The case for a Leica Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 (MATE) successor

[RMF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just recently picked up a late model 49mm 6-bit coded MATE and it’s kind of a game changer for a street lens as long as you use it within its capacity; it really can change the way you approach and pre-visualize photographs when quickly on the move.. to me it adds both another level of complexity (suddenly I have three focal lengths on a whims notice), but it also allows me to quickly photograph a moment with a given lens that I might have been able to if I had one of my primes on.  It’s certainly not the one lens for all, but it really is a nice compliment for those that already have other lenses that cover situations that this lens was not meant for.  Really, one should try it out and you’ll see what I mean 😀.

 

 

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, RMF said:

Just recently picked up a late model 49mm 6-bit coded MATE and it’s kind of a game changer for a street lens as long as you use it within its capacity; it really can change the way you approach and pre-visualize photographs when quickly on the move.. to me it adds both another level of complexity (suddenly I have three focal lengths on a whims notice), but it also allows me to quickly photograph a moment with a given lens that I might have been able to if I had one of my primes on.  It’s certainly not the one lens for all, but it really is a nice compliment for those that already have other lenses that cover situations that this lens was not meant for.  Really, one should try it out and you’ll see what I mean 😀.

 

 

We call this concept a zoom (kind of).  The WATE functions as an actual zoom, albeit without all the frame lines. 
 

Jeff

[RMF]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

We call this concept a zoom (kind of). 
 

Jeff

Correct. Yes, some might call the MATE a ‘zoom-kind of’ but true differences are in the mindset while using it; the full click stops at the three individual focal lengths as well as the sequencing order of 35/50/28 takes it out of the realm that I would typically call a zoom.  The mindset is the key differential in using the MATE compared to a typical zoom, as the lens encourages to be used as three distinct focal lengths. 
 

[Jeff S]

20 minutes ago, RMF said:

Correct. Yes, some might call the MATE a ‘zoom-kind of’ but true differences are in the mindset while using it; the full click stops at the three individual focal lengths as well as the sequencing order of 35/50/28 takes it out of the realm that I would typically call a zoom.  The mindset is the key differential in using the MATE compared to a typical zoom, as the lens encourages to be used as three distinct focal lengths. 
 

Plus a kind of macro function at about 40mm setting.

Jeff

[lct]

+1 and a true zoom would remain in focus not only at each focal length but also in between them.

[Jeff S]

Like the WATE, as noted.

Jeff

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, RMF said:

Correct. Yes, some might call the MATE a ‘zoom-kind of’ but true differences are in the mindset while using it; the full click stops at the three individual focal lengths as well as the sequencing order of 35/50/28 takes it out of the realm that I would typically call a zoom.  The mindset is the key differential in using the MATE compared to a typical zoom, as the lens encourages to be used as three distinct focal lengths. 
 

The wise word for using MATE is indeed mindset.

I had never thought that why the MATE is "three in one mindset".

Now when I think of it, I use to set one of the three focal lengths before taking the M to eye level ( kind of "prevision" !).

 

Thanks RMF for this.

[roydonian]

I have found this lens to be a handy combination of focal lengths, but very prone to flare. Perhaps a redesigned version might be better in this respect.

[Jeff S]

8 minutes ago, roydonian said:

I have found this lens to be a handy combination of focal lengths, but very prone to flare. Perhaps a redesigned version might be better in this respect.

Notably at 50mm.

[roydonian]

That would make sense. I initially used the MATE on my M8.2, but rarely used the 50mm setting. But with the M-9P, I started using the Tri-Elmar regularly at 50mm. And it was with the M9-P that the flare problem became noticeable (despite Erwin Puts' claim that in the Tri-Elmar "Flare is very well controlled").

I have seen reports that in some cases sending the lens back to Leica has resulted in an improvement, but some who have done this report no improvement.

I asked Leica Mayfair about the possibility of sending it back, but they basically shrugged their shoulders, saying "It's an old lens". I guess that people in their 30s or 40s have a different perspective on the concept of 'old'. My idea of an old lens is my prewar 5cm Elmar (made five years before I was born), or my retractable 5cm Summicron (made when I was an early teenager), but not a Tri-Elmar made 25 years ago.

 

[lct]

The MATE is an asph lens, hence not an old lens in my book but i guess Leica is not keen to do intensive works on it, given its complexity. BTW about flare at 50mm, the 12592 accessory hood can do little difference but making shade with the hand can help a lot. Shooting in LV mode can help to preview flare too. MATE v1 with & without hand shade @ 50mm below.

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!

 

[roydonian]

As a working journalist, I've got better things to do than waving my hand around in the hope of shading the lens, especially if I'm covering a news event. I've never seen rivals who use other brands of camera and/or lens having to do this. In any case, since none of my M-series cameras have live view, shading the lens manually is not a practical option.

The front surface of a digital sensor is much more reflective than film emulsion, so causes light to enter the lens in the opposite direction to normal, a situation that could create flare. The MATE may have been viable for film-based cameras, but seems to be less viable in the digital era. This may have been a factor in Leica's decision to end MATE production soon after the introduction of the M8.

[lct]

Not sure flare issues are new to digital but i had no experience with the MATE in the film days. Some typical flare situations are not unusual at Leica i.e. when strong light sources like the sun stand ouside the frame. Similar issues with the "thin" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, the Apo-Telyt 135/3.4 or the Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5. Here MATE at 50mm again.

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!

[Carlos cruz]

13 minutes ago, lct said:

Not sure flare issues are new to digital but i had no experience with the MATE in the film days. Some typical flare situations are not unusual at Leica i.e. when strong light sources like the sun stand ouside the frame. Similar issues with the "thin" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, the Apo-Telyt 135/3.4 or the Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5. Here MATE at 50mm again.

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!

 

2 hours ago, roydonian said:

As a working journalist, I've got better things to do than waving my hand around in the hope of shading the lens, especially if I'm covering a news event. I've never seen rivals who use other brands of camera and/or lens having to do this. In any case, since none of my M-series cameras have live view, shading the lens manually is not a practical option.

In most situations proper lens hood should do the job. The problem is that most lens hoods sizes are rather loosely correlated to focal lengths, it’s typical to have hoods that cover span of 35 mm to 50 or 90 to 135. It certainly saves some cash on both ends, but such hoods with wider lenses, where we should have hood almost creep into picture area  is still a bit too loose. My explanation for it is lens “breathing”, that was taken into account.  With live view we can now see how lenses marginally differ in actual focal length depending on focus. Solution may seem simple -floating elements to correct “breathing” , it never was big issue for photography especially with rangefinders, and costly. With zoom lenses it’s rather obvious that you can properly cover the wider end with fixed lens hood, leaving longer focal lengths to fend for themselves. I remember there was FIKUS hood but probably no one wanted to have to adjust the hood with every lens swap. Mechanically self adjusting lens hood sounds like exemplary over engineering. So it’s either you waving your hand or flares, at least with SLRs you have a chance to see if you actually are shading the lens or covering half of the frame.

[lct]

2 hours ago, Carlos cruz said:

it’s either you waving your hand or flares

Or use a real hood... Hard to imagine on the MATE though 😉

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!

[Kiwimac]

The MATE is a great travel lens. 
 

The f4 maximum is a little constraining in terms of bokeh but most travel images typically contain context rather than a blur of background so not a fatal restriction in my view. 
 

[lct]

On 6/14/2025 at 4:17 AM, Kiwimac said:

The f4 maximum is a little constraining in terms of bokeh [...]

The MATE's hidden close focus setting can help. Here on digital CL.

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!