If you could ask Peter Karbe one question...

[logan2z]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have we reached (or surpassed) the point in modern lens design where the gains in performance are so minimal as to be essentially meaningless to most photographers?  Who do you think is benefiting photographically/artistically from the continued push for higher and higher resolving lenses?

[evikne]

2 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

Like the summarit line?

No, like the Summilux line! I have a lovely 35 and 50 mm Summilux pre-ASPH, but I'm sure there is room for improvements with today's knowledge and technology. 

For the 35mm Summilux I wish:

• Better wide open performance
• 0.7 m MFD

50mm Summilux wish list:

• Improved flare resistance
• Less focus shift

Some new, compact Summicrons would be welcome too!

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

34 minutes ago, logan2z said:

Have we reached (or surpassed) the point in modern lens design where the gains in performance are so minimal as to be essentially meaningless to most photographers?  Who do you think is benefiting photographically/artistically from the continued push for higher and higher resolving lenses?

As a photographer I reached that point many years ago. Even some very old lenses can produce exceptionally good photographs with plenty of detail. You might want to ask a slightly different question and try to find out who any 'improved' ultra high performance lenses are aimed at! 

[pgk]

2 minutes ago, evikne said:

No, like the Summilux line! I have a lovely 35 and 50 mm Summilux pre-ASPH, but I'm sure there is room for improvements with today's knowledge and technology. 

The 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH could not be bettered, when Mandler designed it, with the glass types then available. I would guess that the glass types available today might enable an improvement in performance, but using aspheric elements probably improves performance more. From a lens designer's point of view I would guess that limiting the design to size and glass types would be seen as a compromise. You and I may be happy to accept this but whether sufficient buyers would do so is another question.

[evikne]

10 minutes ago, pgk said:

The 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH could not be bettered, when Mandler designed it, with the glass types then available. I would guess that the glass types available today might enable an improvement in performance, but using aspheric elements probably improves performance more. From a lens designer's point of view I would guess that limiting the design to size and glass types would be seen as a compromise. You and I may be happy to accept this but whether sufficient buyers would do so is another question.

Voigtländer did exactly what I wanted with their 35 mm/1:1.4 Nokton II. I am not talking about a reissue, but a new lens designed from scratch with today's possibilities.

… But unfortunately I am completely faithful to Leica and their lenses. 😄

Edited July 6, 2021 by evikne

[pgk]

3 minutes ago, evikne said:

Voigtländer did exactly what I wanted with their 35 mm/1:1.4 Nokton II. I am not talking about a reissue, but a new lens designed from scratch with today's possibilities.

For Leica it would potentially be a problem if they produced a similarly sized and performing lens which cost a vast amount more. Perfectly possible I would say but whether it would work in marketting terms is quite another question.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The three questions I've always wanted to ask Peter Karbe (pick one as desired):

1) Is it appropriate to design lenses with a concave rear surface (e.g. 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M-ASPH, 75 APO-Summicron-M-ASPH) for use on digital cameras with a highly-reflective imaging surface (i.e. sensor glass, instead of film gelatin)? Does that not risk producing reflected and semi-focused flare (sensor > rear-element > sensor) by "re-imaging" the image on the sensor back onto the sensor, as would any concave "mirror" lens?

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!

I've had both those lenses produce "hot-spot" flares around bright objects against a dark background.

Studio example from the 75 ASMA on M9 - white chicken "reimaged" as a blurred hot-spot in the center.

2) Is it appropriate to design lenses with a rapid fall-off in focus either side of the image plane - IF those lenses are to be used with a "proxy" focusing system such as the M rangefinder, especially when used in rapidly-moving situations (such as journalism/documentary)?

Or would it be better to retain a little spherical aberration and "focus spread" to get "reasonably sharp" images either side of the focus plane, and smooth/extend the transition from sharp to blurry?

3) Equally, on a proxy-focus rangefinder system, with longer lenses (less DoF - 135, 90, 75, fast 50mm).

Is it not better to have a long focus-throw (~180°) for better finger-tip vernier precision, rather than a short-light-rapid (<110°) focus throw?

Edited July 6, 2021 by adan

[logan2z]

28 minutes ago, pgk said:

You might want to ask a slightly different question and try to find out who any 'improved' ultra high performance lenses are aimed at! 

That's what I was getting at, but may not have stated it as clearly as you did.

[Punkrockemo]

I would be tempted to ask why the leica lens are so expensive, doubt I would get a very open response though. Expect he get asked it alot too

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, hdmesa said:

The one question I would ask is in bold below. The others would be backups

Maybe to bypass the new product question by making it a hypothetical:

• Would designing a 28mm APO M lens with a 30cm MFD be more challenging than it was for the 35 APO M?

Some others:

• If you could go back in time and change one thing about one lens you designed, what would it be?
• From all the lenses you have designed, which are you most proud of and which is your favorite to use?
• What M lens from another designer are you secretly jealous of?
• What current lens design challenge do you most hope future technology will solve?

Karbe has addressed the question in bold from the standpoint of his ‘favorite’ lens and his ‘forever’ lens (if he could only choose one to use).  Toward the end of the following discussion, he states that his choice last year was the SL 35, but is now superseded by the 35 M APO Summicron.  
 

