LEICA THAMBAR-M 1:2.2/90 officially announced

[otto.f]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It’s a plaything, just like the Summaron 28 and I fail to understand until now why you couldn’t be satisfied with post-processing a normal 90 lens capture, or experiment with different patterns of vaseline on your filter. For the scarce moments you need the David Hamilton effect in your image € 6000 is really too much, 1500 would have been the limit for me. I think wedding photographers can well do with other methods. This dreamy shots aren’t that big booming business that you have a return on investment in no time.

[Advertisement]

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

[Overgaard]

The original Thambar manual says:

 

Stop-less aperture ring:

f/2.32 to f/6.3 with red numbers 

(for use with soft focus filter)

 

f/2.2 = f/2.3 and f/2.4 = f/2.5 and f/2.6 = f/2.8

marked to take the smalle difference in 

aperture value into account when using 

the soft filter.

 

f/9.0 to f 25 in white numbers for use 

without soft filter. 

[Overgaard]

You can see some sample in the bottom of my article of the soft focusing filter being used at different (wrong) f-stops

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-90mm-Summarit-M-f-25.html

 

 

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!

[mdemeyer]

Just glad Leica introduced an expensive new lens that doesn’t give me GAS. ;-)

[wlaidlaw]

I am a bit concerned that these limited edition and limited market, legacy lenses are a distraction from their main business, which should be getting on with bringing out the promised (and delayed, e.g. the 16-35 6 months late) SL lenses and other "normal" lenses for their mainstream cameras like the M and T. 

 

Wilson

[wattsy]

I am a bit concerned that these limited edition and limited market, legacy lenses are a distraction from their main business, which should be getting on with bringing out the promised (and delayed, e.g. the 16-35 6 months late) SL lenses and other "normal" lenses for their mainstream cameras like the M and T. 

 

 

I doubt any significant production or design resources are shared between the SL lenses and these new M lenses.

[Overgaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a bit concerned that these limited edition and limited market, legacy lenses are a distraction from their main business, which should be getting on with bringing out the promised (and delayed, e.g. the 16-35 6 months late) SL lenses and other "normal" lenses for their mainstream cameras like the M and T. 

 

Wilson

 

 

I think we as users generally should not concern ourselves with how Leica conducts production. There is always a waiting list. One element is human resources in the factories in Portugal and Wetzlar, but there are lots of glass, metal, electronics, shutters, bits and pieces in the Q, SL, M, lenses, X and all that comes from sub-suppliers all over the world.

 

I know that the shutter in the M ... I mean, who uses shutters these days? So getting a shutter designed, produced and delivered in the proper quality is in itself a task.

 

One sub-supplier that fail to make a delivery of any part for any product will delay that line. Glass elements, raw glass, paint, leather, screws, raw metal ... And I think that is happening quite a lot, particular because Leica is so specific with what they want and they return all that isn't 100% to specifications. 

[willeica]

Does anyone here recall the Nikon DC lenses? I still have my 105mm DC with its beautiful crackle finish somewhere, but I have not used it for years. My recollection is that it worked (ie produced some noticeable pleasing effects) at some settings but not at others. It was perfectly good as a normal lens as well. The settings on the original Thambar were designed for an era when there was no TTL metering or viewing and so the guess work had to eliminated for photographers. Hence the two scales. There were other examples around at the time such as the f2.9 settings on the Summar for use with the filters for the short lived early Agfa colour film. With digital and TTL metering it is very easy to work out what settings will and won't work, as Thorsten's example above shows. We have our own 'field lab' nowadays to show what works and what does not.

 

As for Wilson's point, he is right to ask for what he wants. Going from conception to production and distribution in a difficult market is never easy. Leica does listen to its clients, however. Last week in Chicago Stefan Daniel took a question and answer session from LHSA members at its AGM. Some of the suggestions from the audience were to say the least 'wide ranging' eg 'liquid crystal shutters' were mentioned by one contributor. Next year LHSA is holding its AGM in Wetzlar and the schedule will include meetings with the Leica CEO and other senior executives. As the market for stand alone cameras contracts, Leica and other manufacturers will need to engage in constructive dialogue with their remaining loyal clients. I think that Leica realises the necessity for this.

 

William

[michaelwj]

I'm unsure of the actual necessity. So far the presented photos do show us it's ability as a portrait lens. More a collectors item I think.

It will never be a collectable item. They will make lots of them, and enough people will put them away for future resale that the market will be flooded. After all, why would a collector buy this when for the same money they can get a nice complete original set?

[wlaidlaw]

It will never be a collectable item. They will make lots of them, and enough people will put them away for future resale that the market will be flooded. After all, why would a collector buy this when for the same money they can get a nice complete original set?

 

I suppose the argument would be that you are getting coated elements to reduce flare and hopefully with the digitally monitored lens element grinding, the sample variation will be less than the originals might have had. However I have to say in my experience, there seems to be less sample variation on my older Leitz lenses than I have had on modern ones. All my old lenses, as long as in good condition (I only buy if in good condition) do what they are supposed to and match optical to rangefinder focus, whereas some of my modern lenses have required one or more trips back to base before they became good performers. 

 

Wilson 

 

PS The glass might be better as well, with no bubbles/inclusions, unlike some of the originals. 

[lct]

Nice collectible for people collecting non collectible lenses .

[anickpick]

It’s a plaything, just like the Summaron 28 and I fail to understand until now why you couldn’t be satisfied with post-processing a normal 90 lens capture, or experiment with different patterns of vaseline on your filter. For the scarce moments you need the David Hamilton effect in your image € 6000 is really too much, 1500 would have been the limit for me. I think wedding photographers can well do with other methods. This dreamy shots aren’t that big booming business that you have a return on investment in no time.

 

 

There are so many ways to be creative nowadays (use of filters - also in post). So why such a lens, that is not a very creative tool imo. It's odd.

And the price point is absurd. ... Finally an M lens that I do not feel the slightest temptation to even try it out.

[michaelwj]

I suppose the argument would be that you are getting coated elements to reduce flare and hopefully with the digitally monitored lens element grinding, the sample variation will be less than the originals might have had. However I have to say in my experience, there seems to be less sample variation on my older Leitz lenses than I have had on modern ones. All my old lenses, as long as in good condition (I only buy if in good condition) do what they are supposed to and match optical to rangefinder focus, whereas some of my modern lenses have required one or more trips back to base before they became good performers.

 

Wilson

 

PS The glass might be better as well, with no bubbles/inclusions, unlike some of the originals.

I agree, it is a lens for using, not collecting.

[otto.f]

There are so many ways to be creative nowadays (use of filters - also in post). So why such a lens, that is not a very creative tool imo. It's odd.

And the price point is absurd. ... Finally an M lens that I do not feel the slightest temptation to even try it out.

The Summaron 28 being the first!

[Leicaiste]

An M Summarex would have been more attractive IMO.

 

The tele HCB was using.

 

[emoji6]

[6bit]

An M Summarex would have been more attractive IMO.

 

The tele HCB was using.

 

[emoji6]

 

 

I agree 10x with you regarding a M Summarex. 

[lct]

A 85/1.5 lens would be out of the accuracy range of 0.68x digital rangefinders i'm afraid. Even on 0.72x focusing would be difficult i suspect. I guess HCB was using the lens on a 0.91x M3.

[mmradman]

Marketing department have done a good job with leather case, it is gorgeous, even selection of E49 filter instead of the original E48 is a good move, not only iy is easier to source other 49mm filters it also prevents completing old incomplete lens with new centre filter/hoods and lens caps, but, big but...relaunching recent classics tweaked for digital like Summilux 75mm or Summilux 35mm v1 would probably sell more than Thambar.  Maybe 35mm or 75mm happens 50 years form now and maybe some time next year, maybe even before next SL lens launch ;-( 

 

I am wondering are we getting Firmware updates for M and SL cameras, presumably new Tambar comes with unique 6-bit code.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[willeica]

I agree, it is a lens for using, not collecting.

Re-creation lenses are not generally of interest to real collectors, unless you are the sort of person who buys special editions in the hope that they will appreciate in value over time. Frankly, I don't expect to live that long. Original items from the 1920s and 1930s are of much more interest to collectors. Putting on a user hat, of course, a Leica of any vintage from the I Model A up to the M10 can be assessed according to its utility value as a photographic tool.

 

A real collector would never ever put a six bit code on a collector's item. This would be a real collecting 'mortal sin'.

 

William

[wlaidlaw]

An M Summarex would have been more attractive IMO.

 

The tele HCB was using.

 

[emoji6]

 

I was blown away by how good this complicated Summarex lens is, especially as it was designed in the late 1930's with mechanical calculators. I expected it to be like a longer version of my 50mm/f1.5 Summarit; interesting but technically not terribly good and with lots of flare plus low contrast. Even wide open, it is very contrasty and sharp in the centre 2/3rds of the image, albeit still flare prone but its standard hood is excellent. However, it is probably too big and heavy for many folks. 

 

Wilson

 

PS I am having no trouble focusing it even on my IIIg.