Thambar-Crazy

[Exodies]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Worth GBP 10,000, Euro 12,500? I don't find the need. Am I alone?

You’re never alone with a Thambar.

[ECohen]

Worth GBP 10,000, Euro 12,500? I don't find the need. Am I alone?

 

 

As glass and metal ......... Is the new Thambar worth  $6.5K US ?..... of course not! 

A thin coat of Vaseline, a PS layer, a nice old Zeiss Softar all will accomplish a beautiful portrait effect...for a lot less money.

 

But that isn't the point and it isn't the point to Leica. I think it depends how you value money....or if Photography is your profession.

.......Or if you simply love the possibilities that this cool old lens design will create.

 

As a tool this lens has an entirely different value.....having nothing to do with money.

 

I cant afford everything Leica. Being a retired professional photographer I "should"  justify every camera/lens purchase, as to how much I plan to use it.

The 28mm 5.6, the Thambar ,the Noctilux .95  are they worth having in your tool box? Of course they are worth having. You really can't do what they do with any other tool.

 

To all that are fortunate enough to acquire this lens and excited enough to learn how to use it properly. Please keep posting your results!

I thoroughly enjoy this weird  wonderful screwy lens.

 

Man o man....does Leica understand us!

[Advertisement]

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

[derleicaman]

I have owned an original Thambar for about 35 years. I like to say it is the Leica lens I love to hate, or perhaps more correctly, it loves to hate me. In my film Leica days, you could never pre-visualize its result. I thought that would change with the M10 and Live View. Well, not so much. It is still almost impossible to see the Thambar effect in the 020 Visoflex and the only way to use the rear screen with the rear display is on a tripod. Not exactly my style of photography.

 

I contend, this is the most challenging of Leica, if not all lenses. I think there is a high percentage of luck in getting good images from it. I think it is great that Leica has re-issued this lens and will encourage others to rediscover it.

 

I have no images worth sharing at this point. But, I will keep trying. No, vaseline or a softar filter will not duplicate the effect. Another old trick was shooting through a nylon stocking. I don't think that will work either. I have toyed with the idea of the 73/1.9 Hektor being the poor man's Thambar, but just now playing around with both of them shows this not to be the case either. There is some glow with the Hektor, but nowhere near the explosion of glow you can get with the Thambar!

 

Thanks to the OP for sharing some of his first results with this very unusual lens. Credit Leica with having the guts to bring out this classic lens again.

[michaelwj]

Option 1: Buy Thambar. Cost = £10,000

Option 2: Buy a ND filter. A smear of vaseline will give a soft focus. Cost = negligible.

 

Hmm, I wonder what I'll do?

I don't think you understand the Thambar. It is not a soft focus lens. Be happy with your choice and allow others to be happy with theirs.

[jmahto]

Worth GBP 10,000, Euro 12,500? I don't find the need. Am I alone?

Simply use your girl friend/wife/neighbor's pantyhose and give your loved one a diamond ring with the saved money.

http://coltondavie.com/tests/testing-net-diffusion/

 

See, I just restored happiness in the world.

Edited December 7, 2017 by jmahto

[jmahto]

I have owned an original Thambar for about 35 years. I like to say it is the Leica lens I love to hate, or perhaps more correctly, it loves to hate me. In my film Leica days, you could never pre-visualize its result. I thought that would change with the M10 and Live View. Well, not so much. It is still almost impossible to see the Thambar effect in the 020 Visoflex and the only way to use the rear screen with the rear display is on a tripod. Not exactly my style of photography.

 

I contend, this is the most challenging of Leica, if not all lenses. I think there is a high percentage of luck in getting good images from it. I think it is great that Leica has re-issued this lens and will encourage others to rediscover it.

 

I have no images worth sharing at this point. But, I will keep trying. No, vaseline or a softar filter will not duplicate the effect. Another old trick was shooting through a nylon stocking. I don't think that will work either. I have toyed with the idea of the 73/1.9 Hektor being the poor man's Thambar, but just now playing around with both of them shows this not to be the case either. There is some glow with the Hektor, but nowhere near the explosion of glow you can get with the Thambar!

