Third-party lenses

[masjah]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, Ornello said:

I assure you I would never be happy with a Leica M camera. They are too restricting. Leica were clueless about how to market the reflex cameras. Autofocus is not essential to reflex systems. I use my SL2s all the time, and rarely have problems with focussing. See here:

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!

A digital camera that could take both manual R lenses and autofocus lenses (without an adapter) would have been better than killing off the R altogether, or perhaps making two models. Used copies of some R lenses have risen to astronomical levels (19mm Elmarits of either type, for instance).

 

I can perfectly well understand why you would not be happy with an M camera. I got an M (240) only because (with an adapter and an EVF2) it was the first viable, though not ideal, digital solution for my R lenses. Having got one, I do now actually enjoy using it as as an M system (I have one M lens) though of course it's not for everyone. I also accept that autofocus may not be essential to reflex systems (it's certainly not essential for my style of photography with essentially static subjects). But for some types of photography (sports/action for example) it is highly desirable. But in any case, few would buy into a manual focus system when autofocus systems were also available. (I would, you would, but not sufficient numbers would.)

Your solution of a digital camera that would take manual R lenses and autofocus lenses would have been wonderful, but totally unaffordable for Leica at the time. Now we have the SL2. If you want two models, we've got two models, one for manual and one for autofocus. What you do is buy two SL2 cameras, and stick an R adapter permanently on one of them. If the SL2 was available back in the day, maybe Leica could have continued with R lenses, and I would have bought one. But it wasn't, and it was a financially impossible proposition for them. Remember, Leica were perilously close to going completely bust.

[Advertisement]

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

[Ornello]

12 hours ago, adan said:

Erwin Puts' Leica Lens Compendium accounts for it very well. The R lens could be larger than the M lens (for the usual reasons, scale to the body, and to avoid blocking the rangefinder windows). A 19mm f/2.8 for the M would have been too big, with 1975-80 technology.

 

How do you explain the 18mm then?

https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/images/18mm/18mm-1050.jpg

Leica has released some 'revivals' such as the Thambar and 28mm 5.6 (in screw thread too?). I'm certain that there was no hue and cry for those! Why not revive the Leicaflex SL2 and some R lenses?

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ornello

[Stef63]

1 hour ago, Ornello said:

Leica has released some 'revivals' such as the Thambar and 28mm 5.6 (in screw thread too?). I'm certain that there was no hue and cry for those! Why not revive the Leicaflex SL2 and some R lenses?

Because the Thambar, the F1 Noctilux and other so called Leica "vintage' M lenses that were recently re-introduced are still very relevant on the current M and SL digital bodies.  A "new film" Leicaflex SL2 has a much much smaler market.  As well as an R lens since there are no native digital bodies anymore.  Leica instead choose the SL mirrorless and L-lens route, which to me is a smart move.  A modern mirrorless FF camera with modern high quality autofocus Leica lenses and third party native L lenses AND proper adapters for those that want to use a vast collection of M, LTM or R lenses in manual focus.   

[Ornello]

9 hours ago, masjah said:

I can perfectly well understand why you would not be happy with an M camera. I got an M (240) only because (with an adapter and an EVF2) it was the first viable, though not ideal, digital solution for my R lenses. Having got one, I do now actually enjoy using it as as an M system (I have one M lens) though of course it's not for everyone. I also accept that autofocus may not be essential to reflex systems (it's certainly not essential for my style of photography with essentially static subjects). But for some types of photography (sports/action for example) it is highly desirable. But in any case, few would buy into a manual focus system when autofocus systems were also available. (I would, you would, but not sufficient numbers would.)

Your solution of a digital camera that would take manual R lenses and autofocus lenses would have been wonderful, but totally unaffordable for Leica at the time. Now we have the SL2. If you want two models, we've got two models, one for manual and one for autofocus. What you do is buy two SL2 cameras, and stick an R adapter permanently on one of them. If the SL2 was available back in the day, maybe Leica could have continued with R lenses, and I would have bought one. But it wasn't, and it was a financially impossible proposition for them. Remember, Leica were perilously close to going completely bust.

Well, Nikon did it!

[adan]

3 hours ago, Ornello said:

How do you explain the 18mm then?

What do you need explained?

The R 19mm v.1, at f/2.8, designed with 1975 technology, was 88mm max. diameter - which would block the RF and viewfinder.

