leicaaddict Posted November 29, 2009 Share #21 Posted November 29, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I just buy one, and waiting to recive from the seller, exactly what is a SLIM filter type'?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Hi leicaaddict, Take a look here why tri-elmar 28-35-50 Discontinue?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted November 29, 2009 Share #22 Posted November 29, 2009 ...exactly what is a SLIM filter type'?? Slim filters don't have front threads which reduces vignetting with some lenses, generally wider than 28mm. Would be useful with the second version MATE as well but i have no experience with this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 1, 2009 Share #23 Posted December 1, 2009 i assume most of you guys have a 28cron, 35lux and a 50 lux...why would you choose to use the mate in favor of these stellar lenses? are you really willing to give up the extra stops of light or carry both in your bag? also, by comparison, how does the mate compare performance-wise? this lens second-hand is almost the new selling price. i've seen 3 recently, two black and one silver, at various dealers selling second-hand. how do you tell the difference between a v.1 and a v.2 apart from the dof scale on v.2? thanks for your patience, i'm curious as to why you chose it over prime lenses plus i'm interested in this little engineering masterpiece since i have and treasure the wate.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted December 1, 2009 Share #24 Posted December 1, 2009 I want a bi-summicron 28 / 35 mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted December 1, 2009 Share #25 Posted December 1, 2009 i assume most of you guys have a 28cron, 35lux and a 50 lux...why would you choose to use the mate in favor of these stellar lenses? are you really willing to give up the extra stops of light or carry both in your bag? also, by comparison, how does the mate compare performance-wise? this lens second-hand is almost the new selling price. i've seen 3 recently, two black and one silver, at various dealers selling second-hand. how do you tell the difference between a v.1 and a v.2 apart from the dof scale on v.2? thanks for your patience, i'm curious as to why you chose it over prime lenses plus i'm interested in this little engineering masterpiece since i have and treasure the wate.. For me the main reason is its versatilty as a daytime lens. If you check Erwin Puts review in fact it is close in performance to the primes - except for minor barrel distortion at 28mm, and a tendency to veiling flare. The latter can be dealt with quite nicely in postprocesssing e.g. with C1. The prime lenses are better (as expected) but in normal use their main advantage would be indoors/nighttime and reduced DoF that comes with large apertures. I am not sure on how to distinguish v.1 and v.2 - presumably others can comment on that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriel Posted December 1, 2009 Share #26 Posted December 1, 2009 Filter size: V1 55mm V2 49mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriel Posted December 1, 2009 Share #27 Posted December 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) V2 also has DOF scale V1 does not Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 1, 2009 Share #28 Posted December 1, 2009 thank you stephen and gabriel for clarifying..i've always been fascinated by this lens but already owning the three primes and by no means having even nearly mastered them yet, it makes it hard to justify such an expensive addition. however, it appears really compact and useful and ideal now for the m9..perhaps one day.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted December 1, 2009 Share #29 Posted December 1, 2009 Yup. Got myself one last week on the bay. Just make sure it's mechanically fine, as this is a fairly complex lens - eg, setting aperture at f/4 on 50mm may occasionally require some fiddling (this seems to be a known issue). I have not heard this claim. Certainly the mechanical construction of the Series 1 version lacked click stops for setting focal lengths, but that was cured with later versions. I have the Series 2 and had mixed feelings about it, particularly the sharpness at the 28mm setting. But since I have used it on my M8 I have been very impressed with its performance, even at f/4 - its full aperture. I would advise anyone considering one to look for Series 2 versions which can easily be identified by the inclusion of depth of field markings. Its one major strength becomes obvious when traveling. Reduced lens changing can radically reduce ingress of dust onto the sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaaddict Posted December 1, 2009 Share #30 Posted December 1, 2009 thanks for the responses, in fact, I already have the primes lens in 28 35 and 50mm, but the main reason to buy the 3E is the pleasure to carry just one lens in the day by day. I live in Spain, lo Ligth is not problem here, the other reason to buy it is that I think it is a great piece of ingeriering ART. Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 2, 2009 Share #31 Posted December 2, 2009 wow..you really are a leica addict! enjoy... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_newell Posted December 2, 2009 Share #32 Posted December 2, 2009 The reasons I use one are: 1. speed of changing focal length vs. changing lens or zooming w/ feet 2. avoid dust 3. image quality: much more classical Leica look compared to the newest ASPHs The only thing the v2 has over the v1 is the DOF lines, which have been conclusively shown to be responsible for various opthalmic and neural disorders in several clinical studies (just kidding). The v1 can arguably be used without a lens hood, which is not true of the v2. The v2 is more sought-after and probably has a higher price on the used market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted December 2, 2009 Share #33 Posted December 2, 2009 I just used a V1 MATE ( originally purchased for my M6 ) on an M9 on a trip to Turkey, Cyprus, Israel, Egypt, Crete, Malta, Tunisia and Spain (Barcelona). The lens was CLA'd by Leica last year and binary coded. The convenience and sensor safety of not changing lenses in the field is significant, and IQ is excellent. I mostly shot Aperture Priority af F4 or F5.6 . I also had am M8 with 90/2.8 elmarit, but 90% shot with the M9/MATE. I black tape over all brand markings, and drew no attention in places where DSLR's got lots of attention. It is a great lens on the M8, and gets even better on the M9. Regards ... Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_newell Posted December 3, 2009 Share #34 Posted December 3, 2009 I've shot it on M6s, an RD-1 and the M8. Of the three, I actually like the M8 best, though it has been great on all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Joachim_I Posted December 3, 2009 Share #35 Posted December 3, 2009 the Series 1 version lacked click stops for setting focal lengthsMine has click stops. Maybe they are more obvious in the later version which I never used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted December 3, 2009 Share #36 Posted December 3, 2009 Mine has click stops. Maybe they are more obvious in the later version which I never used. Mine has click stops as well. I have both versions. The only significant difference between them is a tab that V2 has. Both versions have exactly the same feeling when it comes to focusing, changing aperture and focal length. It might be subjective , but I feel that the images taken with V1 are crisper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_newell Posted December 3, 2009 Share #37 Posted December 3, 2009 Certainly the mechanical construction of the Series 1 version lacked click stops for setting focal lengths, but that was cured with later versions. Again, not so. The original Leica catalog and spec sheets say it had the detents, and my v1 TE has them (and they have worked with every M I've used it one, ranging from early M4s and M5s to M6s and my current M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_newell Posted December 3, 2009 Share #38 Posted December 3, 2009 It might be subjective , but I feel that the images taken with V1 are crisper. Possibly just sample variation? I thought they were optically identical. ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 3, 2009 Share #39 Posted December 3, 2009 With some pangs, I sold my MATE to help finance my M9. I liked it for the reasons others have stated: convenience; less lens changing; maybe smaller travel kit. But I had a Zeiss 25 and a 35 Summicron and a 50 Summilux and while the TE may be very good it is not as good as the primes. Since my shooting is mostly deliberate with time for lens changing, the optical compromise inherent in the TE led me to go with the primes. I may end up regretting my decision, but for now I wanted to avoid the compromise solution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.