Which lens from history would you like to see remade?

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well there are a good number of new versions of old lens designs now on the market. Is there room for any more I wonder? What would people like to see produced next? A Dallmeyer Soft Focus lens? Any early Japanese designs? Very early designs? Suggestions.

[UliWer]

For me the so called "new versions" of old lens designs mostly look parasitic and reveal a lack of inspiration.

Why does anyone need "new old" when real old is so widely available and usable?

 

Edited April 26 by UliWer

[pedaes]

54 minutes ago, UliWer said:

mostly look parasitic

Such as?

[250swb]

There are too many already, no significant differences between any of them except the novelty lenses like the Noctilux/Nockton/etc. where people can argue over the merits of vast areas of bokeh.

[DadDadDaddyo]

I have several quite early lenses, going back to a 1936 Elmar 5cm. These older lenses all work perfectly, and their functioning stands as testament to their mechanical robustness and simplicity.

That said, I'm surprised to find myself wishing to suggest a reissue of the Tri-Elmar-M 28-35-50 f/4. It's by no means my most-often-used lens, but in those moments that call for it, it's wonderful to have 

My Tri-Elmar-M 28-35-50 also works perfectly, but I tend to treat it with kid gloves, especially while changing focal lengths in use. The cross-sectional illustrations of the internal mechanisms of this lens would give any thoughtful user the heebie-jeebies, for what it takes for this lens to shift lens elements forward and back, engage the rangefinder mechanism, and switch the appropriate frame lines in and out.

I understand why Leica may have felt it time to retire this lens from production. 

I'm just glad to be photographically active in a time in which samples of this lens are still around and functioning.

And I imagine the price of a new edition would be very high. But it would, at the very least, mean that parts for this lens would be in current production, and that repairs could be accomplished without having to cannibalize pieces from the existing stock of lenses. 

[pedaes]

There was a big plea to bring back the Summarit range that went unheard so I think little chance I am afraid (unless you can underwrite an order for 1000 pieces).

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summicron 50/2 Dual Range... without dual range. My 1957 copy is my favorite 50mm on the M11 and i don't need its goggles with the Visoflex 2 but i cannot focus continuously from 0.5m to infinity the same way as i do with the Skopar 50/2.2. Also i lack 6-bit coding on the DR and i would appreciate a bit less weight and focus throw. But please keep the IQ of the DR, dear Leica friends, i'm not interested in a remake of existing Summicrons.

[costa43]

It would be nice to see Leica give us something different and not just rely on their history, we have the Chinese manufacturers for homage pieces. Leica’s lens releases are getting too big and heavy for my liking. All the close focus glass is fat. I’d rather take a small hit on image quality but have them come in smaller. Voigtlander for new modern performing lenses are looking more and more appealing. 

[mottykytu]

33 minutes ago, lct said:

Summicron 50/2 Dual Range... without dual range. My 1957 copy is my favorite 50mm on the M11 and i don't need its goggles with the Visoflex 2 but i cannot focus continuously from 0.5m to infinity the same way as i do with the Skopar 50/2.2. Also i lack 6-bit coding on the DR and i would appreciate a bit less weight and focus throw. But please keep the IQ of the DR, dear Leica friends, i'm not interested in a remake of existing Summicrons.

Why you need the With-out dual range version if the 50/2 Rigid provide just exactly the same IQ just don't have Dual Range ? 

it is the dual range goggles system made 50/2 DR what it is !!!

Edited April 26 by mottykytu

[UliWer]

3 hours ago, pedaes said:

Such as?

https://lightlenslab.com/?srsltid=AfmBOooeCkq1N8eZSzuV-XUL3HpQuvCsqWXUH-CUW3oVkxxJ9Rdq_zVn

https://www.meyer-optik-goerlitz.com

https://thypoch.com/de/eureka

https://myfunleader.com/products/aritzlab-classic-35mm-f-1-4-for-m-lens

et al ad nauseam

 

 

[pgk]

5 hours ago, UliWer said:

For me the so called "new versions" of old lens designs mostly look parasitic and reveal a lack of inspiration.

Why does anyone need "new old" when real old is so widely available and usable?

Well, some old design lenses were never made for the 35mm format but they could be today - say Rapid Rectilinear lenses as an example or early 3 element Cooke lenses which were not made in 35mm or 50mm focal lengths originally (no 35mm cameras) but obviously could be made now.

[lct]

1 hour ago, mottykytu said:

Why you need the With-out dual range version if the 50/2 Rigid provide just exactly the same IQ just don't have Dual Range ? 

it is the dual range goggles system made 50/2 DR what it is !!!

