Thinking about a 28/35/50 Tri Elmar??

[CamdenJayce]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Back when I was a previous Leica user - in the film days (sold all my leica cameras/lenses in the early '00s) - one of many Leica lenses I owned was the 28/35/50 Tri-Elmar - now, I have discovered, known as a MATE.  I liked the concept but, in practice, didn't use it much, primarily because the fastest B&W film I shot was TriX and the only color film I shot was Velvia.  SO the f4 widest opening was limiting for my usual shooting style.

However, now rejoining Leica after 15 years of absence with a new (to me) M10, I'm thinking that the ISO capability of the camera makes the F4 limitation a non-issue.   I have the same focal lengths in primes but, again, I like carrying a single lens.  It didn't work well for me THEN but it might now.  So I'm wondering how other folks view the Mate/M10 ISO combination and any other issues that may be relevant.  

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

The MATE is an excellent and versatile travel lens, with a vintage character. The performance is similar to Summicrons 3 and 4  35-s. If you want to get the utmost from digital photography there are more modern lenses offering higher performance, but in general I prefer results over specification numbers. I am sorry I sold mine - just before prices exploded.  😡  Get a version two - they have a less fiddly frameline mechanism.

[a.noctilux]

MATE ?

after some years of use, love/hate, I can say that the MATE is THE lens to have/use if only ONE M lens is enough.

have a look here (some features with LV)

It's not the best or the most flaw-free (flare, etc.), but it's unique in M (with the WATE 😏).

nice read here

and much more,

but in the end, trying out the thing is the only way to be sure it's for you.

[michali]

2 hours ago, CamdenJayce said:

Back when I was a previous Leica user - in the film days (sold all my leica cameras/lenses in the early '00s) - one of many Leica lenses I owned was the 28/35/50 Tri-Elmar - now, I have discovered, known as a MATE.  I liked the concept but, in practice, didn't use it much, primarily because the fastest B&W film I shot was TriX and the only color film I shot was Velvia.  SO the f4 widest opening was limiting for my usual shooting style.

However, now rejoining Leica after 15 years of absence with a new (to me) M10, I'm thinking that the ISO capability of the camera makes the F4 limitation a non-issue.   I have the same focal lengths in primes but, again, I like carrying a single lens.  It didn't work well for me THEN but it might now.  So I'm wondering how other folks view the Mate/M10 ISO combination and any other issues that may be relevant.  

I have a vers.1 MATE which  I've used on the M8, M9 & M10. Over the past +13 years it's travelled all over Africa and have used it in Antarctica as well. Faultless.  

Its versatility and not having to change lenses in these kind of environments, far outweighs any minor shortcomings. Some of my favourite images have come from this lens. 

 

[onasj]

I agree totally with the outstanding high-ISO performance of modern M cameras making the downsides of an f/4 lens less limiting.  And you get a bonus undocumented fourth lens built into the MATE: a 40-mm "macro" close-focus lens that is quite useful with a live-view camera:

 

Edited July 23, 2020 by onasj

[Andrew Spackman]

3 hours ago, CamdenJayce said:

Back when I was a previous Leica user - in the film days (sold all my leica cameras/lenses in the early '00s) - one of many Leica lenses I owned was the 28/35/50 Tri-Elmar - now, I have discovered, known as a MATE.  I liked the concept but, in practice, didn't use it much, primarily because the fastest B&W film I shot was TriX and the only color film I shot was Velvia.  SO the f4 widest opening was limiting for my usual shooting style.

However, now rejoining Leica after 15 years of absence with a new (to me) M10, I'm thinking that the ISO capability of the camera makes the F4 limitation a non-issue.   I have the same focal lengths in primes but, again, I like carrying a single lens.  It didn't work well for me THEN but it might now.  So I'm wondering how other folks view the Mate/M10 ISO combination and any other issues that may be relevant.  

I bought a secondhand version two Tri-Elmar in 2005 and it remains my most-used lens. I did send it to Leica for 6-bit coding in 2013 and it's possible they did more work on it than just the coding. 

I have used it on M8, M9 and now M240, as well as film Leicas. It's not perfect (watch out for flare) but minor faults are easily corrected in software. I usually make A3 prints and am very happy with the results.

I have found the lens hood essential! I once dropped my camera bag and the lens hood took all the force of the fall and was mightily distorted. The lens itself seemed fine and it must have been checked by Leica during the subsequent 6-bit coding. And then my new M240 slid off a bench on to the hard floor in an Italian cafe and the replacement lens hood took the force of the fall. Gulp. Well, that was five years ago and I haven't had any problems and even the lens hood survived, though somewhat distorted. So the Tri-Elmar must be more robust than is sometimes suggested.

