Third-party lenses

[Ornello]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I notice quite a number of third-party lenses being offered for Leica M mount. It would seem that a market exists for R mount lenses, as there are thousands of R-mount cameras. In particular, fast wide angle lenses (such as 21mm f/2.8) were never offered by Leica in R mount, even though Leica offered such lenses in M mount.  Olympus offered a 21mm f/2. I would go for a 21mm f/2 or f/2.8 for R mount. I know it's easier to create such designs with the shorter flange distance of M cameras.

Edited November 30, 2021 by Ornello

[Advertisement]

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

[solareslarrave]

I believe only Angenieux made lenses for the Leica R mount. All of them are well esteemed, but many are so rare it's a lot easier to use Leica glass. 

[Ornello]

7 hours ago, solareslarrave said:

I believe only Angenieux made lenses for the Leica R mount. All of them are well esteemed, but many are so rare it's a lot easier to use Leica glass. 

I know, but what about now?

[a.noctilux]

Now ?

Leica R mount is out of business years ago.

It would be unlikely that someone makes R mount lens again.

 

I have/had used Tamron with R mount (this is interchangeable mount) but no 2.8/21mm lens, only not so bad 17mm and 24mm lenses with Leica R6 or Leicaflex SL.

Olympus Zuiko 2/21mm lens is nice, I used happily for decades with Leica M, when at the same time Leitz offered only 4/21 or 3.4/21mm.

 

 

 

[Ornello]

1 hour ago, a.noctilux said:

Now ?

Leica R mount is out of business years ago.

It would be unlikely that someone makes R mount lens again.

 

I have/had used Tamron with R mount (this is interchangeable mount) but no 2.8/21mm lens, only not so bad 17mm and 24mm lenses with Leica R6 or Leicaflex SL.

Olympus Zuiko 2/21mm lens is nice, I used happily for decades with Leica M, when at the same time Leitz offered only 4/21 or 3.4/21mm.

 

 

 

There are still many Leica R cameras in use, and used lens prices are rising! It would seem that independent makers could easily adapt already existing designs, as for instance was done by Zeiss for the Super-Elmar 15mm, and Schneider for the Super-Elmarit 15mm, and Minolta's lenses in the early 1970s.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Ornello

[Stef63]

4 hours ago, Ornello said:

There are still many Leica R cameras in use, and used lens prices are rising!

R-lens prices are rising not because they can be used on the many R-camera’s (film) but because they can be used today on Leica M and even more on Leica SL camera’s.  It is the other way around.  Film is a dead end as well as R bodies are a dead end, however lenses initially introduced for film camera’s but now usable on digital camera’s are indeed hot.  That is the primary reason for the price increase on R lenses, not the many available R bodies.

And indeed R mount is gone, but the value of it is not the bodies but the lenses.  I have a few and they are a real joy and quality is matching the top Peter Karbe designs for M and SL

 

 

[Ornello]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Stef63 said:

R-lens prices are rising not because they can be used on the many R-camera’s (film) but because they can be used today on Leica M and even more on Leica SL camera’s.  It is the other way around.  Film is a dead end as well as R bodies are a dead end, however lenses initially introduced for film camera’s but now usable on digital camera’s are indeed hot.  That is the primary reason for the price increase on R lenses, not the many available R bodies.

And indeed R mount is gone, but the value of it is not the bodies but the lenses.  I have a few and they are a real joy and quality is matching the top Peter Karbe designs for M and SL

 

 

The point remains that others are making M-mount lenses, and M film cameras are by far in the majority.

[Stef63]

8 hours ago, Ornello said:

The point remains that others are making M-mount lenses, and M film cameras are by far in the majority.

Just for my understanding.  Are you saying that M film cameras are still in the majority in day to day use in 2021 over their digital M brothers?  And by consequence third party M lens makers are targeting film M-users more than M digital users.  I don't think that is true but I might misinterpret what you are saying.

[Ornello]

6 hours ago, Stef63 said:

Just for my understanding.  Are you saying that M film cameras are still in the majority in day to day use in 2021 over their digital M brothers?  And by consequence third party M lens makers are targeting film M-users more than M digital users.  I don't think that is true but I might misinterpret what you are saying.

No, I'm saying that there are far more film M cameras in existence than digital ones.

[wizard]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Ornello:

I'm saying that there are far more film M cameras in existence than digital ones.

