Using Elmarit 28 sans hood

[ibogost]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I seek opinion about using the Elmarit 28/2.8 without its provided hood. Extreme compactness has become a particular interest of mine lately, possibly brought on by the acquisition of a current-gen collapsible Elmar 50. The Elmarit 28 is a small lens to be sure, but in comparison to the Elmar it seems huge now. The hood is a big part of the problem. On top of it, I've lately been finding the Elmarit to render "nervously" in a way that makes me less happy than I once was. Maybe I'm just looking for an excuse to consider getting a 28 Summicron.

 

At any rate, my question is twofold:

 

(1) Any opinions about the real-world consequences of going without the hood on the Elmarit under different shooting conditions? I've found it flare resistant anyway, but I haven't tried it in all circumstances either. I'm willing to take some risks in exchange for compactness, but I'd like to have a sense of what they are so I can act accordingly.

 

(2) Does anyone know where I can get a replacement lens cap like the nice metal 39 push-on cap that comes with the Elmar 50? That cap fits perfectly onto the IR-filtered, unhooded end of the Elmarit and I'd like to get another one for this purpose. I've tried purchasing one of the purported replacements on Ebay but it does not fit properly. Is it Leica part #11831 I'm looking for?

 

Thanks.

[Advertisement]

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

[luigi bertolotti]

I suppose you refer to the current asph... which I have not: mine is an older Canada (much longer) with its 12538 black plastic hood: imho, the question hood or not is quite simple, as for other lenses: if you have some lightsource, direct OR REFLECTIVE (these can be less intuitive to notice), in front of you, better to have it on; otherwise, no difference with or without.

[lct]

A hood is almost mandatory if you use an IR-cut filter otherwise flare and ghost images will be even worst i'm afraid. The clip-on metal hood # 12504 for vintage 35/2 & 35/1.4 lenses fits well the 28/2.8 asph if you use it on a 'cropped' body like the M8. It is certainly nicer but hardly smaller that the regular plastic hood # 12526 though and the latter is more handy with its rubber cap # 14043 IMHO.

[Neil Macmillan]

..... I've lately been finding the Elmarit to render "nervously"

 

Interesting post, but could you please explain what you mean by 'nervous' rendering. The 28 Elmarit is my main lens: see avatar. I usually have the lens hood on at all time.

[ibogost]

Interesting post, but could you please explain what you mean by 'nervous' rendering. The 28 Elmarit is my main lens: see avatar. I usually have the lens hood on at all time.

 

Here's what I mean

[lars_bergquist]

Yes there is evidence of double contours and other effects of overcorrected spherical aberration beyond the plane of focus. If you don't like that, get the Summicron, or go for another focal length. Extreme compactness has its price. Pay up, or shut up.

 

The Leica M, film or digital, is the most compact system camera. It is not a 'compact camera' however. No M will ever be as compact as the screw-mount cameras were, or the CL for that matter. How large pockets do you have, anyway?

 

The old man from the Age of the IIIf

[ibogost]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes there is evidence of double contours and other effects of overcorrected spherical aberration beyond the plane of focus. If you don't like that, get the Summicron, or go for another focal length. Extreme compactness has its price. Pay up, or shut up.

 

The Leica M, film or digital, is the most compact system camera. It is not a 'compact camera' however. No M will ever be as compact as the screw-mount cameras were, or the CL for that matter. How large pockets do you have, anyway?

 

Huh? My post wasn't a complaint about the Elmarit, nor did it mount an unreasonable expectation about the material trade-offs of the two lenses. I was simply asking for advice about hoods and lens caps.

[kenneth]

Huh? My post wasn't a complaint about the Elmarit, nor did it mount an unreasonable expectation about the material trade-offs of the two lenses. I was simply asking for advice about hoods and lens caps.

 

Yes I think you were a bit hard done by there- I cannot answer your question but keep plugging- you just might find someone with a little compassion and humility, but I would not hold my breath- For what it is worth, I ,like you like the compactness of the M system and although I sacrificed some of that by buying a 35mm Summicron asph with oblong attached hood the results are astonishing. I never found much use for a 28mm lens but I used a 24mm extensively on the hill

[thompsonkirk]

If you're shooting with an M8, the crop factor allows you to go all the way to an old 12585 lens hood (35 & 50mm) without vignetting. Its vents let you see more of the viewfinder than you can with the dedicated rectangular hood. The 12504 (35mm), mentioned above, is almost as good - blocks a tiny bit more of the corner of the viewfinder but still lets you see more than with the rectangular hood. It would probably work with the Elmarit on a film M, but I haven't tried it.

 

You can also get a new, cheap, & very useful 39mm vented screw-in hood on ebay.

 

As to the way the lens renders light ("draws"), I know what you mean - it's too contrasty to be a friendly sunny-day lens. I use it in softer light, switching to 25 Skopar or 28 Ultron in contrasty light.

 

I'd sell the Elmarit, which has been a disappointment because of its contrast, & get a Summicron - except that one of the vague rumors for Photokina is a faster 24. If that materializes it would be a higher priority for me - which is why I'm sticking with the CV lenses for now.

 

I haven't found that w/o a hood, the UV/IR filters cause more flare than other filters did on my film M. I pretty regularly use the CV Ultron with the filter unhooded, so that it doesn't block the viewfinder. Whatever flare I get is overall, & not much of a problem - I've only rarely met a localized ghost.

 

Kirk

[NZDavid]

My experience with the 28 Elmarit was very good. But I always use a lens hood. I now favor the 24 ASPH (again always with the hood); it's a brilliant lens.

 

I recall Brian Bower in his Leica M guide rated the 28 Elmarit very highly for flare resistance.

Günter Osterloh, in Leica M Advanced Photo School, says curvature of field may be a factor at near focusing distances,and this may be your concern, but he says even severe backlighting or light sources in the frame do not cause disturbing reflections and flare.

 

My experience is it's possible to make any lens flare, and precautions are advised.

 

Osterloh also recommends alays using a hood, and I agree: not only does it minimize flare, it protects the lens from rain, snow, fingerprints and so on.

[lct]

...I recall Brian Bower in his Leica M guide rated the 28 Elmarit very highly for flare resistance. Günter Osterloh... says even severe backlighting or light sources in the frame do not cause disturbing reflections and flare...

Not sure if Osterloh or Bower refers to the 28/2.8 asph but the latter's resistance to flare looks very good indeed.

First pic below compared to the 28/2 (2nd pic).

Without filter of course.

 

 

[ibogost]

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful replies. I think I might try out the elmarit without its hood and see if I can find the edges of its flare resistance. The protective features of the hood are nothing to sneeze at, but the UV/IR filter also offers some protection. I understand the benefits of the hood... but the compactness of this lens is one of its primary virtues, and the hoods I've tried are just stupid large in comparison.

 

It's a tough call on the Elmarit vs. Summicron. The Elmarit is still excellent, and so much less expensive, but I'm noticing the optical compromises more and more.

[ibogost]

Not sure if Osterloh or Bower refers to the 28/2.8 asph but the latter's resistance to flare looks very good indeed.

 

This is very informative indeed! Thanks for it.