What M lens is missing - what lens should Leica invent soon?

[Michael Geschlecht]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Everybody,

67mm is a misprint in the WIKI at the top of this page. Andy's measurement of 62mm flange to the front of the lens is accurate.

Best Regards,

Michael

[UliWer]

vor 35 Minuten schrieb pippy:

...if greater accuracy is required....

No certainly not😀! Seems as if the thin version was as short as the fat one. My 1:4/90mm C-Elmar measures 61mm. 

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

I don't have the fat Tele-Elmarit 90mm, but have the 'thin' TE comparision with the Elmarit 90mm, and Summarit-M 2.5/75mm at hand,

about the same size as my 'calibrated shell' 😉 (it's a joke)

 

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!

 

[pippy]

26 minutes ago, UliWer said:

No certainly not😀! Seems as if the thin version was as short as the fat one. My 1:4/90mm C-Elmar measures 61mm. 

Yes; in fact this measuring exercise has been interesting all round.

The f2.8 Tele-Elmarits are both (to all intents) the same length; the 1-stop-slower f4 C-Elmar version is only 1mm shorter and (the biggest surprise for me) the (approximately) 1/2 stop faster f2.5 (and near-identical f2.4) design - with, clearly, a considerable nod to the 'Style' side of things included as part of the remit - was only 5mm longer (Beauty-Ring included) than the f2.8 designs.

Says a lot for the now-discontinued Summarit range of lenses.....

Philip.

Edited February 2, 2021 by pippy

[a.noctilux]

New type of Berg Elmar ?

maybe changed to 135mm and with new technology of now, this lens must weight not much than 100g *.

I would buy one to always have it in my flat pocket ( the Macro-Elmar-M 4/90 is almost there, but only 90mm and needing some cropping  ! )

* my 135 TE is 550g, I can dream

Edited February 2, 2021 by a.noctilux

[Guest]

Given the EVF options in the M system, my vote goes to an Apo-Telyt-M or Apo-Elmarit-M 180mm with 1.4 and 2x Apo-Extender-M.

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 12 Minuten schrieb a.noctilux:

New type of Berg Elmar ?

Yes, if you are really looking for gaps in the line of M-lenses you'll only find it at 105mm. Though there you'll need additional frames. I tried the Berg-Elmar by using the frames for 90mm - not really good, as you always keep thinking too big. 

With liveview it would work, you also could go rather wide then. 1:2.5/105mm could be interesting - though I fear Dr. Kaufmann would have to buy the ailing Nikon Company before we'd see something like this with the Leica brand on it. (In the meantime you might find old Nipon Kogaku lenses with 1:2.5/105mm and 39mm screwmount - and good they are). 

135mm could be achieved by an 1.5 Apo-Extender for the new tiny Tele-Elmarit Apo. Asph. 1:2.8/90 filling an even tinier gap, so you could get an 1:4.2/135 Apo-Apo.Asph Telyt. Leitz even made experiments with an extender for the Tele-Elmarit, but they didn't realize it (there was no Forum at the time). . 

  

 

[UliWer]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb Joachim_I:

Apo-Telyt-M

I already have one with 180mm and Apo-Extender - it's an R-lens you get for 600,- €. Add the price for the R-to-M-Adapter and the Extender. If they wanted to improve it, it would cost ten times as much. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, UliWer said:

I already have one with 180mm and Apo-Extender - it's an R-lens you get for 600,- €. Add the price for the R-to-M-Adapter and the Extender. If they wanted to improve it, it would cost ten times as much. 

Finding one in top condition becomes more and more difficult. An improved close focus distance would be highly desirable for my purposes.

[BradS]

My initial thought was I’d like to see them re-imagine the collapsible 5cm Summicron-M . Same basic lens as the original from ca. 1960 but with modern glass and coatings (ie not soft as chalk!). Nothing fancy just excellent, compact, lightweight and not stupid expensive  

but I’d really just like to see Leica firmly committed to running the company as a sustainable, on-going enterprise. Presently, it seems like management are trying to squeeze as much short term revenue and profit as possible without much concern for how long it can continue. 

[Mr.Prime]

52 minutes ago, BradS said:

Presently, it seems like management are trying to squeeze as much short term revenue and profit as possible without much concern for how long it can continue. 

Well, apart from the fact that companies exist to maximize shareholder returns this is also the behaviour of a company that wants to be acquired for the highest price they can get

[105012]

A new Tele-Elmarit 90mm f/2.8 "thin" with 1.5x teleconverter (to make a 135mm f/4) would get my $. Must be e39, of course.

[pgk]

8 hours ago, pippy said:

Yes; in fact this measuring exercise has been interesting all round.

It has. I think that I've owned all the f/2.8 versions except the Summarit (which appeals) at one time or another. Anything smaller than the lightweight (which I'm using at the moment) would be a great lens if the image 'quality' could match or exceed the Summarit and Emarit-M or even be on a par with the Apo-Summicron. That would be an 'invention' worth having.

[BradS]

I still don’t understand why Leica discontinued the (modern) Summarits. Especially the 50mm and 35mm. 
 

Why is Cosina able to make and sell all manner of excellent, reasonably priced lenses but not Leica? 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, BradS said:

I still don’t understand why Leica discontinued the (modern) Summarits. Especially the 50mm and 35mm. 
 

Why is Cosina able to make and sell all manner of excellent, reasonably priced lenses but not Leica? 

The answer has to be that the summarit's  did not sell and that cosina use modern production technique combined with cheaper labour cost.

Maybe?

 

[BradS]

54 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

The answer has to be that the summarit's  did not sell and that cosina use modern production technique combined with cheaper labour cost.

Maybe?

 

I honestly do not know. Labor in Japan is far from cheap and Leica surely have the same modern production equipment and methods available to them so...??? 
 

It does seem safe to assume that Leica were not able to produce the summarit at a profit that corporate management thought necessary and sufficient. 
 

but that begs the question...why? 
 

why can’t they make an excellent, compact, reasonably priced normal lens? 

Edited February 2, 2021 by BradS
Auto spell correct is f’ing up!

[Al Brown]

7 minutes ago, BradS said:

why can’t they make an excellent, compact, reasonably priced normal lens? 

They can but they won't. So simple.

[BradS]

4 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

They can but they won't. So simple.

Well, except that they apparently tried and failed....which is more like, can’t. 

[lct]

Only way to compete at same price levels would be to stick a red dot on lenses made by others. Same as Zeiss besides the color of the dot . 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[BradS]

1 minute ago, lct said:

Only way to compete at same price levels would be to stick a red dot on lenses made by others. Same as Zeiss besides the color of the dot . 

Which also implies that Leica cannot...which seems very unlikely to me but maybe you know why they cannot compete?