dpattinson Posted June 18, 2008 Share #61 Posted June 18, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Even more interesting is how you would propose dealing with the framelines......... Actually - you could just use the existing framelines... at any useful working distance the existing uncertainty would probably be sufficient to cover the intermediate zoom stages Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 18, 2008 Posted June 18, 2008 Hi dpattinson, Take a look here Infos from the forum-meeting 2008. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wizard Posted June 18, 2008 Share #62 Posted June 18, 2008 "The Tri-Elmar is one of the most mechanically complex lenses ever made. As a small company, Leica has to subcontract certain parts of some products. And unfortunately, a Leica subcontractor has quit supplying a critical part of the Tri-Elmar." Actually, Howard, the explanation that was given to you back then in my view fully reads on the "new" situation as well. Nowhere was it mentioned that the critical part which a subcontractor had quit supplying was a mechanical part. I believe that you somehow transferred the content of the first sentence into the second sentence, while in fact these two sentences are entirely separate. Each sentence is still correct, i.e. the Tri-Elmar certainly is one of the most mechanically complex lenses ever made, Leica has subcontracted certain parts of this lens (e.g. certain lens elements) and a Leica subcontractor has quit supplying a critical part of the Tri-Elmar, namely a certain lens element. Unless of couse it was specifically made for the cropped sensor M8. Then again I'd be surprised if Leica went down that route. I specifically asked Mr. Daniel if there is a psiibility that new M lenses would be "M8 only", i.e. not covering FF. His answer was quite clear, he said Leica would not go down that route for two reasons, a) film M bodies still sell quite well, and Leica does not want to lose the option of a FF digital M body. Regards, Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted June 18, 2008 Share #63 Posted June 18, 2008 I had always understood that the problem component with the Tri-Elmar was the front lens element but there's so much rumour and hearsay that this could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 18, 2008 Share #64 Posted June 18, 2008 Howard, I did not post the message, but this was the exact explanation given by the Leica M manager Stefan Daniel in public at the Forum Meeting. He also confirmed it in a private conversation afterwards. Regards, Ivar That is exactly correct;Ivar.The addional reason was that the lens was very elaborate to build and thus took a disproportionate share of the production capacity. There was an 8000 lens backlog then.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 18, 2008 Share #65 Posted June 18, 2008 ... Nowhere was it mentioned that the critical part which a subcontractor had quit supplying was a mechanical part. Andy-- Thanks. You're correct. The original explanation may even have been intentionally worded to avoid giving up too much information about lens production, as some mentioned above. What I wrote above was my recollection. In the meantime I was able to find the original, which even contains a direct reference to optical quality that I had overlooked: The LEICA TRI-ELMAR-M 28-35-50mm f/4 ASPH. is one of the most complex Leica M lenses. It is extremely demanding in terms of assembling the individual mechanical and optical parts. Sadly, one of the key parts cannot be acquired in the quality necessary for the lens performance any longer. Every attempt to replace this part with an alternative only resulted in a lens with a rendition quality well below the Leica standard. Therefore, we were forced to discontinue the lens. Mine the conflation, yours Leica's redemption. Thanks also to both Andy's, Ivar and Friedhelm for giving me clarification on Leica's lens production! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted June 18, 2008 Share #66 Posted June 18, 2008 And there was at least one REAL photographer there.... Jaap-- I keep going back to look at that shot. I've sent it to several people and even received it from one. May I ask-- I assume he was part of the Leica-Treffen? (Maybe the new head of Solms' software design team? ) Did you ask his permission to shoot? He looks completely natural. What lens did you use? How far were you? Any other tricks of the trade you don't mind sharing? It's really a superb picture of "the Leica photographer," who 40 years ago was equivalent to "the German photographer." A beautiful trophy of the day! Thanks for sharing it with us! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lll Posted June 18, 2008 Share #67 Posted June 18, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Howard, the REAL photographer is our member Thomas Schertel. One of the nicest guys we have. Always friendly, always decent, a priest, btw. Besides his permanent smoking pipe he uses a lot of historic photographic equipment from Leica till Linhof, most coming from his family heritage. You will find him on the annual meeting whenever he can manage it with his services. Shure he wouldn´t object You portraying him. Regards, Friedhelm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted June 18, 2008 Share #68 Posted June 18, 2008 This is a very nice portrait, no doubt. I believe I was sitting next to Jaap when Thomas came along, and Jaap used an R9 with the 105-280, if my memore is correct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.