 

Thanks to the OP for sharing some of his first results with this very unusual lens. Credit Leica with having the guts to bring out this classic lens again.

I did read your post after posting mine. Yes, nylon will not exactly duplicate and vice versa too. Whether it is worth can only be answered by the people who own it. For whatever it is worth, I did like the pictures posted in this thread. Whether they can be achieved by nylon, Vaseline or photoshop is immaterial to the final aesthetics of the picture. Value can be debated independent of aesthetics. 

[cwcheung]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks.lik

 

Would you show the packing (inside of the box) of the lens?

 

Rgds.

[Herr Barnack]

It’s € 5.900

Too much of course.

As always.

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk Pro

 

We should conduct a poll to pick a new company motto for Leica.  Here are a few suggestions:

 

 

"Leica - your kids wouldn't take college seriously anyway."

"Leica - making love to a camera beats making love to the wife's sister."

"Leica - my kids are shitheads so I'm spending their inheritance."

"Leica - 66% of market value paid for healthy kidneys as trade-in."

 

Edited December 7, 2017 by Herr Barnack

[M9reno]

Option 1: Buy Thambar. Cost = £10,000

Option 2: Buy a ND filter. A smear of vaseline will give a soft focus. Cost = negligible.

 

Hmm, I wonder what I'll do? 

This is really a misconception, akin to saying that the look of an APO 50 can be replicated with a f/3.5 Elmar and ten seconds of fiddling with the sharpness and contrast sliders in Photoshop.

 

Seriosuly - one may or may not like the Thambar aesthetic, and the lens is indeed devilishly hard to master. Either way it has its context in photographic pictorialism, and a respectable creator in Berek. Leica is selling a bit of history here - not a bad thing, especially compared to some other things they've been selling.

 

The price is mainly due to the fact that many will feel like you do, and few will buy.

[LocalHero1953]

I have a forlorn hope that one day we might see a thread like this just as an opportunity to see examples of the Thambar at work; all those who don't own the Thambar, have no wish to own the Thambar, but just want to say what a waste of money it is, would start up an entirely separate thread for that purpose rather than derail this. Having just watched a similar thread about the S system disintegrate unnecessarily into rancour and mods intervention, I suspect I am fighting against some basic aspect of human nature - but where would we be without hope?

 

Please keep posting Thambar pictures!

Edited December 7, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[helged]

Please keep posting Thambar pictures!

+1.

[willeica]

This is really a misconception, akin to saying that the look of an APO 50 can be replicated with a f/3.5 Elmar and ten seconds of fiddling with the sharpness and contrast sliders in Photoshop.

 

Seriosuly - one may or may not like the Thambar aesthetic, and the lens is indeed devilishly hard to master. Either way it has its context in photographic pictorialism, and a respectable creator in Berek. Leica is selling a bit of history here - not a bad thing, especially compared to some other things they've been selling.

 

The price is mainly due to the fact that many will feel like you do, and few will buy.

 

Alfonso, much as I hate to correct you, this is a re-creation of history rather than history itself. As a collector, an original is of infinitely more value to me than a re-creation. As you will know, you can get excellent images from a well kept original of any lens. Also on the issue of price, an original Thambar will be somewhat less than the re-creation and you will have a piece of real history in your hands. The same applies to other lenses; the original 2.8cm f5.6 Summaron, which is optically superb, currently goes for about half the price of the re-creation. To take an analogy from music that I like, I would always prefer to listen to an original jazz or blues classic than listen to some young fellow doing a re-creation. The young fellow might be a good musician, but there is nothing as good as the real thing.

