Which M lens would you like to see made close focusing next?

[wolan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica is slowly adding close-focusing capabilities to its lens line-up.

I hope the next one after the 35mm Summicron and the 50mm Summilux will be the 75mm Summicron, I'd not hesitate upgrading mine. I'd also welcome a 28mm f2 CF, as it has a nice bokeh.

What do you think?

N.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

None. Wasted for me with RF-only M use; plus adds unnecessary complexity, worse focusing ergonomics and added cost. 
 

Jeff

[RexGig0]

The APO Summicron-M 75mm ASPH already has a quite good magnification factor, from its MFD of 0.7m, which does not seem to have helped it to become a mass-appeal lens, in high demand. This does not mean that I dislike this 75mm lens; I have one, and like it. See the comparative images in this linked article, by LUF member Jono Slack:

https://nextdoor.com/p/6NhLNqGWkZTT/c/1001940929?post=288875318&comment=1001940929&s=&is=nce&ct=tJ90l9YHf4IJOjqzuNHYNYe3D5g_5i8X_35Bnmu133rH1x087V8G8vbbUu7Xjac7&ec=CUuITXfgC4y3JTZ2xRbYqsCEDVfj1pLaDEEEO8rW-uw%3D&mobile_deeplink_data=eyJhY3Rpb24iOiAidmlld19wb3N0IiwgInBvc3QiOiAyODg4NzUzMTh9&link_source_user_id=19458414

In other camera systems, plenty of shooters use 28mm at very close range. (I have Canon and Nikon 28mm lenses that have very close MFD specifications.) It might be wiser marketing to make a closer-focusing 28mm M lens, but, then, it would compete with the Q-series cameras, so, perhaps not. I have no familiarity with the Q series, so am not qualified to answer that one, but, perhaps, the best path to a modern close-focusing 28mm Leica lens might be to add a Q camera. A 28mm Close-Focus M lens remains my best guess.

If we look at history and tradition, there was a screw-mount 65mm macro lens, made to use with the film-era Visoflex. The lack of 65mm frame lines would probably doom the prospect of a 65mm M lens.

Personally, I do not enjoy using Live View or an Electronic Viewfinder, so, would only rarely use Close-Focus capability, if I owned any such lenses. I see my APO Summicron-M 75mm ASPH as negating the “need” for the closer-focusing Summilux-M 50mm ASPH II as its magnification factor, at 0.7m, is nearly equal to 50 ASPH II, at its MFD. if the accounting lobe of my brain will ever let be rob my retirement funds, to spend the money for an APO Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, its ability to focus more closely is unlikely to be one of the factors in making the decision.

 

[TomB_tx]

Agree with the above responses - no need for more close focus on M lenses, where RF use is most important and the strength of the system. When I want CLOSE I use SLR lenses on a mirrorless system designed for them - just like I used an SLR along side my RF Leica since the 1960s.

[Jeff S]

An interview with Leica execs revealed that the 35 APO M Summicron, the first of these close focus designs, was initially spec-ed by the design team to focus to the traditional RF coupled .7m. It was only later that the technical side showed what was possible to provide closer focus. They went back to the drawing board and incorporated the concept.  

Just because something can be done doesn’t mean that it should be done. But Leica has its own priorities, not the least of which is profit.  I prefer that these lens updates prioritize quality control… aperture ring tension, mechanical reliability, etc, along with the expected optical performance.  
 

I’ll stick with the SL system when I need all-around usage. Even my SL zoom focuses more closely than these M re-designs. M cameras were never optimized to be jack-of-all-trades; all the better.

Jeff

Edited August 26, 2023 by Jeff S

[Kreeshp]

I disagree with much of the above comments.  I acquired the 35mm APO in part, due to its close focus ability, which I use frequently with liveview on my digital M bodies.  The close focus makes the M a lot more versatile than the very limiting 0.7 m of lenses traditionally.

 

The trend is more close focus lenses because, presumably, that's what the demographic that is buying M systems are wanting in their gear systems.  Other cameras costing the same or more than a new M11 can focus closer than 0.7 m so if Leica wants to remain competitive, they have to give in to demand.

Edited August 26, 2023 by Kreeshp

[mediumformula]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd like to see Leica move in the opposite direction and start making their lenses smaller with .7m close focus.  My favorite lenses are the compact, lightweight lenses from the 80s and 90s such as the version 4 summicrons (35 and 50mm).  I'd love to see a really small compact reasonably corrected 50mm Summilux.  Instead they made it bigger and heavier and kept the optics mostly the same.

[hdmesa]

13 minutes ago, mediumformula said:

I'd like to see Leica move in the opposite direction and start making their lenses smaller with .7m close focus.  My favorite lenses are the compact, lightweight lenses from the 80s and 90s such as the version 4 summicrons (35 and 50mm).  I'd love to see a really small compact reasonably corrected 50mm Summilux.  Instead they made it bigger and heavier and kept the optics mostly the same.

Close focus isn't increasing the size. Look at the 35 APO-M size. It's tiny. The size of the new 50 Lux is increased in width, but we don't know if that's due to the close focus mechanism or simply a design choice (make assembly easier, etc.). In any case, a close focus f/2 lens can stay small and still focus closer than 0.7m. Voigtlander's new 28 M Color Skopar is good example of this – f/2.8, 0.5m MFD, and nearly a pancake lens.