If I had the M10 I would value the higher ISO capability not least because I could stick with just the Tri-Elmar for the great majority of my outdoor photography. It's really convenient having the instant choice of three focal lengths. (Naturally there are times when one might want the wider aperture on a Summicron or Summilux for the pictorial effect but that's rare in my case.)

Andrew

[Viv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Buy a Q2.

28, 35, 50 and 75 mm crops built in.

[Jeff S]

Leica has hinted at producing a more modern version, but don’t hold your breath.  I’ve owned two, most recently buying one a few years ago.  But I sold it when I acquired a 50 APO, as it wasn’t seeing much use.  The 50mm setting is more flare prone; just be aware. It’s a complex lens, so even better if it has been serviced recently and sold through a reputable dealer with warranty and return policy, as was mine.  

Jeff

[lct]

I don't see the MATE as a vintage lens i must say. Rather like a modern asph lens limited to f/4. I don't use it with M bodies anymore due to its flare issue at 50mm but i re-discovered it on the digital CL where flare is easy to avoid. It has also a hidden close focus position which is fun to use at about 40cm subject distance on the CL (link). Should work also on the M10 in LV mode i guess but i have no experience with it.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Diverse/n-QFBj4/Leica-digital-CL-Leica-28-35-504-v1/i-bFTzX8v/0/49153b89/X5/C1080269_si-X5.jpg

[farnz]

As an alternative you might consider the 21 & 35 Dual-Hexanon-M lens, which is excellent optically, whose build matches Leica lenses, and which bridges the gap between WATE and MATE.

Pete.

[jdlaing]

20 minutes ago, farnz said:

As an alternative you might consider the 21 & 35 Dual-Hexanon-M lens, which is excellent optically, whose build matches Leica lenses, and which bridges the gap between WATE and MATE.

Pete.

Ditto. A fine option.

[a.noctilux]

This one Dual 21-35 ...

 

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!

image of ynp

 

 

 

 

 

[CamdenJayce]

On 7/23/2020 at 12:34 PM, CamdenJayce said:

Back when I was a previous Leica user - in the film days (sold all my leica cameras/lenses in the early '00s) - one of many Leica lenses I owned was the 28/35/50 Tri-Elmar - now, I have discovered, known as a MATE.  I liked the concept but, in practice, didn't use it much, primarily because the fastest B&W film I shot was TriX and the only color film I shot was Velvia.  SO the f4 widest opening was limiting for my usual shooting style.

However, now rejoining Leica after 15 years of absence with a new (to me) M10, I'm thinking that the ISO capability of the camera makes the F4 limitation a non-issue.   I have the same focal lengths in primes but, again, I like carrying a single lens.  It didn't work well for me THEN but it might now.  So I'm wondering how other folks view the Mate/M10 ISO combination and any other issues that may be relevant.  usps tracking showbox speed test

I think that if Fuji were to update the lens on the next rendition it would be awesome to see a true manual focus. I think this would step the X100 up to a level where it is a solid competitor for something like the Leica Q, and it would be neat to see Fuji take up some space in the Leica-esque market. I think that it could really add to the effectiveness of the OVF as well, allowing a classic rangefinder shooting style with zone focusing. I definitely like the idea of having that option.

[farnz]

36 minutes ago, CamdenJayce said:

I think that if Fuji were to update the lens on the next rendition it would be awesome to see a true manual focus. I think this would step the X100 up to a level where it is a solid competitor for something like the Leica Q, and it would be neat to see Fuji take up some space in the Leica-esque market. I think that it could really add to the effectiveness of the OVF as well, allowing a classic rangefinder shooting style with zone focusing. I definitely like the idea of having that option.

I suspect that you might be speaking to the wrong audience.

Pete.

Edited July 25, 2020 by farnz

[Erato]

The MATE could be one of the best candidates for M10-R in terms of architecture and landscape photography, and the tripod is a must-have it seems!

[Gobert]

13 minutes ago, farnz said:

I suspect that you might be speaking to the wrong audience.

Pete.

Probably wrong forum or wannabe Leica M System user.

[jaapv]

56 minutes ago, CamdenJayce said:

I think that if Fuji were to update the lens on the next rendition it would be awesome to see a true manual focus. I think this would step the X100 up to a level where it is a solid competitor for something like the Leica Q, and it would be neat to see Fuji take up some space in the Leica-esque market. I think that it could really add to the effectiveness of the OVF as well, allowing a classic rangefinder shooting style with zone focusing. I definitely like the idea of having that option.

Why should they? There are plenty of standard zooms - the MATE is rangefinder-specific with the focal lengths matched to the framelines.