New Summarit-M Lenses

[Gabriel M.A.]

Mehinks it depends on what's meant as "old fashioned."

As long as the lenses don't render "old fashioned" chromatic aberration, coma, or over-corrected bokeh, I'm fine with "old fashioned".

Well, there's the Summitar, which is an "old fashioned" lens, and has some rough edges, but I still love it. I love the original Summarit (yes, a leased Xenar, I know).

I think f/2.5 is to go back to what Max Bereck gently put as the desire of the "common shooter" to have things reasonably "in focus" while allowing some user focus error. This, of course, applies best with the 35mm and 50mm lenses, anything longer is going to be tricky.

I still think they're making a mistake with the 35mm and 50mm lenses. The Elmar is well-priced new, and the 35mm Summicron would experience more sales if they set the price at $1500. Of course, I'm pulling this out of my @$$ because I don't know what the real cost considerations are involved in the production and delivery of these lenses.

I know I won't be buying the f/2.5 lenses. f/2.0 is my comfortable limit (as an available light, and narrow DOF shooter), and only a few current f/2.8 designs please me (90 Elmarit, 50 Elmar).

But more power to the masses with their collective purchases and their "who cares if it's made perfectly, as long as I get a good enough image" philosophy.

 

[Doug]

When I open the sample DNG from the 50mm in GIMP using the UFRaw plug-in. the black areas (tabletop) have red spots all over it ... looks like chicken pox. Anyone know what that's all about?

I see the very same thing in the JPEG file viewed on my Mac with GraphicConverter. Could be a pattern of actual spots on the table...

 

[edodo]

Strangely enough the lens that sat on the Minilux and the CM, the "summarit 40mm" wich is a modern formula with an economical design also has a max aperture of 2.4 and that is close enough. Always wondered why they named the lens of their P&S with the original superfast 50mm?

 

[AlexanderR]

If you like that sample you really should check out the website of the guy who shot the picture .......... awesome stuff ...........http://www.rax.is/

Thanks for the link. I love this guy's work.

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[MadMan2k]

My thoughts exactly, but I think they would go straight to digital. Bring out a dCL with a 1.6 sensor or wait until the M9 is near ready and bring out a dCL with the 1.3 sensor, and then the M9 with a full frame.

That would be great. They need a lower priced M8 alternative to go with the lower priced lenses. A digital CL with an M mount and maybe even 2x crop sensor from the 4/3rds system (and the already made electronics), combined with a very compact M mount lens, might be what everyone's looking for in a reasonably priced but capable compact digital camera.

We know they're trying, with those somewhat compact SLR's from Olympus, Panny and "Leica", and the 25/1.4 "Summilux" for 4/3 mount. (Note the quotation marks...)

I bet they could use the sensor as a focus confirm system; you set an AF point through the menu, put your eye to the viewfinder and turn the lens, and it beeps when it has enough contrast on the selected point.

Actually, it might be a nightmare to build, but what about a projected RF patch in the viewfinder that's actually calculated using the main sensor as the focus shifts, so you can use it like a real rangefinder without a bunch of expensive parts that get out of alignment?

 

[AhShun]

A CL2 with 1.33X CCD would be more practical for Leica.

Will it hurt M8? Might be. (M3>M2; M5>CL)
However, you get the same sensor from a D40x or D200, and they targeted at diff. users, and both accepted by the market.

A 4/3 CL with LiveMOS is innovative.
Pana should also make DigiOnly 15, 21, 24, or Cosina would be very happy.
Therefore, profit to Pana but not Leica, and history repeat (re Minolta CL).

Leica stated that D-Only Lens will not be accepted, so...

What can be "discarded"/"trimed" to make the CL2 critically cost less?
OEM rangefinder?
A lesser display for setting only?

 

[Trius]

I see the very same thing in the JPEG file viewed on my Mac with GraphicConverter. Could be a pattern of actual spots on the table...

Could be, but I don't think so. Look at the lower right quadrant at 100% view. There are spots on the supporting members. Plus if you look at how some of the spots span the table top and a puddle of rainwater, it doesn't look like spots on the surface(s) to me. Curious.

 

[jarski]

its nice to see Leica still has resources put up new lens category, same time while working hard with digital.

having a good lens portfolio and partners could be a good "plan B", just in case digital RF's go to rocks.

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

I think that the presentation of the new Summarit lenses line is a very good new. All the lenses are design and made in Germany, with normal spherical glass. Maybe, we will have finally the classic Leitz bokeh, disappeared with the ultra sharp but also ultra cold Aspherical and/or APO lenses. And, last but not least, with prices a little less stellar...
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[Harry Lime]

That would be great. They need a lower priced M8 alternative to go with the lower priced lenses. A digital CL with an M mount and maybe even 2x crop sensor from the 4/3rds system (and the already made electronics), combined with a very compact M mount lens, might be what everyone's looking for in a reasonably priced but capable compact digital camera.

Please, no 4/3rds. It's a technological dead end. It is next to impossible to get good high ISO performance and dynamic range out of these sensors, because the size of the individual receptors is too small. At a minimum we need APS (x1.5). These chips are cheap and widely available from companies like Sony etc. The RD-1 used the same chip as the Nikon D100. Leica could easily use the APS sensor that is in the Nikon D200


The other problem with 4/3rds is that because of the high crop factor (x2) you get twice as much DOF, as with a standard fullframe camera, Which makes everything look like it was shot with a point and shoot.