35mm Elmarit-R III - Min Focus Beyond Min Focus Mark

[Keith (M)]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Took a first step into the R-World today with the arrival of an R5 & a 35mm Elmarit-R III (1992).  I am somewhat disconcerted to find that the focus setting can be turned considerably beyond the min focus of 30cm (as per Leica Wiki, E Puts's 'Leica Compendium' & J Eastland's 'Leica R Compendium').  With the setting at the physical minimum I can focus down to circa 20cm.  Is this normal for the lens?

 

[

[jip]

Yes that is normal for that lens, as long as the infinity stop focuses at infinity you're good. Mine did it as well.. can't remember if it did it as much as yours, but I remember being appalled by it as well back when I first got it. 

 

Remember: The 35mm Elmarit-R is a great lens but always a little bit soft in the corners even when stopped down. This makes it a great lens for reportage, but less so for landscape work.

 

Beside that I really liked the lens and it gave me nice shots both on Leica R8.

 

 

[Keith (M)]

Thank you for that, Jip - although everything looked fine through the viewfinder at circa 20cm, it is such an unusual 'feature' that it raised a concern, particularly with regard to the data stated by authoritative sources.  Phew!  

 

Interesting what you say about it being a little soft. Eastland writes:-

 

A relative lightweight with excellent optical properties. Excellent resolution and contrast are obtainable at maximum aperture. Little or no discernible difference in image quality is achieved on stopping down.

 On the other hand, E Puts in his Compendium appears to agree with you.  Hopefully I will see my first results in a day or so, time & weather permitting.

 

 

 

 

[otto.f]

Wysiwyg, or rather wys through the lens iwyg

[Keith (M)]

Wysiwyg, or rather wys through the lens iwyg

Well, yes indeed!  I was merely slightly concerned at just how far it turned beyond the stated minimum distance mark.

[Keith (M)]

Hi Keith

 

This is entirely normal.

 

I have just checked my 35mm Elmarit R 111 and it is exactly the same.

 

This is a very good lens BTW!!

Indeed it is very good - the results from my first roll through the R5 have been very pleasing, both for landscapes and close-up shots.  Highly delighted!

[RexGig0]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just realized that my Elmarit-R 35 is this version, and that its focus ring turns well past the marked 0.3m focusing distance. Now, to verify that infinity is truly at infinity. (If my memory is correct, it is accurate at infinity, based upon having using the distance scale to focus, when using it on an M 246 Monochrom, a few years ago, during what may have been its only shooting session.) I had almost sold this one, recently, to compensate my budget for having bought a Re-Edition Steel Rim Summilux-M 35mm lens, but, fortunately, decided to investigate its close-focus performance before parting with it. 

Edited December 3, 2023 by RexGig0

[AZN]

On 7/25/2017 at 10:31 PM, jip said:

Remember: The 35mm Elmarit-R is a great lens but always a little bit soft in the corners even when stopped down. This makes it a great lens for reportage, but less so for landscape work.

For my v.III lens, there is a tiny amount of blurring in the extreme corners at ƒ8 (you have to pixel-peep to see it).

Nevertheless, amoung the 35mm R options the Elmarit-R is IMO probably the best for landscape work.  

The 35 'lux (R) – which renders beautifully and one of my favourite lenses – is hopeless for landscape work.  At least my copy is so bad in the corners at infinity that you definitely don't have to pixel peep to see it.  And BTW I had the lens serviced by DAG, who recalibrated the elements using his optical bench, so cannot see it improving.

The 35 'cron (R)  I have never used. But have seen plenty of examples on Flickr and notice that it has pretty serious field curvature.

I also have the 35-70mm Vario-Elmarit-R f4.  At 35mm it is pretty decent with no corner issues, but there is also a noticeable amount of barel distortion.  Easy to correct with modern software I know, but it's there. The zoom lens isn't very compact either.

Of course there are plenty of 35mm alternatives in other lens-mounts.  eg. my 35mm Summicron-M ASPH works really well on the Leica SL (typ 601).

[davidmknoble]

The 35 elmarit has a fair amount of distortion unless shot extremely level.  I prefer the 35 ‘cron although the corners are softer even at higher f/stops, I regularly frame film a little looser to allow for it.  The 35-70 f/4 lens is a lot like the M MATE 28-50-35 lens and behaves similarly.  For digital these distortions are not terribly important.  I would argue the the zoom is compact compared to many R zoom lenses and smaller than the SL zooms… I like the R 35-70 f/4 (and the MATE) as travel lenses.