 

Karbe offers answers to some of the questions posed in this thread in various hours long video presentations and interviews over the last couple of years. In the one linked above, he and Stefan Janssen (Product Manager/Lenses) each offer some interesting points.  Karbe even slips when he says the 35 APO is ‘future proofed’ for ‘when’ (then changed to ‘if’) Leica offers higher resolution M sensors.

I found it interesting that the product development side of the house (Janssen) didn’t initially spec the 35 APO M Summicron with MFD closer than 70cm… that came later as the technical side offered what was possible, and that became the new spec and build challenge.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

33 minutes ago, adan said:

The three questions I've always wanted to ask Peter Karbe (pick one as desired):

1) Is it appropriate to design lenses with a concave rear surface (e.g. 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M-ASPH, 75 APO-Summicron-M-ASPH) for use on digital cameras with a highly-reflective imaging surface (i.e. sensor glass, instead of film gelatin)? Does that not risk producing reflected and semi-focused flare (sensor > rear-element > sensor) by "re-imaging" the image on the sensor back onto the sensor, as would any concave "mirror" lens?

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!

I've had both those lenses produce "hot-spot" flares around bright objects against a dark background.

Studio example from the 75 ASMA on M9 - white chicken "reimaged" as a blurred hot-spot in the center.

2) Is it appropriate to design lenses with a rapid fall-off in focus either side of the image plane - IF those lenses are to be used with a "proxy" focusing system such as the M rangefinder, especially when used in rapidly-moving situations (such as journalism/documentary)?

Or would it be better to retain a little spherical aberration and "focus spread" to get "reasonably sharp" images either side of the focus plane, and smooth/extend the transition from sharp to blurry?

3) Equally, on a proxy-focus rangefinder system, with longer lenses (less DoF - 135, 90, 75, fast 50mm).

Is it not better to have a long focus-throw (~180°) for better finger-tip vernier precision, rather than a short-light-rapid (<110°) focus throw?

If you personally sent these along, you might not get a public response, but maybe a job interview.

Jeff

[SrMi]

38 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Karbe has addressed the question in bold from the standpoint of his ‘favorite’ lens and his ‘forever’ lens (if he could only choose one to use).  Toward the end of the following discussion, he states that his choice last year was the SL 35, but is now superseded by the 35 M APO Summicron.  

<snip>

Imogen Cunningham said: “Which of my photographs is my favorite? The one I’m going to take tomorrow.”

It is likely the same with Peter Karbe. His favorite lens is the one he is going to design tomorrow :).

[jaapv]

9 hours ago, jankap said:

No answers here, please. 

Is it possible, that new R-lenses will be developed?

 

Even I could answer that one   But he might consider basing lenses on the best R designs in L-AF. 

[Guest BlackBarn]

If you had to choose one non Leica lens …..what would it be?

[Guest]

4 hours ago, evikne said:

No, like the Summilux line! I have a lovely 35 and 50 mm Summilux pre-ASPH, but I'm sure there is room for improvements with today's knowledge and technology. 

For the 35mm Summilux I wish:

• Better wide open performance
• 0.7 m MFD

50mm Summilux wish list:

• Improved flare resistance
• Less focus shift

Some new, compact Summicrons would be welcome too!

Thanks but they would simply be in the same price range as the 35 and 50 apo maybe even more expensive? 

A top performing lens the size of the 35mm pre-asph summilux would be sensational though.

 

[evikne]

6 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

Thanks but they would simply be in the same price range as the 35 and 50 apo maybe even more expensive? 

A top performing lens the size of the 35mm pre-asph summilux would be sensational though.

I am not asking for a top performing lens, only a little better than the old version.

But never mind. I love my 35mm Summilux from 1979 more and more. I don't need anything else.

[laowai_]

I’d be curious to know if Leica is ever considering engineered materials for non-structural parts of the lenses (as opposed to all-metal constriction).

Leica used to be a technology innovator (asph. designs!). Do they see themselves as innovators or have they become a maker follower (I.e. do the same as everybody else but do it better)? So I would line to hear Mr. Karbe’s take on emerging optical technologies such as curved sensors, diffractive optics, liquid lenses, meta-materials/negative refractive index materials.

 

 

[logan2z]

I might change my previous submission to this one:   Can you show us some of your favorite photos you've shot recently?

(You know, the thing that all this crap is supposed to be about? 😁)

[beewee]

4 hours ago, evikne said:

I am not asking for a top performing lens, only a little better than the old version.

Isn’t that just a Sigma?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[otto.f]

17 hours ago, Steven said:

Agreed, this is why I opened his thread. At this point, I still can't think of any interesting, clever, and unexpected question to ask. I doubt I'd be able to ask him more than one or two questions, if any at all. 

The truth is that they asked me two weeks ago to send a question list by email, but I was swamped at work and didn't have time to send anything on time before the deadline. So I don't even know if I'll get any mic time! 

Just count the likes under the posts in this topic. If such a question annoys you, just do it on behalf of some LUF members.