Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Olof

New lens constructing engineer at Leica...

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I dont think that Leica can exist with low cost lenses. The 28/2.8 was a appetizer for the M8 System. Leica lenses always had a outstanding quality and price.

 

They can't exist with $3000 plus lenses either.

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very well focused prediction, Lars

 

- They cannot keep in production the ApoTelyt 135, declaring it's officially a "film only" lens : as you say, a rather simple mech/VF project can assure the ApoTelyt a long life: it's excellent, and M8 users feel the need of 135. Ithink it would be silly not to go on with a rather cheap projject...

Very well reasoned, Lars and Luigi. But one thing speaks against the goggles: The repair department hated them and felt they were an atrocious addition.

 

Of course, the only 135 Elmarits the repair department was likely to see were those that had been knocked out of alignment.

 

--HC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see it being a 135mm myself, I doubt if that lens has ever been that popular, and with the crop factor even more so.

 

Personally I'd expect a 16mm prime to allow the equivalent of a 21mm on a film M. F4 or f3.5. Not everyone wants the Tri-Elmar, or it's viewfinder for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1/2001.

Actually, the 1/2001 issue had an article by Puts on the lens, but not about the lens designer. I also recall that article, and will look for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't see it being a 135mm myself, I doubt if that lens has ever been that popular, and with the crop factor even more so.

 

Personally I'd expect a 16mm prime to allow the equivalent of a 21mm on a film M. F4 or f3.5. Not everyone wants the Tri-Elmar, or it's viewfinder for that matter.

 

Why not 135 Steve ? On classic Leicas it was sold a lot... 13,5 cm was the first Tele for Leica in the '20s (was an Elmar 4,5) and 135s were sold in thousands (good old Hektors are very cheap for this reason) for LTMS and LBMs... many people like using a "real tele" and on the M8 135 surely is... I agree is not the main mission of a Leica, that is basically a "reporter" camera for WA-normal, but we amateurs that plan to use it as universal camera surely appreciate a =180mm FF lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, the 1/2001 issue had an article by Puts on the lens, but not about the lens designer. I also recall that article, and will look for it.

 

The first real article on the 28 Cron Asph is 1/2001, as I already mentioned. The second article, as well as a "how did Leica build it" article come in 7/2001. The optical engineer's name is Michael Heiden, and the mechanical engineer who designed the lens body is Holger Wiegand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

TBH, the next £3k/$5k I spend on photographic equipment is more likely to be on a Nikon D3, whenever that comes out.

 

Exactly the same for me!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about the appetite for M8-only lenses, that won't cover full-frame. It seems to me that if Leica have a strong enough uptake on the M8 with its current crop - then such lenses could be very attractive.

 

Imagine an f2.8 tri-elmar for example. Not sure if that's feasible, but I presume that with the same front element size and a smaller image circle you get brighter. Otherwise they should be able to make a 24/2.8 that doesn't obstruct the finder nearly as much, a 50/1.0 that weighs a hell of a lot less...

 

Seems many/most people buying new M lenses at the moment are buying them to put on a M8, so I wonder.. especially if they aren't selling too many film bodies any more.

 

David.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder about the appetite for M8-only lenses, that won't cover full-frame. It seems to me that if Leica have a strong enough uptake on the M8 with its current crop - then such lenses could be very attractive...

Agree. Leica have made C lenses for the Leica CL already, why not D ones for digital?

This is the only way to get a 21/2 or a 16/2.8 that is not a monster like the Zeiss 15/2.8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems many/most people buying new M lenses at the moment are buying them to put on a M8, so I wonder.. especially if they aren't selling too many film bodies any more

 

I agree that they are probably selling more M8s than film Ms at the moment, but you have to remember that M8s only represent a tiny fraction of all the M cameras in use, and will do so for some considerable time. There are far more film Ms out there than M8s and by introducing a 'D' lens Leica would remove any possibility of selling the lens to this (relatively) large market. The resulting lower potential sales would mean that the unit cost of any such lens would have to be higher too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.......... There are far more film Ms out there than M8s and by introducing a 'D' lens Leica would remove any possibility of selling the lens to this (relatively) large market. ........

 

This large population of film M owners and users - are they the same owners and users who nearly brought Leica to its knees because they were not buying new lenses? If they are, why precisely are they now going to start purchasing lenses for their film cameras following the introduction of the M8?

 

Leica tried really hard and introduced many new lenses with outstanding performance to tempt them – but they did not buy them in the necessary numbers.

 

People who have bought an M8 are, like me, buying new lenses to "re-balance" their outfits both to allow for the crop factor and because photography is exciting again. I never liked, or owned, a 28mm with my film M cameras but it is now one of my most used lenses. I sold my Noctilux because I regard its performance as no more than acceptable when used on an M8. It is certainly less suited to the M8 than it was to film cameras. I am replacing it with a new 50mm f/1.4 'lux Asph. Then there is the 75mm f/2 'cron Asph which I ordered the moment the specification of the M8 was published. I suspect that this pattern is being repeated hundreds if not thousands of times.