[Al Brown]

22 minutes ago, Kreeshp said:

The trend is more close focus lenses because, presumably, that's what the demographic that is buying M systems are wanting in their gear systems. 

The trend is whatever Leica says it will be, not the demographic. They are pushing the close focus lenses to push the SL sales at the moment for existing M users. Whether a close focusing M body is also in the pipeline remains unknown until Leica will, again, decide it is finally time (despite the demographic call for closer focus since 1954).

[hdmesa]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

None. Wasted for me with RF-only M use; plus adds unnecessary complexity, worse focusing ergonomics and added cost. 
 

Jeff

Would be interesting if they offered both options for the new lenses – one with 0.7m MFD and one with close focus. I wonder which way sales would skew.

[Guest]

Summilux 28mm. Perhaps some inspiration from how this was solved in the Leica Q?

[wolan]

vor 6 Minuten schrieb comptroller:

What is making their lenses bigger is the trend of making them more and more corrected. 

I just sold a close focusing 0.5m lens and I’m so glad to be back to 0.7m like my Summicron. It was confusing and annoying. 

If it functioned like an infinity lock maybe it would be better. If the tab had a button to unlock it to go past 0.7m. 

What I wish about lensss is that Leica revives more vintage ones. Like they did with the Summaron and the Steel Rim. 

They also need to rethink their lens designs. It’s becoming stale like a Viltrox lens. Compare the previous 50 Summilux with the current one for example. 

That is how it is done in the new 35mm sun micron, you have to exercise a bit of pressure to beyond .7 m

I think it is the right compromise to avoid annoying the traditional range finder shooters and at the same time give easy access to the new option 

Edited August 26, 2023 by wolan

[Al Brown]

11 minutes ago, mzbe said:

Summilux 28mm. Perhaps some inspiration from how this was solved in the Leica Q?

The Q Summilux works differently and even needs computational CPU processing to extend its fisheye edges in-camera. Tons of threads on the subject in the forum.

Edited August 26, 2023 by Al Brown

[Jeff S]

26 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Would be interesting if they offered both options for the new lenses – one with 0.7m MFD and one with close focus. I wonder which way sales would skew.

Well, they likely could have counted me among the buyers, as I might have traded my 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE) v.1, and possibly my 35 Summicron ASPH v.1, to simplify my M kit. Ideally, the ‘traditional’ version would be offered at a lower price, but I wouldn’t count on that.  But, as it stands, I have no interest in the close focus version.  
 

I liked the earlier Leica mantra… sticking to the essentials.  But seems that adding bells and whistles is the new direction for M lenses and bodies.

Jeff

[evikne]

A 90mm Summicron with extra close focus capability would make a pretty capable macro lens. But I guess I would still prefer the old 90mm Mandler Summicron v3, or the 75mm Summilux.

[spydrxx]

If I was using a digital M body with EVF and wanted close focus capabilities, I'd just add a screw on diopter. Old school solution I know.

[hdmesa]

2 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

...seems that adding bells and whistles is the new direction for M lenses and bodies.

To be fair, for the lenses it's just one thing they're adding – a single bell or whistle but not both in plural  

For the bodies, I think the only controversial M11 addition was full-time live view, which requires a longer mechanical shutter cycle than previous variants, at least in rangefinder mode. The M11 improves on the previous shutters if the previous variants are using live view. You could also say they removed a complication from the M11 that had no reasonable purpose, which was the bottom plate. Leica giveth, and Leica taketh away.

[Jeff S]

20 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

To be fair, for the lenses it's just one thing they're adding – a single bell or whistle but not both in plural  

For the bodies, I think the only controversial M11 addition was full-time live view, which requires a longer mechanical shutter cycle than previous variants, at least in rangefinder mode. The M11 improves on the previous shutters if the previous variants are using live view. You could also say they removed a complication from the M11 that had no reasonable purpose, which was the bottom plate. Leica giveth, and Leica taketh away.

We differ significantly on the M11. I have no interest in many of the new bells and whistles, err features… charging port, internal storage, metering, triple resolution, etc.  My M10-R and M10M suffice.  The only practical addition I’d like at some point is IBIS, due to my benign hand tremors, if ever feasible within the current form factor.

For the lenses, Leica added close focus… and design/build complexity, production and supply issues, and higher prices. Simplicity could have helped in many regards, for my tastes. I actually prefer the controls and ergonomics of the sometimes modestly larger M lenses, for instance the 50 Summilux ASPH more than the 50 APO Summicron. Sometimes size constraints can push the limits of both production and use, although I know many here think smaller is always better. 
 

Different strokes…  so I like the idea of options, although Leica beats to its own drum.

Jeff

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Kwesi]

1 hour ago, mzbe said:

Summilux 28mm. Perhaps some inspiration from how this was solved in the Leica Q?

I hope the 28/1.4 is next. It would be nice to have the 28, 35 and 50 summilux lenses all be updated with close focus capability. 
the other reason why the 28 ‘lux is a natural choice is that it would great to have the excessive purple fringing wide open on the M11 and future high -res sensors addressed. Lastly there is that little issue of not providing the lens ring that would be solved by adopting the new built in hood design of the new 35 and 50 ‘lux lenses

 

[hdmesa]

2 hours ago, comptroller said:

…I think Leica is focusing on their mirrorless SL system to please the professional crowd of wedding photographers and the like…

 

Hardly. Ask any SL user how long they’ve been waiting on the 21 APO-SL or a body with fast, accurate AF tracking.