That may well be true, but people are not buying lenses just because a camera is still existing. Rather, they buy lenses to use them. That's why a lot of M third party lenses are being made today, because they may be used with modern digital M mount cameras. Note that third party M lenses did almost not exist in the age of M film cameras. Only when digital M cameras came into existence, third party lens makers started to enter the market, too. Of course, some of those new third party M lenses will also be used on M film cameras, but certainly not the majority of them.

[Ornello]

1 hour ago, wizard said:

That may well be true, but people are not buying lenses just because a camera is still existing. Rather, they buy lenses to use them. That's why a lot of M third party lenses are being made today, because they may be used with modern digital M mount cameras. Note that third party M lenses did almost not exist in the age of M film cameras. Only when digital M cameras came into existence, third party lens makers started to enter the market, too. Of course, some of those new third party M lenses will also be used on M film cameras, but certainly not the majority of them.

I would not disagree, but I maintain that making lenses in R mount would be worthwhile (it's just a small change for the most part). The lenses I am talking about are manual-focus lenses from Zeiss, Schneider, and a few others. The lenses already are being sold; just a mount change is all that's needed. Think of the 28mm shift lens from Schneider sold by Leica in the past. It was available for Canon EF, Pentax KAF, Sony/Minolta Alpha, and Nikon F (FX).

Edited December 3, 2021 by Ornello

[masjah]

24 minutes ago, Ornello said:

I would not disagree, but I maintain that making lenses in R mount would be worthwhile (it's just a small change for the most part). The lenses I am talking about are manual-focus lenses from Zeiss, Schneider, and a few others. The lenses already are being sold; just a mount change is all that's needed. Think of the 28mm shift lens from Schneider sold by Leica in the past. It was available for Canon EF, Pentax KAF, Sony/Minolta Alpha, and Nikon F (FX).

But if you're going to do it properly, the "just a mount change" involves the technology for the ROM chip and also the third cam and aperture stop-down mechanism, which is unique to the R system. The thing about the 28 PC is that it really is just a mount, because there is no aperture linkage and the second and third cams are simply fixed, vestigial cams. I suspect the demand would not be there to justify the cost of the more sophisticated linkage unique to the R system. 

[a.noctilux]

R lenses need to close down the aperture (auto in general) just before the taking picture.

The PC-Super-Angulon 28mm that I use for years has no auto closing aperture, only manual closing, so easy to be adapted in different mounts.

Sometimes I replace the R mount with Nikon one, if I fancy using it on Nikon camera.

 

Just recently I have a look at the Leica R rear part lens to understand that can not be easy to make this kind of mount, even without ROM.

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!

taken from here Edited December 3, 2021 by a.noctilux

[Ornello]

4 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

R lenses need to close down the aperture (auto in general) just before the taking picture.

The PC-Super-Angulon 28mm that I use for years has no auto closing aperture, only manual closing, so easy to be adapted in different mounts.

Sometimes I replace the R mount with Nikon one, if I fancy using it on Nikon camera.

 

Just recently I have a look at the Leica R rear part lens to understand that can not be easy to make this kind of mount, even without ROM.

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!

taken from here

So? Leica lenses are expensive too!

[adan]

I think you have the marketplace backwards.

1) People (but not enough, eventually) bought Leica R cameras so that they could use Leica's SLR lenses. If all one wanted was a Tamron or Vivitar (or Voigtlander or TTArtisans), any another camera brand was likely both more advanced and less expensive.

Even in the R's heyday, only a handful of companies (e.g. Angenieux, as mentioned; Tamron T-mount/Adaptall; a few simple tele-converters; or Minolta/Schneider/Sigma/Kyocera-Zeiss (rebranded as "Leica"), bothered to produce lenses to fit an R. And half the time that was because Leitz/Leica were not able to design or build them themselves.

2) Leica-R lenses are themselves now the "third-party lenses" - mostly bought to be used (via adapters) on other brands of camera (SLR or mirrorless) or Leica's own mirrorless cameras (including digital Ms with live-view).

So why would a lens company invest money in making a lens in R-mount (for cameras no longer made) - only for it to be adapted to some other mount in 99% of cases anyway? More profitable to simply make the lens in EOS, or Canon R, or Nikon F or Z, or Leica L or M-mount directly, and sell to the vastly larger market of people who are buying today's cameras.

You might as well ask why no one is making new lenses anymore in: Canon FD mount, Contax/Yashica mount, Minolta SR mount, Zeiss Contarex/Contaflex mount, Topcon mount, Hasselblad V-mount, Bronica 6x6 mount, Pentax 6x7 mount.

