Will Leica make a 40mm M-Mount Lens?

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica seems to be introducing to market more close focus lenses suited to an EVF. This certainly points to the possibility of them introducing an EVF camera with a native M mount down the road.

With this, I am wondering if there could be a possibility for Leica to re-look at the 40mm focal length and possibly introduce one.

[michali]

2 hours ago, rramesh said:

Leica seems to be introducing to market more close focus lenses suited to an EVF. This certainly points to the possibility of them introducing an EVF camera with a native M mount down the road.

With this, I am wondering if there could be a possibility for Leica to re-look at the 40mm focal length and possibly introduce one.

There was the Summicron 40mm f2 in M mount which was made for the CL. It's still one of my favourite lenses on my M cameras, compact with excellent IQ. It doesn't trigger the frame lines, but no big deal. I seem to remember reading somewhere that if you use an EVF (I don't) it brings up the 40mm frame. 

Abandoned whaling station Antarctica -  M9 & 40mm Summicron

(please click on image for better res.)

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!

[Pyrogallol]

Voigtlander has a nice new 40mm lens in M or screw fit.

 

[rramesh]

Yes, the Summicron 40 is amazing. I was close to buying one till the seller changed his mind. Still looking but was wondering if a 40 is on the Leica roadmap.

Edited December 22, 2022 by rramesh

[FrozenInTime]

There is also the superb Voigtländer 40/1.2 which is very compact for its speed.

 

[FrozenInTime]

2 minutes ago, rramesh said:

Yes, the Summicron 40 is amazing. I was close to buying one till the seller changed his mind. Still looking but was wondering if a 40 is on the Leica roadmap.

I doubt Leica will make a M 40mm themselves because of the legacy M series mechanical frame lines. The CL was an oddball for them.

A compact L-mount or Q3 variant 40mm would have higher probabilities. 

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

51 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

I doubt Leica will make a M 40mm themselves because of the legacy M series mechanical frame lines. The CL was an oddball for them.

Then it begs the question as why Leica is making close focus M mount lenses. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by rramesh

[sometimesmaybe]

54 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

Q3 variant 40mm

i hope so, because it wont cannibalise their 35mm or 50mm sales 🤞

[Guest]

6 hours ago, rramesh said:

This certainly points to the possibility of them introducing an EVF camera with a native M mount down the road.

If that happens, I hope Leica produces a macro lens with M mount that reaches 1:1 without extension tube or achromat. Not holding my breath yet.

40mm? 35mm seems close enough, at least for me.

[cboy]

Its high time that Leica actually made a faithful FF digital successor to the film CL with built in EVF. But it would be more of a pipe dream i feel as it may cannibalize Leica M sales.

Edited December 22, 2022 by cboy

[jukka]

5 hours ago, rramesh said:

Then it begs the question as why Leica is making close focus M mount lenses. 

Sorry, I may have missed something but why does this beg the question, that is, what is the connection between the 40mm focal length and close focus/evf? 

[Jeff S]

11 minutes ago, jukka said:

Sorry, I may have missed something but why does this beg the question, that is, what is the connection between the 40mm focal length and close focus/evf? 

The RF is not coupled for the new close focus distances, therefore requiring LV/EVF viewing.  The RF/VF also doesn’t provide 40mm frame lines, similarly requiring EVF or alternative viewing method for best accuracy.

Jeff

[dpitt]

My primary reason to buy one at the time was that it was one of the cheapest lenses wider than 50mm for my M8.

 The Summicron 40 C brings up the 50mm frame lines, which I do not find very helpful.  My version has been modifiied to bring up the 35 mm frame which is near ideal, framing just inside the frame will nail it.

If Leica would release a newer version it would surely not have the same old style of smooth lower contrast rendering, so I do not really see the point in deviating from the standard set of frames...

I must admit that I use the 40 a lot on the M9 as a compromise between 35 and 50, but with the cropping possibilities of high resolution sensors in the newer M’s the choice for 35mm as an alrounder is more evident.

Does anyone feel the 40mm FOV has that much advantage compared to 35 or 50 like the setup is now?

[jukka]

45 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The RF is not coupled for the new close focus distances, therefore requiring LV/EVF viewing.  The RF/VF also doesn’t provide 40mm frame lines, similarly requiring EVF or alternative viewing method for best accuracy.

