Should I get a Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 f4

B

bene

Established
Local time
6:12 PM
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
162
View My Gallery
I have the VC 35f1.2 and 50f1.1 . I plan to get my first leica lens this year. I find the Tri-Elmar attractive. As my low light needs are met. and I rather get a zeiss than a cron. I know that it is known to be "soft" but I think it pretty much good enough and I want to try out the "leica look" . and the versality is great.
Would like to know any users first hand experience.
Feel like a good combination with my current line up.
 
The Tri Elmar is one of those corporate "Oh, isen't this a good idea" - that was scrambled in the design! It is an ergonomic disaster. The focal length selector is right where the focus ring should be. It is slow - I could live with a 28f4, possibly with a 35f4 - but a 50f4!!!!. The 1 st version had a rather mediocre performance at 28mm and f4. OK with 35/50 at f4.
The version II was much improved - even @f4 the 28 is nice and sharp. However, it is a rather clumsy lens to use - it is big and, as stated" you keep switching focal lengths rather than focus.
Today, you can get dedicated focal length lenses with better performance for much less money from Zeiss and VC - and faster too.
The 28/35/50 also had some problems with switching frame-lines. The 1 st version in particular was a bit iffy in this respect. The mechanism is complex and often needed to be adjusted to engage the frame line selector of the camera.
I had a couple of them, a version I and a version II - but in the end I got rid of them as the convinience of a Tri-focal wasn't enough to overcome the shortcomings of the lens.
 
Do the same comments also apply to the lens's wider sibling? I'm fascinated by that one and was aiming to try it out one day. Right now, I'm content with the CV 15mm screw-mount
 
I have the 2nd version, & I'll be partly contrarian & say that the Tri-Elmar may be a good companion for your primes, particularly as a daylight travel lens.

It's big compared to most Leica-compatible primes, but not really so much w/regards to your Noktons. The fact that it has a focus tab keeps me from attempting to focus w/the selector ring. The main drawbacks for me are the slow speed & high price. The 1st could be addressed by keeping a fast prime(s) handy for low light shooting, & the 2nd is your concern only.

bene said:
I have the VC 35f1.2 and 50f1.1 . I plan to get my first leica lens this year. I find the Tri-Elmar attractive. As my low light needs are met. and I rather get a zeiss than a cron. I know that it is known to be "soft" but I think it pretty much good enough and I want to try out the "leica look" . and the versality is great.
Would like to know any users first hand experience.
Feel like a good combination with my current line up.
Click to expand...
 
Get the Tri-Elmar for convenience if you generally shoot in good light. I tested my version 2 against my Summicron 50, Hexanon 50 and Nokton 50 (see link below). Whilst sharp enough, its a much lower contrast lens. In terms of size, its probably similar to a 90 2.8 Elmarit M IIRC. I liked mine and didn't have problem with FL selection or focusing.


http://strachan.zenfolio.com/p741443616
 
I have one of the later ones, and have no problem with frame line changes. It's sharp enough for me (400 speed film, hand holding). It is not at all sloppy.

The point of the lens is to avoid frequent lens changing. It depends, of course, on the light level whether you will want an f2 or f1.4 lens some of the time. Which leads to lens changing.

I like the feel of an M6 with small lenses, so I often travel with a 50/2 and a 25/2.8. Both give the camera a different feel to the Tri-Elmar, which I often leave at home.

I will be keeping my Tri-E for some travel photography.
 
I don't see any practical usefulness for such a lens.
As an alternative, consider a small wide angle lens, a sharp and fast normal lens, and maybe a short tele.

24-35-50 or 21-35-50 or 21-50-90.
 
CLE-RF said:
Get the Konica equivalent, the M-Hexanon Dual 21-35/3.4-4.0. None of the Leica trouble, better built and faster.

Currently for sale on eBay, item nr. 270503772731
Click to expand...

I had one - it is HUGE and I kept forgetting to reset the selector and ended up with a lot of what I thought was 35 being 21!! A friend has it now and he likes it on the M8. Optical performance is very good.
 
sevo said:
Nothing wrong with a disagreement, but I wish it would be in form of something better than a mere belief statement, in triple repeat. I always wanted to like the Tri-Elmars, but whenever I tried them, they disappointed me - if there are reasons that have escaped me, name them, and please show some pictures...
Click to expand...

It was not a "belief" statement - it was based several 100 rolls with these lenses. I suspect that if the M8 had been around and I had one - the Tri Elmar 28/35/50 would make sense. I used it on the M6/M4P's and did not like how it felt.
The WATE 16/18/21 is a better kit - though I find that the 2 mm and 3 mm focal length difference is not that big. It is also staggeringly expensive as you can by a used M6, a 15f4.5 Heliar, a ZM Distagon 18f4 and a VC 21/4 - or even a ZM Biogon 21f4.5 and have money left over - and you would not see any significant difference in image quality.
 
I've had a version two and thought it was excellent for out door. But I need fast lenses too and therefore it didn't make sense for me to keep it.
In your case I'd buy a VC 28/2 or 28/1.9

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
I had the version II for a few years. I tried to like it, but the finicky selector and a propensity to flare, even with the hood and no filter, discouraged me in the long run. I stopped using it, so I sold it. Don't miss it at all.
 
I have had one since 2001. A nice daytime travel lens. After not many rolls the aperature ring got loose and lost it's click stops. It was fixed under warranty and now is loose and clickless again. When Leitz calls a lens "mechanically complex" it scares me a little. It's a little fiddly to get the proper frame lines up. All that said, it makes lovely images if the light is good and you don't mind the bulk. Joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kxl
Considering my first Leica M body (film)
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
3K
rfaspen
rfaspen
D
Stolen Leica II with Elmar
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Ray Kilby
Ray Kilby
W
Elmar 50/2.8 & Super Rokkor 50/2
Replies
3
Views
501
rfaspen
rfaspen
Richard G
Compose within 50mm framelines, anticipate outside them, or just grab a 28?
Replies
13
Views
453
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
C
I've Fallen And I Can't Get Up
2 3
Replies
46
Views
5K
bcostin
bcostin
Back
Top Bottom