The answer is that they are "defunct" as viable markets - just like the R-mount. Even though some were sold in much larger numbers than the R cameras/lenses.

3) The Leica M-mount is quite a bit simpler to reproduce, not just "shorter." It only has one moving connection to the camera - the focus cam. (And even that can be skipped in some cases.)

The R-mount requires mechanisms to: communicate maximum aperture (to avoid stop-down metering); communicate the aperture actually set; and then stop down the lens at the moment of exposure and re-open it after exposure. One can substitute a ROM chip for the first two (but only for the R8/9 - earlier R cameras do not have the necessary contacts). The last requires extra parts (and a camera that can activate them with a lever).

If one is a little "boutique factory" in China (or even Cosina in Japan) an M-mount is relatively easy to assemble - an R-mount is more complex and time-consuming.

Cosina is willing to make a handful of lenses in Nikon F-mount (about as complex as the R) - because there are 10s of millions of Nikon F-mount cameras out there (and still being made), as opposed to maybe 470K (?*) R-Leicas (assuming they all still function). TTArtisans aren't going to waste their limited resources. At least not until the profits from their M-mount lenses will pay for more staff, and a factory upgrade.

*https://www.cameraquest.com/rtype.htm

..................

BTW - Leica themselves designed and made two different 19mm f/2.8 lenses - from 1975 until the end of the system. If that is what you are seeking.

Leica never designed a 21mm for the R of any type (they were Schneider Super-Angulon designs, since Schneider had more experience with wide-field lenses, from their view-camera lenses).

Most of the industry made 20mm f/2.8-3.5 lenses, so Leica decided to beat them all by going 1mm wider at f/2.8. 21mm was "old hat" by the late 1970s.  

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!

 

Edited December 4, 2021 by adan

[pgk]

On 12/2/2021 at 3:43 PM, Ornello said:

There are still many Leica R cameras in use, and used lens prices are rising! It would seem that independent makers could easily adapt already existing designs, as for instance was done by Zeiss for the Super-Elmar 15mm, and Schneider for the Super-Elmarit 15mm, and Minolta's lenses in the early 1970s.

If a maker could make money out of building lenses in R mount today they would be doing so. The fact that they aren't tells us its not an economic proposition.

[Anbaric]

That hardly anyone bothered making lenses in Leica R mount back when the system was live probably tells us all we need to know. Today, the market would be much, much smaller. Anyone who wants a similar experience to a Leica R body with a larger choice of lenses can just pick up a Minolta XD or XE, of course...

[Ornello]

1 hour ago, Anbaric said:

That hardly anyone bothered making lenses in Leica R mount back when the system was live probably tells us all we need to know. Today, the market would be much, much smaller. Anyone who wants a similar experience to a Leica R body with a larger choice of lenses can just pick up a Minolta XD or XE, of course...

Then can you explain why Don Goldberg is inundated with Leicaflex and M film bodies to work on?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

37 minutes ago, Ornello said:

Then can you explain why Don Goldberg is inundated with Leicaflex and M film bodies to work on?

The people who can work on such bodies are getting fewer and fewer, so those who can are busier than ever with repairing the incresaing number of aging bodies needing service and repair. You are looking at things the wrong way around.

[Anbaric]

42 minutes ago, Ornello said:

Then can you explain why Don Goldberg is inundated with Leicaflex and M film bodies to work on?

Perhaps because they need something to mount their Leica lenses on? And the M film bodies are in much greater demand, going for perhaps 5-10x the price of an R body of similar vintage, which says something. If you made a new third-party R lens, what production numbers do you suppose the total global market would justify? Dozens? Three figures at a push? I don't imagine thousands. Leica themselves see no market here, for the lenses or the cameras. Are there third-party lenses in production for any other film-only SLR system? There must be millions of Canon FD and Minolta MD mount bodies out there, with some excellent quality cameras at the high end of the ranges, but does anyone make lenses for them today? People who want to use these systems buy the vintage lenses, as do the much smaller numbers of R users. The R lenses would be a fair bit cheaper than they are if people weren't adapting them to digital (and most still don't go for M prices, so there's less of a niche for cheaper alternatives). If something like this were ever to happen, it would probably need an enthusiast like Mr Kobayashi at Cosina to do it at least partially as a labour of love, like those Voigtlander SC lenses for Contax and Nikon rangefinders they made a few hundred of each (and found hard to shift).