Why no 28/1.4's?

T

Tim Gray

Well-known
Local time
7:33 PM
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
1,965
This isn't just directed at Leica or RF's in general, but 35mm cameras. Canon, and now Leica, both make 24mm and 35mm in 1.4. I think Nikon used to make a 28/1.4. I guess in RF land, a 28/1.4 would be big as hell and block the viewfinder too much.

Seems odd to me since 28mm seems to be an important focal length... Any thoughts?
 
A 28/1.4 is feasible - if Leica can do it for the 21 and 24 mm lenses, they can do it for a 28. When they designed the 28/2 the M8 was not on the horizon, so the crop factor wasn't being considered and there was less pressure to develop really extreme designs. The goalposts have now shifted, for a number of reasons, including that leica have made it cleear that they are not scared to make lenses that retail for $5-10K+.

The Nikkor 28/1.4 is incredible, but huge.

Marty
 
The 21 & 24 Summiluxes are byproducts of the reseach work they were doing for S2 lenses. I guess it didn't extend to the 28mm focal length.
 
Really? That's interesting.

Yeah, a 28/1.4 would have been equivalent to a 35/1.4 on the M8, right? Seems natural to me... But then, I've always been surprised that Canon doesn't make a 28/1.4...
 
Right now, I think it depends on whether it easier and cheaper to design and produce a new lens or a full-frame-M.
 
Last edited:
I think the most logical reason would be that they are keeping a 28 1.4 (and more exotic lenses) for next photokina and/or such events. What would be the point for Leica to introduce all the top lenses in a same year? What would be left to introduce, then? A new line of summitar f4.5 lenses?

I am badly lusting for the 21 f1.4 (what a tour de force!) and I think they should've waited next year to introduce the 24 1.4. Simple business moves...
 
I guess my question was less of a leica question and more of a general optics question. I always assumed 28mm was a bread and butter focal length (might be wrong there). I just found it interesting that even in the SLR world, nobody is currently manufacturing a 28/1.4. With the advent of the M8, a 28/1.4 would be equivalent to a 35/1.4 which is a very popular optic.

Then again, maybe 28mm is a ******* length. Seems like many people gravitate to 35 or 25/24 and wider. I myself went to 35mm, but I found that 50mm doesn't quite fit right. So I'm going to give the 28/50 combo a go, since I like that on my SLR. I could do 35/75, but the 50 Lux ASPH is so tempting...
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Peter,

Are you sure of this? Because I can't quite see how they might be related.

Cheers,

Roger
Click to expand...
Yes, reasonably sure. It was in a blog about a meeting with Peter Karbe, Leica's current optics guru. He talked about shared designs and common components and how Leica was able to use these processes to bring more lenses to the market at a faster rate.
 
peter_n said:
Yes, reasonably sure. It was in a blog about a meeting with Peter Karbe, Leica's current optics guru. He talked about shared designs and common components and how Leica was able to use these processes to bring more lenses to the market at a faster rate.
Click to expand...

Dear Peter,

I'm still puzzled. There aren't any significant common components between the new Summiluxes and the S2 lenses, and there's no way an f/1.4 to cover 24x36mm is a shared design with an f/2.5 to cover 30x45mm.

Each lens type has to be designed, calculated and ground separately. I suppose you could argue that Leica's aspheric technology is a link, but that would be pushing it. The same goes for some of their new assembly techniques. I assume it's the Farkas piece? I can't get the link to work.

Oh well; I'm hoping to be in Solms before Christmas. I'll ask 'em.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Tim Gray said:
I guess my question was less of a leica question and more of a general optics question. I always assumed 28mm was a bread and butter focal length (might be wrong there). I just found it interesting that even in the SLR world, nobody is currently manufacturing a 28/1.4. With the advent of the M8, a 28/1.4 would be equivalent to a 35/1.4 which is a very popular optic.

Then again, maybe 28mm is a ******* length. Seems like many people gravitate to 35 or 25/24 and wider. I myself went to 35mm, but I found that 50mm doesn't quite fit right. So I'm going to give the 28/50 combo a go, since I like that on my SLR. I could do 35/75, but the 50 Lux ASPH is so tempting...
Click to expand...
Dear Tim,

I've always thought that 28mm is neither one thing nor the other, and is basically an historical accident because it was the widest they could make in the 1930s.

Also, with a 4/3 multiplication, 24mm is a 32mm equivalent and 28mm is 37mm. Although a stronger case can perhaps be made for 37mm as a useful 'wide standard' on the M8, the choice between 32 and 37 doesn't worry me too much and I'd certainly be more interested in a really fast 24mm on film.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Peter,

I'm still puzzled. There aren't any significant common components between the new Summiluxes and the S2 lenses, and there's no way an f/1.4 to cover 24x36mm is a shared design with an f/2.5 to cover 30x45mm.

Each lens type has to be designed, calculated and ground separately. I suppose you could argue that Leica's aspheric technology is a link, but that would be pushing it. The same goes for some of their new assembly techniques. I assume it's the Farkas piece? I can't get the link to work.

Oh well; I'm hoping to be in Solms before Christmas. I'll ask 'em.

Cheers,

Roger
Click to expand...
I remember reading that Karbe said he reorganized the design teams with optics, mechanical and production working together, and he also said he changed the manufacturing process. The new 21 and 24 were done simultaneously by one designer. Apparently this guy Karbe has changed a lot of things...
 
peter_n said:
I remember reading that Karbe said he reorganized the design teams with optics, mechanical and production working together, and he also said he changed the manufacturing process. The new 21 and 24 were done simultaneously by one designer. Apparently this guy Karbe has changed a lot of things...
Click to expand...
Dear Peter,

Certainly the 21 and 24 Summiluxes feed off one another; from memory, the designs are very similar, with one more element (and one more aspheric surface?) in the 21 -- but that's still no relation to the S2 lenses.

From what I understand, indeed, production has been much reorganized, and everyone -- design and production -- can get more done, more easily; but again, that's applicable to the entire process, not a result of S2 research.

Sorry if I appear unduly dogged about this, but as I can't get to the original interview, I am pestering you at second hand. Obviously I'd like to learn as much as I can before my next visit to Solms. If your reaction is that you don't want to be pestered, I will more than understand.

Cheers,

Roger
 
akalai said:
Peter is this the blog you were thinking of?

David Farkas Photo Blog: Photokina 2008 Day 2
http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/2008/09/photokina-2008-day-2-taking-it-easy-and.html
Click to expand...
Hi akalai how are you doing? :) This isn't where I saw it although I did read the Farkas reports at the time. If you're a member of the LUF you could hardly avoid them. I thought that he did an amazing job although he seemed a bit star-struck at times.

BTW did you ever get that CV 35/2.5 Pancake I?
 
Had One

Had One

Just a couple of years ago I paid $1200 for the Nikon 28/1.4 -- great build quality but at f/2 the cheap/light/compact 35/2 was better and focused faster...

Wish I would have kept it though, for whatever stupid reason people are paying stupid Noctilux money for them now. Both them and me are dumb, dumb, dumb.

After playing that speed game, the more compact slower lenses are usually the ones that give me the most successful pictures, and even at f/2.8 the bokeh is pleasing enough and the DOF covers my focusing errors. All those 1/15th-1/30th @ f/1.4 shots were total crapshoots and usually the results were too. Better to shoot faster film at a more certain speed/aperture combination to risk it all on borderline, "hail mary" shots.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom