Brand new close focus Summilux-M 50 f/1.4 ASPH

[kinetic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, JeffWright said:

The primary limitation is that of the parallax problem- the closer you get to the subject the bigger the difference between what is seen by the lens by what is seen through the viewfinder. It's been a long time since I've had naked rangefinder parts in front of me, but I suspect there are mechanical issues potentially as well with the actual rangefinder mechanism, but those could probably be overcome.

I don't know how it works, but I'm hoping they will update the rangefinder over just using an EVF. EVF focusing is really challenging to me. The focus peeking and highlighting is just too slow.

[Advertisement]

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

[kinetic]

2 hours ago, darkspark said:

I'm also eagerly waiting for early reviews on this. I already put down my name for it at my local Leica dealer.

How did you put your name down? It wasn't even announced yet?

[Segal]

On 4/9/2023 at 10:33 AM, Al Brown said:

Most likely as big of an improvement in IQ as the old FLE vs. the new FLE II... 😁

I know it's not scientific, but I get noticeably better environmental portraits with the new FLE II - I guess better bokeh helps. I am looking forward to the new 50 mm, even though I have the previous one  

[Al Brown]

21 minutes ago, Segal said:

I guess better bokeh helps.

At what f-stop are you getting better portraits?

[derleicaman]

19 hours ago, kinetic said:

I’m new to rangefinders, but why would a EVF be needed over a rangefinder that can handle closer focus?

I really love the rangefinder, and I’d rather have one that could handle the closer focus. But maybe there’s a mechanical limitation?

Yes, there is a mechanical limitation. This is all part of the inherant limitations in the design and principal of the optical viewfinder/rangefinder the M camera uses. Part of it involves the rangefinder base, which is the distance between the primary viewing window and the secondary window (the small one on the left, as you look at the camera). The wider the base, the more accurate the rangefinder is. This is why the original Contax RF cameras had more accurate focusing than the Leica II and III cameras Zeiss was competing with. Obviously, the size of the camera is a limiting factor here. Also, the viewfinder magnification plays a part here. The lower the magnification, the less accurate the rangefinder is. That is also why the M3 at .9 magnification is the most accurate M for focusing. The .7 and .72 x magnification of most other M cameras makes them less accurate as well. .58 x is taking it to the other extreme, but in those days, .58 x was to accomodate wider angle lenses that had apertures of 2.8 but not faster, and more inherant depth of field to accomodate focusing error. Leica setteld on .7 meters as the minimum focusing distance back in M3 days as the best compromise for the RF system. To get closer focus, you needed to resort to auxillary finders like the Dual Range Summicron, or the close focusing attachment for the 90/4 Macro Elmar.

Reflex cameras of course, do net need to resort to these other measures, and can focus much closer. But you pay a price in bulk, etc. which is one of the things that make the M experience so enjoyable. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by derleicaman

[Jeff S]

I’ll happily continue to use both my 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE) and 50 Summilux ASPH. Both are dialed in for my rendering needs and RF-only use. In fact, I see the added mechanical complexity, and lack of hard focus stop at 70cm, as unnecessary downsides in these new lenses.

Jeff

Edited April 10, 2023 by Jeff S

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

19 hours ago, kinetic said:

I’m new to rangefinders, but why would a EVF be needed over a rangefinder that can handle closer focus?

I really love the rangefinder, and I’d rather have one that could handle the closer focus. But maybe there’s a mechanical limitation?

Another challenge would be that it would not work with any lens older than it. The vast majority of M lenses focus between .7 and 1m, and their mount is ground such that the roller cam in the camera properly reads the distance. You might be able to design a rangefinder that focuses closer, (as far as I remember, the Zeiss Ikon went to .5m), but it would only work on lenses designed to support it...probably would not work on the close focus m lenses either, as they were designed to be used with live view, evf, or special goggles.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[Kwesi]

I too am looking forward to this new lens but I have to confess its going t be very hard to give up my black chrome version

[derleicaman]

6 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Another challenge would be that it would not work with any lens older than it. The vast majority of M lenses focus between .7 and 1m, and their mount is ground such that the roller cam in the camera properly reads the distance. You might be able to design a rangefinder that focuses closer, (as far as I remember, the Zeiss Ikon went to .5m), but it would only work on lenses design to support it...probably would not work on the close focus m lenses either, as they were designed to be used with live view, evf, or special goggles.

You are absolutely right Stuart. I forgot to take into account the cam, cam angle and follower as far as ability and limitation to minimum focusing distance.

[Stuart Richardson]

Maybe you could send it in for a mount change, like they did when they introduced the six bit coding, but I have a feeling Leica is not looking to create that kind of work for itself these days...my guess is they will say, "that is what the visoflex is for". Also, as the magnifcation increases, so does the need for precise tolerances, so my guess is that making a rangefinder focus super accurately at 50mm f.95 or 75mm 1.25 at 60mp an is already asking a lot, but trying to do it at .45m? Rangefinders were really designed for "normal" lenses and "normal" distances. The more you strain them, the less accurate they are. That is why SLR's were king for macro and telephoto for so long.

[John Smith]

29 minutes ago, Kwesi said:

I too am looking forward to this new lens but I have to confess its going t be very hard to give up my black chrome version

I can't wait to trade in my silver chrome version. Way too heavy.

 

[kinetic]

14 minutes ago, John Smith said:

I can't wait to trade in my silver chrome version. Way too heavy.

 

I love the look and feel of the black chrome, but I do think it would be nice to have a lighter lens (especially on my black M11)

[Kwesi]

16 minutes ago, kinetic said:

I love the look and feel of the black chrome, but I do think it would be nice to have a lighter lens (especially on my black M11)

I went from the standard version to the black chrome a few years ago and while I agree its quite heavy, especially when coupled to a silver chrome M11, everything about how the lens operates just feels so good. Not to mention the fact that it knows me well enough to find focus for me wide open even in the toughest of situations.

[kinetic]

10 minutes ago, Kwesi said:

I went from the standard version to the black chrome a few years ago and while I agree its quite heavy, especially when coupled to a silver chrome M11, everything about how the lens operates just feels so good. Not to mention the fact that it knows me well enough to find focus for me wide open even in the toughest of situations.

Yeah I can see it pairing well with the silver m11!

[derleicaman]

1 hour ago, Kwesi said:

I went from the standard version to the black chrome a few years ago and while I agree its quite heavy, especially when coupled to a silver chrome M11, everything about how the lens operates just feels so good. Not to mention the fact that it knows me well enough to find focus for me wide open even in the toughest of situations.

The Black Chrome version of the Summilux is an off shoot of the lens I specified for the LHSA MP3 kit. The heavy brass lens body was Leica's way of accomplishing the "classic" look of the lens, based on the original Summilux 50 with its beautiful scalloped focusing ring. The LHSA and BC versions are much heavier than the original Summilux lens, and it is slightly larger than that lens as well. Until you hold the lens in your hand, you don't realize how heavy it is. The heavier mount also dampens the focusing action and enhances the feel as well, and this lens does not have the complaints in this regard that the original 50 Summilux ASPH has had. I have a BC version of the lens as well, and it is a lump to carry around! But look at the results you get with it, and the wonderful haptics, and it is well worth it!

Edited April 10, 2023 by derleicaman

[Segal]

5 hours ago, Al Brown said:

At what f-stop are you getting better portraits?

I use 1.4 to 2.8 for portraits most of the time.

[darkspark]

7 hours ago, kinetic said:

How did you put your name down? It wasn't even announced yet?

I'd try calling or contacting your smaller Leica dealers/camera stores. Big retailers will wait for the official announcement first, but for a relatively smaller market (especially if you have somewhat of a professional relationship with your local dealer) you can usually tell your dealer that you are interested. Normally they wouldn't confirm or deny any rumors, but would take your name down for a potential customer.

Then I would contact them again as soon as the product is announced, to make sure that I'm on the actual preorder list with them.

[darkspark]

The new 50lux with the new M11 Mono

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mediumformula]

It looks wider than the current 50 Lux Asph.  The new one looks wider than the lens mount whereas the current 50 Lux barrel is the same width as the lens mount.   Personally, the only reason I could see wanting to update would be for a smaller, lighter 50 Lux. 

[Al Brown]

5 hours ago, Segal said:

I use 1.4 to 2.8 for portraits most of the time.

At f/1.4 wide open the bokeh of FLE II is identical to the old FLE - all the diaphragm blades are wide open, so no difference whatsoever between the two regardless of two extra blades on the II (as confirmed by Leica, Jono Slack etc. etc.)