Jump to content

Farkas blog: Interview on recent lens designs


thompsonkirk

Recommended Posts

x

I know they want to portray the glasses used in Leica lenses as precious and special but the price of silver is only $13.29 an ounce. The Noctilux at, say, 550g and $10k actually costs $515 an ounce, nearly 40 times more...

 

Gold on the other hand is $896 an ounce, but saying that "Gold is 67 times more valuable than the glass we use in our lenses" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

 

OTOH, gold only has to come down to around $500/oz for the lens to be "worth more than its weight in gold"...

 

All marketing hype...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark,they don't sell glass.

They sell lens, as well as R&D. That's what separates them from the rest. If we go by the kilo, then one can assume that Ferrari and Porche are thiefves (by selling iron@ 100E the kilo).

What's this novelty with silver nowadays ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

David Farkas' blog,

 

David Farkas Photography Blog

 

contains an interesting interview with Peter Karbe of Leica on current 35mm lens design.

 

It's written for laypeople - not a technical article.

 

Kirk

 

Thank you for that link Kirk. I need to remember to check into David's blog more often. That piece about Peter Karbe was one of the most interesting things I've read on the web in a long time. Thanks for writing that David.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark,they don't sell glass.

They sell lens, as well as R&D. That's what separates them from the rest. If we go by the kilo, then one can assume that Ferrari and Porche are thiefves (by selling iron@ 100E the kilo).

What's this novelty with silver nowadays ?

 

 

 

You need to brush up on English humour a little.....:);)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know they want to portray the glasses used in Leica lenses as precious and special but the price of silver is only $13.29 an ounce. The Noctilux at, say, 550g and $10k actually costs $515 an ounce, nearly 40 times more...

 

Gold on the other hand is $896 an ounce, but saying that "Gold is 67 times more valuable than the glass we use in our lenses" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

 

OTOH, gold only has to come down to around $500/oz for the lens to be "worth more than its weight in gold"...

 

All marketing hype...

 

... and when gold prices fall to that level, it's a good opportunity for them to rejuvenate the "Luxus Leica" body & lens gold-plated :D

 

P.S. : thanks for the link... very fascinating the interview with chief optical designer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For someone who did not take notes, David's post is pretty incredible. It is also exciting to hear him make references to the "fast-growing" lens design department at Leica. If you read David's post and sum up his quite excellent reporting on the S2 and other developments, the picture he draws is of a company that is beginning to rock and roll. They may not be putting out enough products fast enough to please everyone on this forum, but unquestionably, Leica under Dr. K is gaining real product momentum.

 

Thank you, David, for the excellant reportage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For someone who did not take notes, David's post is pretty incredible. It is also exciting to hear him make references to the "fast-growing" lens design department at Leica. If you read David's post and sum up his quite excellent reporting on the S2 and other developments, the picture he draws is of a company that is beginning to rock and roll. They may not be putting out enough products fast enough to please everyone on this forum, but unquestionably, Leica under Dr. K is gaining real product momentum.

 

Thank you, David, for the excellant reportage.

+1

well said

 

Hans

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the positive remarks.

 

Really, it was quite an honor to get insight from a man like Peter Karbe. At the end of the show today, he came up to me to say hello. I wanted to make sure that I understood him correctly about the 75 lux, as this seemed ruffle some feathers, so asked for further clarification. He said that, well, it is an old design with a lot of issues and that he much prefers his 75 cron as it doesn't (have problems that is). :D

 

Hey, I asked.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

did you get the MTF graphs of the new M and S lenses?

 

Karbe compares the 75 Summicron and the 75mm Summilux, but there is a whole stop difference in speed. Did you ask why he didn't a new Summilux instead of the APO-Summicron? Do you think they plan to do it?

 

Tom Abrahamsson interviewed Mandler at the beginning of the 80s, and Mandler said his favourite lens at that moment was the 75mm Summilux !!!!

 

R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a touch of NIH - Not Invented Here - the 75/1.4 and 50/1 are similar designs, just like Peter Karbe's 50/1.4 and 75/2. I like the 75/1.4 but we all know it's not the best performing lens and, the market seems to agree, it's relatively unloved secondhand and may be the fastest depreciating of any recent Leica lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

did you get the MTF graphs of the new M and S lenses?

 

 

Yes. I got to see them. No, I was not allowed to photograph or publish them. And with regards to the S lenses, I'm sorry, but I can't get into any specifics (until I hear otherwise from Leica). Let's just say that when I commented to Peter that the performance looked very good, he looked taken aback and retorted, "Not just very good. This is outstanding!" ;)

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
Sorry, guys, I'm missing something here. Where is the interview with Karbe on Dave's blog? My version starts with the Nocti info.

 

It's here under Photokina Day 2...

 

David Farkas Photography Blog: September 2008

 

This thread has been revived by someone trying to add a link to an Eastern European sex site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread was started last September, so the interview may be in the archives.

 

Looks like the thread might have been revived by someone testing this site. Check the history on the two who posted after last September.

 

Edit: Looks like Steve has figured it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...