The M 18mm, at f/3.8, designed with 2006 technology, was 61mm max. diameter - which does not block the RF and viewfinder.

Leica needs to limit the size of M lenses to less than a diameter of about 70mm, to maintain RF focusing.

[Ornello]

16 minutes ago, adan said:

What do you need explained?

The R 19mm v.1, at f/2.8, designed with 1975 technology, was 88mm max. diameter - which would block the RF and viewfinder.

The M 18mm, at f/3.8, designed with 2006 technology, was 61mm max. diameter - which does not block the RF and viewfinder.

Leica needs to limit the size of M lenses to less than a diameter of about 70mm, to maintain RF focusing.

So what? My point was that the 19mm R was an anomaly, and the effort should have been directed at making a 21mm f/2.8 for the R. 

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 minutes ago, Ornello said:

So what? My point was that the 19mm R was an anomaly, and the effort should have been directed at making a 21mm f/2.8 for the R. 

OK. When you can own and operate your own lens/camera company, then your points will be the controlling factor.

Leica's management, for whatever reason, decided beating the (1975) 20mm competition by 1-2 silly mm in focal length, was good for them and their market. And it was their company.

But we're getting off your original question, which was why there are no third-party lenses,  made now, for the R System.

No one here is a third-party lens maker. You can post here for the next 50 years, and not change that situation. You have to talk to the lens-makers directly, or you are just spinning your wheels.

[Ornello]

10 minutes ago, adan said:

OK. When you can own and operate your own lens/camera company, then your points will be the controlling factor.

Leica's management, for whatever reason, decided beating the (1975) 20mm competition by 1-2 silly mm in focal length, was good for them and their market. And it was their company.

But we're getting off your original question, which was why there are no third-party lenses,  made now, for the R System.

No one here is a third-party lens maker. You can post here for the next 50 years, and not change that situation. You have to talk to the lens-makers directly, or you are just spinning your wheels.

I was looking at prices for the 19mm Elmarits (both versions) on e-bay. The prices being asked are well over what the Zeiss lenses are selling for. That's my point!

[adan]

How can we help you with that?

[a.noctilux]

2 hours ago, Ornello said:

I was looking at prices for the 19mm Elmarits (both versions) on e-bay. The prices being asked are well over what the Zeiss lenses are selling for. That's my point!

Just curious, I can not help neither.

Or maybe ...hiding solution somewhere.

Can you tell us on which camera this 19mm will be used ?

Edited December 7, 2021 by a.noctilux

[Ornello]

47 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Just curious, I can not help neither.

Or maybe ...hiding solution somewhere.

Can you tell us on which camera this 19mm will be used ?

Huh?

[Stef63]

Dear @Ornello.  It might by just me but I do not follow the way you are driving this discussion.  You make a lot of statements about a lot of things, you make a lot of suggestions about what Leica or third party R lens vendors should do but most of us on this thread are just regular R lens owners who appreciate the R lens quality but accepted a long time ago they are a thing of the past.  I personally do not think I can help you with your quest, whatever that may be.   Nor do I see an economical future for a new film R body, R lenses or third party R lenses etc you are suggesting. 
 

People in this thread tried to help you and were genuinely positive and helpful,  but this discussion is leading nowhere with your type of reactions like the previous one (which in my opinion is not a very polite one). Good luck with your battle, but I will leave it from here. 

[masjah]

I think I too have said all I can say on this topic - I've nothing more to add.

[gargoyle]

From the viewpoint of a rookie to the world of Leica R cameras I found this an interesting and informative discussion. I just purchased a "new" R9 and 2 lenses (21-35 & 35-70). I did my research in advance and realized the limitations I was buying into but thread answered some questions I still had. My question would be that it would be nice if we could adapt non-Leica glass to an R body as a fully manual lens. My Canon 17mm TS that I sold would have been a very sweet lens on the R9. I guess it just goes with the territory. Digital is behind me now it's all just film going forward!

[Sandokan]

@Ornello - your guesses about Leica are barking up the wrong tree. 

One Leica repair person inundated means he has maybe 2 cameras per week to repair, 5 at most. And there are only a few people able to repair them.  Remember Leica were selling many times more M than R systems, so maybe that is 1-2 R per month being repaired? 