 

To add to all this I’m being told by people at Leica that a significant part of the success of the M8 is – to their surprise but immense satisfaction – sales to people who have never owned any Leica previously who are now buying sets of lenses.

 

Film is effectively dead. The future is digital and there is no need, let alone technical feasibility, to have a larger sensor in an M camera. Leica are as aware as anyone of the advantages of smaller, lighter lenses and the M8 opens up the possibility of some very interesting specifications with outstanding performance but only if they are optimised for the 18 x 27mm format.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, I agree with you.

 

Before the M8 was launched, we talked about the lens drag-along business the M8 would generate and I expect their revenue from the sales of new lenses is in excess of revenue from the M8. In my case, it's something like 2 times. The M8 was the catalyst to kick-start lens sales again.

 

Somewhere in Solms/Rochester, there will be a view whether the M can ever be used with a bigger sensor. If not, Leica can build on the M by introducing innovative lenses which do not have to render an image outside 18*27mm.

 

I've put up a post in the film forum to see if any film users have bought a WATE. It will be interesting to see if anyone has; if not, the ability of that lens to render outside 18*27mm is wasted.

 

When the M8 came out, it was said the M8 was just another M and further film Ms would follow. Does anyone still believe that, if you ever did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes nature hates vacuum. If Leica want to sell APS digicams like M8 they have to allow customers to use true 'Leica' lenses i mean small and fast ones. No problem for tele lenses but fast wides become too big below 35mm. Hence the necessity, soon or late, to sell D lenses IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see a 25/2 and a 60/1.4.

 

Apart from this, apparently the M8 has spawned a regeneration of the film M market, so it is not correct to say that film is dead or that the film M is dead. There is still lots of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This large population of film M owners and users - are they the same owners and users who nearly brought Leica to its knees because they were not buying new lenses?....

 

Film is effectively dead. The future is digital and there is no need, let alone technical feasibility, to have a larger sensor in an M camera. Leica are as aware as anyone of the advantages of smaller, lighter lenses and the M8 opens up the possibility of some very interesting specifications with outstanding performance but only if they are optimised for the 18 x 27mm format.

 

Peter,

Leica's customers may have been guilty of bringing Leica to their knees when they stayed away in droves after the M5 was launched, it was, after all,just what the customers had been asking for. But more recently the problem was all Leica's own, a classic case of producing products that they thought their customers should buy, when their customers were screaming for something else (a digital M...).

I will also beg to differ as regards sensor size. With a few years of using a nikon digital with a 1.5 FOV factor I came, slowly, to the realisation that these smaller sensor formats are a pain because for a given FOV you have to use a wider lens, and hence you get more (apparent) DOF, different perspective and different distortion. Those things may not bother you, but they, as well as the infuriating aspects of the M8's handing are driving me to make more and more use of film, not less!

 

Incidentally isnt it entirely possible that this new engineer might simply be replacing someone who retired, left for a better paid job at Zeiss, or heaven forbid fell under a bus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhere in Solms/Rochester, there will be a view whether the M can ever be used with a bigger sensor. If not, Leica can build on the M by introducing innovative lenses which do not have to render an image outside 18*27mm.

 

 

Mark, didn't you find that the light box in the M8 (space between the battery and the shutter) is simply not full 36mm width? I don't see how that will change to permit full frame.

 

scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark, didn't you find that the light box in the M8 (space between the battery and the shutter) is simply not full 36mm width? I don't see how that will change to permit full frame.

 

scott

 

I too noticed and measured it... no space, and Mark' splendid posted dissasembly of M8 shows clearly that gaining space would be a terrible (and costly issue)... I think that definitely there NOT wil be a Leica M digital FF... unless they would repeat the M5 error (DSLR is another story... R9 is so bulky...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first real article on the 28 Cron Asph is 1/2001, as I already mentioned. The second article, as well as a "how did Leica build it" article come in 7/2001. The optical engineer's name is Michael Heiden, and the mechanical engineer who designed the lens body is Holger Wiegand.

I don't know if anyone is still following this, but apparently there is another followup article on the engineer of the 28/2 in 1/2002.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not 135 Steve ? On classic Leicas it was sold a lot... 13,5 cm was the first Tele for Leica in the '20s (was an Elmar 4,5) and 135s were sold in thousands (good old Hektors are very cheap for this reason) for LTMS and LBMs... many people like using a "real tele" and on the M8 135 surely is... I agree is not the main mission of a Leica, that is basically a "reporter" camera for WA-normal, but we amateurs that plan to use it as universal camera surely appreciate a =180mm FF lens.

 

It seems that the M8 has also attracted many new users and previous DSLR owners. Having longer focal lengths, like the 135, would certainly be appealing to that crowd and may even entice a few more.

Share this post


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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy