 28-75mm f/3.4-5.6


rosuna

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dr Rohde is apparently a pal of Dr Kaufmann and has previous history of beta testing products prior to release and posting photos using these products prior to official release or announcement. There was a bit of fuss prior to the release of the M240 and a number of photos taken by Dr Rohde using the camera were widely circulated. I seem to recall photos taken inside a supermarket or DIY store, photos of yachts and various shots of swimming pools and the like taken from a hotel balcony.

 

And he didn't appreciate the fuss back then either....  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/198117-new-dngs-from-drrohde/?p=2242665

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the product is a real one (and I suspect it probably is – and will be announced next month along with the M successor) it will be the least appealing and most useless (to me) M system product I can possibly imagine.  :D

Certainly, for experienced M users with an array of M lenses. But as it covers the happy range for focusing on the M in one package, it could be very attractive to newcomers to the M system - and a useful way for Leica to draw people in and broaden its appeal without upsetting old hands.

 

Edit: I suspect John is saying the same thing

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly, for experienced M users with an array of M lenses. But as it covers the happy range for focusing on the M in one package, it could be very attractive to newcomers to the M system - and a useful way for Leica to draw people in and broaden its appeal without upsetting old hands.

 

Edit: I suspect John is saying the same thing

 

 

Maybe.

 

But it will disguise the real virtues of the M system and I don't think that's helpful in the long run. 

 

I feel Leica are losing their way a little at the moment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I this proves to be a real production lens for use with an EVF compatible M camera, then why is Leica losing it's way by producing a 'kit zoom' as John described it?  Leica would be simply producing a lens to increase peoples choices and camera versatility where Leica perceives (perhaps quite rightly) a demand for a zoom option for M cameras. Previously, the MATE was an excellent but expensive and potentially fragile solution to this, one that's unlikely to be repeated now the camera is EVF-compatible.

 

One does not have to buy it to stick on ones' M-camera if one doesn't want to 'lose one's way' with M-system karma. One doesn't have to stick an EVF on one's M-system camera or press the video button on one's M-camera (which I don't btw).  And yes, would be a an obvious compromise on an M camera. It is unlikely to be fully backward compatible with older non-EVF compatible cameras as even if it had various focal length detents it would be unlikely to be able to bring up the correct tramlines in the OVF by mechanical means (look at what Leica had to do to get the MATE to be compatible with there FLs), and there would be too much finder blockage to use the OVF regardless.  

 

There is likely a demand for such a lens though, look at what happened to the prices of R lenses (esp the 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R) with the release of the M240. People are now quite familiar with sticking accessory EVFs on a variety of Leica cameras.

 

However, I occasionally use my 2.8-4.0/28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R and 4.0/80-200 Vario-Emlar-R with EVF on the M240. The 28-90 is a spectacular lens which gives me the convenient option of a zoom should I so choose without having to buy a second camera system (SLR) for when I occcasionally want to use a zoom lens or the speed and FL range of the MATE is insufficient. I took the 28-90 (with 3 prime M lenses) on a recent trip to New Zealand recently and the system worked surprisingly well. This was especially so where prime lens changing would have been too awkward/slow such as in wet/dusty environments, in an helicopter, or when my wife was clearly getting the shits with me when I paused for lens changes, etc.  And yes, it would have been nice to have a better EVF.  

 

Having said, that this new lens is slower than the 28-90 but most people who may want one won't have access to a 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R or a MATE for that matter. The compromise of the maximum aperture of 3.4-5.6 and it's attractive FL range of 28-75 mm will control it's size and price (although it's unlikely to be a cheap lens!).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica would be simply producing a lens to increase peoples choices and camera versatility where Leica perceives (perhaps quite rightly) a demand for a zoom option for M cameras.

 

 

Possibly but such a lens rather misses the point (on more than one level) of the M system IMO. If a zoom lens is desirable and an EVF required (can this thing even be focused using the rangefinder?), Leica might as well offer the lens in conjunction with the SL or a variation on the Q.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I this proves to be a real production lens for use with an EVF compatible M camera, then why is Leica losing it's way by producing a 'kit zoom' as John described it?  Leica would be simply producing a lens to increase peoples choices and camera versatility where Leica perceives (perhaps quite rightly) a demand for a zoom option for M cameras. Previously, the MATE was an excellent but expensive and potentially fragile solution to this, one that's unlikely to be repeated now the camera is EVF-compatible.

 

One does not have to buy it to stick on ones' M-camera if one doesn't want to 'lose one's way' with M-system karma. One doesn't have to stick an EVF on one's M-system camera or press the video button on one's M-camera (which I don't btw).  And yes, would be a an obvious compromise on an M camera. It is unlikely to be fully backward compatible with older non-EVF compatible cameras as even if it had various focal length detents it would be unlikely to be able to bring up the correct tramlines in the OVF by mechanical means (look at what Leica had to do to get the MATE to be compatible with there FLs), and there would be too much finder blockage to use the OVF regardless.  

 

There is likely a demand for such a lens though, look at what happened to the prices of R lenses (esp the 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R) with the release of the M240. People are now quite familiar with sticking accessory EVFs on a variety of Leica cameras.