Leica R was shut down as a line because they were not being bought as you could buy two Nikon F6 kits for the price of a Leica R9 with lens. If you wanted to use Leica glass, you could buy any camera film body and adapt them. Carry a R9 for a day or a M7 ... easy choice. Going on Safari - buy a R6 with 400, 600 and 1000mm lenses or a R9 with 560mm. 

My local shop sells 1% Leica M film bodies to digital. More film M bodies than digital - where did you get that statistic? 

More film being sold today than ever before? Film sales account for fractions of a percent against the hay-day in the 90's which is why films are being discontinued. BTW - more film was sold to the motion picture industry than SLR users - Km of film were used per feature length film. 

I have >40 film cameras but most of my shooting (especially in the studio) is with one of my 5 digital cameras and there is nothing my M10s cannot do. 

Get the filter adaptor for the 19mm lens - details in this forum if you search. Or make one with a 3D printer. 

[jaapv]

17 hours ago, Ornello said:

How do you explain the 18mm then?

https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/images/18mm/18mm-1050.jpg

Leica has released some 'revivals' such as the Thambar and 28mm 5.6 (in screw thread too?). I'm certain that there was no hue and cry for those! Why not revive the Leicaflex SL2 and some R lenses?

Because Leica would sell approx. five. 

[a.noctilux]

11 hours ago, Ornello said:

Huh?

Well, if you can not tell,

as other, I have nothing to add.

Good "air hunting" then.

[Ornello]

8 hours ago, Sandokan said:

@Ornello - your guesses about Leica are barking up the wrong tree. 

One Leica repair person inundated means he has maybe 2 cameras per week to repair, 5 at most. And there are only a few people able to repair them.  Remember Leica were selling many times more M than R systems, so maybe that is 1-2 R per month being repaired? 

Leica R was shut down as a line because they were not being bought as you could buy two Nikon F6 kits for the price of a Leica R9 with lens. If you wanted to use Leica glass, you could buy any camera film body and adapt them. Carry a R9 for a day or a M7 ... easy choice. Going on Safari - buy a R6 with 400, 600 and 1000mm lenses or a R9 with 560mm. 

My local shop sells 1% Leica M film bodies to digital. More film M bodies than digital - where did you get that statistic? 

More film being sold today than ever before? Film sales account for fractions of a percent against the hay-day in the 90's which is why films are being discontinued. BTW - more film was sold to the motion picture industry than SLR users - Km of film were used per feature length film. 

I have >40 film cameras but most of my shooting (especially in the studio) is with one of my 5 digital cameras and there is nothing my M10s cannot do. 

Get the filter adaptor for the 19mm lens - details in this forum if you search. Or make one with a 3D printer. 

No, Don has told me he has cameras as far as the eye can see. Part of the problem is that Leica have been shut down for COVID, but that's not all there is to it. According to him, Millennials are inheriting and buying older film cameras and want to use them. The 'price' is not the cost. I am still using one of the two Leicaflex SL2s that I bought in 1975 (at one point I sold them both, but re-acquired one of them). Retail was $1200. Divide that by 45 years and it comes out to about $25 per year. Have you seen 45 year old Nikon Fs? The Photomic meters are useless and cannot be fixed.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Ornello

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Ornello]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Because Leica would sell approx. five. 

LOL. They can sell anything they want, if they create a 'special edition'.

[Ornello]

16 hours ago, Stef63 said:

Dear @Ornello.  It might by just me but I do not follow the way you are driving this discussion.  You make a lot of statements about a lot of things, you make a lot of suggestions about what Leica or third party R lens vendors should do but most of us on this thread are just regular R lens owners who appreciate the R lens quality but accepted a long time ago they are a thing of the past.  I personally do not think I can help you with your quest, whatever that may be.   Nor do I see an economical future for a new film R body, R lenses or third party R lenses etc you are suggesting. 
 

People in this thread tried to help you and were genuinely positive and helpful,  but this discussion is leading nowhere with your type of reactions like the previous one (which in my opinion is not a very polite one). Good luck with your battle, but I will leave it from here. 

Well, the rangefinder is 'a thing of the past', manual focus is a thing of the past', too! If the M camera line can be continued, why not the R camera line?

Nikon still makes some manual-focus lenses, and the new Z-mount f/0.95 lens is a manual-focus lens.

It's idiotic for Leica to discontinue R production!

Edited December 8, 2021 by Ornello