Jeff

Yeah, but the question was why Leica makes close focus lenses (given that they are not likely to produce another 40 m lens), no? 

Well, Leica makes close focus lenses due to capabilities of live view in M, visoflex, and sl-series. 

Maybe this is splitting hairs but I don’t see the connection to 40 mm focal length here 🙂

 

[grahamc]

My theory is that It's not in Leica's interest to release anything as good as the 40:2 , or to offer 40mm framelines (which would tempt people to buy it).  Either move would mean demand for their "also rans" (aka the 35 and 50 crons) would inevitably plummet. 

 

Edited December 22, 2022 by grahamc

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, jukka said:

Yeah, but the question was why Leica makes close focus lenses (given that they are not likely to produce another 40 m lens), no? 

Well, Leica makes close focus lenses due to capabilities of live view in M, visoflex, and sl-series. 

Maybe this is splitting hairs but I don’t see the connection to 40 mm focal length here 🙂

 

The question was prompted by post #6, which stated that a 40mm M lens was unlikely due to lack of corresponding frame lines, instead requiring EVF.  Post #8 draws the parallel question that, if EVF viewing is a deal breaker, why did Leica produce close focusing lenses, which also require it. A 40mm M lens could similarly be used with LV, EVF or on SL.

Jeff

[jukka]

35 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

The question was prompted by post #6, which stated that a 40mm M lens was unlikely due to lack of corresponding frame lines, instead requiring EVF.  Post #8 draws the parallel question that, if EVF viewing is a deal breaker, why did Leica produce close focusing lenses, which also require it. A 40mm M lens could similarly be used with LV, EVF or on SL.

Jeff

Yes, but a couple of points; EVF viewing is hardly a deal breaker and adding close focus capability to existing lenses is precisely due to modern M-cameras having EVF capabilities. 

The c-40 summicron and the cl were produced to differentiate a cheaper product from the m-line – simple as that. This has also been the reason for Voigtlander to add the 40mm to their product line.

No connection between these two issues. Just saying – and probably going to go find something else to do now 

Ps. And just to highlight the point; existing close focus focal lengths can be used in m-bodies without EVF capability – a potential 40mm could not.  

Edited December 22, 2022 by jukka

[Jeff S]

16 minutes ago, jukka said:

Yes, but a couple of points; EVF viewing is hardly a deal breaker and adding close focus capability to existing lenses is precisely due to modern M-cameras having EVF capabilities. 

 

You misunderstood…again.  In post #6, it was said that the 40mm wasn’t likely because it would require EVF, which means that HE THINKS that the EVF would be a deal breaker in terms of making a 40mm M lens. Post # 8 pointed out that the EVF certainly wasn’t a deal breaker when it came to close focus lenses, so why should it be one for the 40mm.  You are in violent agreement.

Jeff

Edited December 22, 2022 by Jeff S

[jukka]

2 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

You misunderstood…again.  In post #6, it was said that the 40mm wasn’t likely because it would require EVF, which means that EVF would be a deal breaker in terms of making a 40mm M lens. Post # 8 pointed out that the EVF certainly wasn’t a deal breaker when it came to close focus lenses, so why should it be one for the 40mm.  You are in violent agreement.

Jeff

This is the most confusing discussion So, help me out here.

In post #6 it was said that "because of the legacy M series mechanical frame lines", not because the 40mm would require EVF.

In post #8 it was then asked: "Then it begs the question as why Leica is making close focus M mount lenses."

Again, I don't understand why the statement in post #6 would prompt the question presented in post #8. A forty could not be (properly) used in Leicas current film m-bodies, thus it is not likely that they will be making one. This has very little to do with EVFs that have enabled the development of close focus capabilities to Leicas current lens line up (that can be used in current film m-bodies).

Sure, EVF would – indeed – enable the precise use of a forty, but that is beside the point, from the perspective of Leica.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[BradS]

I don't understand the logic here either.   Makes no sense at all to me. 

However, I see absolutely no reason for Leica to produce a 40mm M-mount lens today and there seem to be many very good reasons for Leica to NOT make a 40mm M-mount lens today.