 

Finally, on the subject of functionality, I have a Nikkor 105 DC lens which uses a different technical design to achieve similar end results. How often have I used it? Well, not very much. Once I had seen the effect a few times, it ceased to be of particular interest. Leica AG is, of course, right to introduce any lens for which it feels that a market exists. Owners of a re-creation lens should remember, though, that what they have is just that. Any assessment of the lens should, therefore, be based on what it can do in a modern context.

 

William

Edited December 7, 2017 by willeica

[SilentShutter]

Worth GBP 10,000, Euro 12,500? I don't find the need. Am I alone?

 

No but people have different taste and different wallets.......so what ?

Glad @lik loves his new lens - for me it wouldn´t work even if I had the money !

[SilentShutter]

We should conduct a poll to pick a new company motto for Leica.  Here are a few suggestions:

 

 

"Leica - your kids wouldn't take college seriously anyway."

"Leica - making love to a camera beats making love to the wife's sister."

"Leica - my kids are shitheads so I'm spending their inheritance."

"Leica - 66% of market value paid for healthy kidneys as trade-in."

 

 

Funny but true is that Leica is a overpriced trade mark - it always was and will be !

No one forces us to buy and use it right ?

[pgk]

Any highly specialised lens will be costly. Whether its worth the cost depends on what you do with it (which may or may not include taking photographs!). Personally, whilst I find its effect interesting, I cannot see that I would actually have a use for such a lens. For those who do have its yet another tool in their photographic armoury but at a price. I must admit that I'm intrigued that Leica have actually recreated this lens - an extraordinary step I would say.

[MarkP]

I have owned an original Thambar for about 35 years.

 

I have no images worth sharing at this point. But, I will keep trying. 

 

 

Pardon my selective editing   

 

If I bought a Thambar I'd still have no keepers at the age of 80! 

Edited December 7, 2017 by MarkP

[wattsy]

To take an analogy from music that I like, I would always prefer to listen to an original jazz or blues classic than listen to some young fellow doing a re-creation. The young fellow might be a good musician, but there is nothing as good as the real thing

 

 

That analogy doesn't work at all. A lens is a tool or instrument not a performance.

 

Your point about the value of an original to a collector is well taken – a reproduction, however physically close, isn't going to satisfy a collector as a substitute for an original of what is being collected. However, speaking as a non-collector, the availability of these old lens designs in a newly manufactured product is a very welcome development.

[Jager]

That analogy doesn't work at all. A lens is a tool or instrument not a performance.

 

Your point about the value of an original to a collector is well taken – a reproduction, however physically close, isn't going to satisfy a collector as a substitute for an original of what is being collected. However, speaking as a non-collector, the availability of these old lens designs in a newly manufactured product is a very welcome development.

 

+1.

 

Speaking as a non-collector, I would certainly prefer a newly-issued Thambar vs. an original.  And of course there's history in the new version.  A photographer today can experience the very same things that a Thambar-buyer in the 1930's would have enjoyed.

 

Cool thread.  More images and Thambar experiences, please!

[wattsy]

...Leica AG is, of course, right to introduce any lens for which it feels that a market exists. Owners of a re-creation lens should remember, though, that what they have is just that. Any assessment of the lens should, therefore, be based on what it can do in a modern context.

 

 I don't think Leica nor owners of the new lens have suggested or believe that is anything other than a re-creation. How could it be? It is a Thambar-M for one thing. Other than Leica completists who buy everything Leica produce, the type of people likely to be interested in this lens are those who want to use it rather than collect it. Your post smacks a bit like trying to rain on the parade of those expressing enthusiasm for this lens in this thread but, being argued from a collector perspective, really ends up missing the point.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stephen.w]

That analogy doesn't work at all. A lens is a tool or instrument not a performance.

 

Your point about the value of an original to a collector is well taken – a reproduction, however physically close, isn't going to satisfy a collector as a substitute for an original of what is being collected. However, speaking as a non-collector, the availability of these old lens designs in a newly manufactured product is a very welcome development.

 

A better analogy IMO is the remastering of an old recording.