 

However, I occasionally use my 2.8-4.0/28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R and 4.0/80-200 Vario-Emlar-R with EVF on the M240. The 28-90 is a spectacular lens which gives me the convenient option of a zoom should I so choose without having to buy a second camera system (SLR) for when I occcasionally want to use a zoom lens or the speed and FL range of the MATE is insufficient. I took the 28-90 (with 3 prime M lenses) on a recent trip to New Zealand recently and the system worked surprisingly well. This was especially so where prime lens changing would have been too awkward/slow such as in wet/dusty environments, in an helicopter, or when my wife was clearly getting the shits with me when I paused for lens changes, etc.  And yes, it would have been nice to have a better EVF.  

 

Having said, that this new lens is slower than the 28-90 but most people who may want one won't have access to a 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R or a MATE for that matter. The compromise of the maximum aperture of 3.4-5.6 and it's attractive FL range of 28-75 mm will control it's size and price (although it's unlikely to be a cheap lens!).

I do use my 35-70 4.0 R that way from time to time, which is a quite affordable alternative. The 80-200 gets used too, and the 105-280 quite often. I don't give a fig for the "purity" of the system, it is rather liberating to be able to extend the use of my preferred rangefinder camera this way. This supposed new zoom might be quite interesting, especially if it is dual-use, a continuous zoom  on the EVF with detentes for frameline settings and rangefinder coupling. But perhaps that would be too much complication to expect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The WATE is a well regarded lens by current owners, many of whom also own stellar M primes.  As discussed earlier, the MATE is likewise admired, but it is an older, more complex design, subject to some mechanical issues and unlike the WATE, doesn't serve as a full zoom.  

 

I've owned M primes since the early 80's and had a MATE but sold it after it developed some issues.  For travel purposes, I would buy a modern iteration of the MATE (like the WATE design) and/or some other multi-focal length combinations (35-50-75/90) IF they were no slower than f4, compact as possible, and built to high standards.

 

For me, the concept of a zoom lens for an M (if it is similar to the WATE design) would be appealing.  The zoom referenced here only fails for me if it lacks those criteria, not because it's a zoom.....we already have a great example in the WATE.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the concept of a zoom lens for an M (if it is similar to the WATE design) would be appealing.  The zoom referenced here only fails for me if it lacks those criteria, not because it's a zoom.....we already have a great example in the WATE.

 

 

Yes, I understand that and used to own the original Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 myself. The WATE and MATE, though a little clunky and quite removed from the feel of a small Summicron prime, are still both M lenses in that they were designed to be composed and focussed optically using a conventional M rangefinder camera (aided by the Frankenfinder in the case of the WATE). I guess I am judging the new zoom in advance of knowing much about it but my suspicion is that, unlike the MATE and WATE, the 28-75 zoom is essentially an EVF only lens without RF coupling and is therefore unlike any previous lens given the M designation. (The recent macro adaptor is also EVF only and also a disappointing development).

Edited by wattsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

An M lens without RF coupling? Would be surprising to me but i may be wrong.

You are probably right. I'm not sure why I thought it will lack RF coupling - I really don't know anything at all about this lens and am just making things up. [emoji1]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by wattsy
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this lens fascinating. The serial number implies a manufacture circa 2012, so the design was likely contemporary with the M 240. It seems clear to me that Leica was exploring the limits of what an M could do with a TTL finder. I'd say that the chain of events is fairly clear: develop an all-purpose zoom for the M with EVF (2009-2012), decide that the lens isn't a viable product (2012), redirect the engineering investment into the X-Vario (2013), and focus on new systems that are better suited to such tools (T in 2014, SL in 2015). This might even explain why Leica initially promoted the X-Vario as a "mini M", because that's how they were thinking about it: Leica designed the lens to cover 90% of M-system use and then shrunk it down into a smaller package for the X-Vario. All of that is armchair speculation, of course. 

 

If the lens were released, though, I'd give it thorough consideration.

 

Cheers,

Jon

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Q&A with Stefan Daniel from 2010 LHSA Meeting in Wetzlar by David Farkas - published on Red Dot Forum September 13 2012:

 

Would it be possible to have a shutterless camera using the new CMOS technology by using an electronic shutter and do away with all mechanical components?

This is, of course, the dream to have a camera with basically no moving parts inside. The current sensor technology does not allow this 100% right now. What you can do is have a simplified shutter, which only either starts the exposure or ends the exposure. The sensor itself is not able to start or end the exposure on current models.

Would you consider producing the Tri-Elmar-M again?

I’ve had a number of requests like this. To be frank, we never had much fun producing that lens as it is. To put it another way, it didn’t earn money and created a lot of headaches because it is quite a complicated lens on a mechanical level. When you turn the focal length ring, it moves the lens head in one direction and it moves the cam selector as well. It was a piece of art, but it is virtually not produceable in industry-standard production. But, we’ll take this demand for a Tri-Elmar into consideration and I can’t exclude that we won’t make a new Tri-Elmar in the future. With the camera I just described it would also make sense to have such a lens maybe not with click stops, but with a continuous zoom.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Q&A with Stefan Daniel from 2010 LHSA Meeting in Wetzlar by David Farkas - published on Red Dot Forum September 13 2012:

 

Would it be possible to have a shutterless camera using the new CMOS technology by using an electronic shutter and do away with all mechanical components?

This is, of course, the dream to have a camera with basically no moving parts inside. The current sensor technology does not allow this 100% right now. What you can do is have a simplified shutter, which only either starts the exposure or ends the exposure. The sensor itself is not able to start or end the exposure on current models. [...]

 

Thanks for this reminder but this was in 2012 as you said. Now all my digitals cameras but the M240 can work 100% in silent mode and actually do. Time to turn the page or i will forgo the next M with regrets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...