Is there any real difference between these two lenses ?

[reven]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

is there a quality difference between the old and new 28-35-50 ?

 

Also which one is the new and old one ?

 

Thanks for teh help.

[marknorton]

I have both...

 

There's no difference optically, but the second generation one has the following changes:

 

- Tab added to focussing ring

- Zig-Zag Depth of field markings

- Narrower lens barrel, 55mm down to 49mm

- Different standard lens hood, 12592 for the first generation lens, 12450 for the second generation lens - both ludicrously expensive

- 12592 has a rubber lens hood cap (like the 21 and 24 Elmarits), 12450 does not

- Improved click stop action of the focal length setting ring.

[Guest]

It may be worth adding to Mark,s very comprehensive list about £500.Two have been sold this week by Ffordes £995 and £1499 for the later version

Brian

[Daniel Ortego]

I have both...

 

There's no difference optically, but the second generation one has the following changes...

 

Sounds like a great lens and I wonder if I would have been better off trying to find one like that instead of purchasing Leica primes of 21, 28 and 50.

Regards,

[Guest]

Hello Daniel

The MATE 28/35/50 tri elmar is 35/50/67on the M8. To cover 21/24/28 you would also need the WATE 16/18/21. I have both and find them very good in good light .Its in poor light when I use primes.Its all about the type of work you do.Their is as usual no simple answer that suits all people.

BrianP

[marknorton]

Yes, I paid £1450 for my used (but mint) second version from ffordes, almost exactly the same as the £1456 I paid in May 1999 for the new first version. Then there's £116 for the hood and the cost of getting it to Solms for coding and the cost of coding... It all mounts up!

 

I was actually pleased to get it at that price though; unless Leica come out with a replacement (which they claim is not planned), I think the lens will become increasingly sought after.

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sounds like a great lens and I wonder if I would have been better off trying to find one like that instead of purchasing Leica primes of 21, 28 and 50.

Regards,

 

No, the primes are better for most photographers.

[marknorton]

I agree, the primes are better and a set of 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/2 (say) will do better and give you 1 or 2 extra stops speed. That doesn't stop the TE being a useful lens and it's a pity it's gone.

[Daniel Ortego]

I agree, the primes are better and a set of 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/2 (say) will do better and give you 1 or 2 extra stops speed. That doesn't stop the TE being a useful lens and it's a pity it's gone.

 

Actually, I opted and already have, a new 28-Cron' with a 50-Lux' on the way. My third lens may likely be a 21-Elmarit. In short, I enjoy street and architectural interiors, and full-frame body shots. Perhaps the MATE isn't really something I should consider.

Regards,

[marknorton]

I have each of those three as well and they are in a different performance league as well as being a wider focal length range and 1 - 3 stops faster. That said, each costs nearly as much as - or more than - the MATE when it was made so they should be better.