You don't need those goggles in LV mode. The 50/2 DR works perfectly with the Visoflex without them but as i tried to explain above, i cannot focus continuously from 0.5m to infinity the same way as i do with the Skopar 50/2.2. Also i lack 6-bit coding on the DR and i would appreciate a bit less weight and focus throw.

[FrozenInTime]

One novelty in the Leica historical cupboard that could be revised is the Stemar 33mm lens and prism stereo set, though the market demand might be quite small.

Leica should firstly iterate on their reissue issues: 

The 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH needs a revision that focuses to 0.7m and has a OLUX hood solution that works with filters ... so physically different housing from the E46 steel rim.

I think the 50mm Summilux 11714 reissue is also a bit of a miss-step:  A lens with classic v2/v3 rendering was what the market expected; we got a de-ASPH non-FLE, that is good <15mm radius, but has really bad field curvature beyond that. At least it fixed the hood/filter issues of the 11688.

A black paint on brass variant of the 50/1.2 Noctilux might sell better than the paint on aluminium version.

[lct]

4 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH needs a revision that focuses to 0.7m and has a OLUX hood solution that works with filters ...

Hard to compete with the Nokton 35/1.4 v2 that already has all that. It has more distortion though admittedly.

[FrozenInTime]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

Hard to compete with the Nokton 35/1.4 v2 that already has all that. It has more distortion though admittedly.

Agree, the re-issue design oversights are why I still have the Nokton v2 and not a steel rim.

[pippy]

5 hours ago, UliWer said:

...Why does anyone need "new old" when real old is so widely available and usable?...

I would question the "real old is so widely available" bit but, of course, much will depend on where one lives.

Let's take the case of the Light Lens Lab offerings starting with their '8 Element' recreation. Currently for sale on the well-known auction website there are only three Leitz 8-E lenses being sold within the UK. Of these one is the 'Goggled' version which would be of no interest to me. Of the other two one has a deformed front ring (which could indicate potential optical issues) and the other is described as; "Optics hazy internally - Sold as Described - No Returns - Needs Internal Optical Clean.".

Then there's their 50mm f2.0 ELCAN. How many original ELCAN lenses are ever seen on the market at an affordable price?

Their 50mm f2.0 'Rigid Summicron' range is intriguing. Again; how many Black Paint originals are available (let alone affordable)? As well as the regular Summicron design it is also possible to buy a LLL Summicron 'lookalike' but with Speed Panchro optics(!). Rather a unique prospect in my opinion.

Going on to Typoch I find that their take on the 'Taylor, Taylor and Hobson 2-inch f2.0 collapsible' to be another rather interesting option.

The above-mentioned lenses are all, obviously, copycat designs but considering the difficulty in obtaining decent originals in good condition for a reasonable price it isn't hard to understand their (relative) popularity.

Philip.

[costa43]

Now all we need is a Chinese rangefinder for 1.5k and we can all cash in. 

[ELAN]

35 Summicron v4 (KoB) in silver chrome exactly as the original (11311), i.e., made of brass, E39, same optical formula.

[TomB_tx]

21 hours ago, UliWer said:

https://lightlenslab.com/?srsltid=AfmBOooeCkq1N8eZSzuV-XUL3HpQuvCsqWXUH-CUW3oVkxxJ9Rdq_zVn

https://www.meyer-optik-goerlitz.com

https://thypoch.com/de/eureka

https://myfunleader.com/products/aritzlab-classic-35mm-f-1-4-for-m-lens

et al ad nauseam

 

 

I can't recommend the Aritzlab 35: I bought one and was impressed by its appearance and solid feel, but RF focus was way off - indicated 25 ft was actually infinity. Sent to DAG to calibrate and he reported it was not designed to have focus calibrated. Could be used only with live-view.

On the other hand my LLL 35 & 50 seem to be excellent lenses. I have the original Leica versions and the LLL compare very well. DAG did need to tweak calibration on the 50 Rigid copy, but it's great after that.

Edited April 27 by TomB_tx

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[costa43]

23 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

I can't recommend the Aritzlab 35: I bought one and was impressed by its appearance and solid feel, but RF focus was way off - indicated 25 ft was actually infinity. Sent to DAG to calibrate and he reported it was not designed to have focus calibrated. Could be used only with live-view.

On the other hand my LLL 35 & 50 seem to be excellent lenses. I have the original Leica versions and the LLL compare very well. DAG did need to tweak calibration on the 50 Rigid copy, but it's great after that.

Hi there, did DAG mention anything positive or negative about the internal build quality of the LLL lenses by any chance? I’m assuming it’s top notch but would be great to hear it from an expert.

I think LLL and Thypoch are definitely exciting players in the M lens market, the build quality seems really high and the optical performance is top notch too. It’s a great time to be an M fan. The more choice the better I say.