Super Fast Super Wide is not for rangefinders?

[zhengpeng]

Hi, I am curious why there are so few superfast (f2.8 or faster) superwide (24mm or less) lenses?

I heard from many sources that wide angle lenses are easier to design for rangefinder cameras because the rear groups of the lenses can go as close as possible to the film plane. So many people told me that (with a similar cost) the wide angle lenses of rangefinder cameras are generally better than those of SLRs.

However, when looking at SLR lenses lineup, it doesn't seem to be the case. For example, Canon has 14/2.8L and 24/1.4L for its EOS system. Whereas for rangefinder cameras, only Leica offers a 24/1.4, and at much higher price than 14/2.8L and 24/1.4L combined. Leica also has 21/2.8, but still several times more expensive than a 20/2.8 commonly found on a 35mm SLR system.

Back to my question, if the design of wide angle lens on rangefinder system is easier, a 24/f1.4 lens should not be even more expensive than its SLR counterpart. Is it just because of Leica? Why other manufactures, e.g. CV and Zeiss, do make have similar lenses? Are there any technical difficulties?

Or, maybe superfast and superwide is just against the philosophy of rangefinder cameras? What do you think?

 

[David Murphy]

A 24mm F1.4 lens is a damn challenging optic to design and build - phenomenal really. I imagine there would need to be a rather large market for a lens of this complexity to be cost effective to manufacture. The EF mount customer base is vastly larger than the M mount customer base.

 

[gekopaca]

I don't understand the utility to be fast for a super-wide.

Actually there's two reasons for a lens to be fast :

1) the DOF: With a super-wide DOF is large; fast lenses are done to have a thin DOF (for portraits for example) - so in that case you will use a "normal" or "portrait" lens, not a wide.

2) the shutter speed : in low light, you may use a slower speed, but it's not really a problem with super wide and non-reflex cameras :
- there's no the vibrations of the miror,
- mouvements are less perceptible with a wide (a few time ago other members of RFF explained me that a 12mm @ 1/8s = 24mm @ 1/15s = 50mm @ 1/30s).

 

[saxshooter]

- mouvements are less perceptible with a wide (a few time ago other members of RFF explained me that a 12mm @ 1/8s = 24mm @ 1/15s = 50mm @ 1/30s).

yes, but if you are working in marginal lighting and your subject is moving any gain in shutter speed helps!

i'm guessing anything faster than a summilux 21 or 24 the front diameter of the lens would block the RF window!

i borrowed a canon 24L the other week and was surprised at the shallow depth of field the lens gets wide open when shooting your subject prominently in the foreground.

 

[Keith]

But Leica does make, for the M mount, both 24mm & 21mm f-1.4 lenses. Someone must buy them.

And I agree, there are many more issues to overcome in providing a well corrected wide angle than normal or telephoto. And the wider the aperture the harder still.

I think those Summilux's are $6000.00 plus and are aimed at people who already paid $6500.00 for a digital M body to put them on. Nikon and Canon users wouldn't pay that price for a wide 21 or 24mm prime IMO ... they might for an enormous great telephoto though! 😀

 

[n5jrn]

Another reason might be that super fast + super wide = super big + super heavy, which contradicts one of the RF selling points of being smaller and lighter than an SLR outfit. Which would mean that not many super fast, super wide RF lenses are being made simply because there's not much demand for them.

 

[zhengpeng]

I agree that the higher price tag is probably due to the relatively limited user base. And I just learnt that super wide is also hard on rangefinder cameras when TTL AE is needed.

I think street photography at night can be a good example of why using fast super-wide angle lenses. I have a Canon 50/1.2 LTM, but sometimes I just need to "get all in" which can not be done with a 50/1.2 or a 35mm lens. I also hope there's a super wide lenses that can produce pleasant bokeh at night.

I will travel to Taiwan and will hang out with friends at nights. I am struggling whether to bring my Leica with slow wide angle lenses or my EOS with fast super wide. I don't really want to bring the EOS because of the extra weight and size. But it seems that I don't have many choices...

 

[dyao]

With a superwide you need an accessory finder for accurate framing. But then you'd need to look through the regular VF to focus at big apertures. Pretty inconvenient...

 

[sevo]

Hi, I am curious why there are so few superfast (f2.8 or faster) superwide (24mm or less) lenses?

I heard from many sources that wide angle lenses are easier to design for rangefinder cameras because the rear groups of the lenses can go as close as possible to the film plane. So many people told me that (with a similar cost) the wide angle lenses of rangefinder cameras are generally better than those of SLRs.

Yes, but... (Near) symmetrical lenses (as feasible on rangefinders, but not on SLRs) have superior properties regarding resolution, contrast and distortion, but they have relatively high light falloff, which gets much worse with speed. More complex lens designs can reduce falloff, but what you end up with there is essentially the same as SLR lenses - the desire to build a expensive lens without visible advantages for the small rangefinder market is not that big.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Price/demand curve?

Cheers,

R.

 

[ZeissFan]

Demand is in the potential buyer's mind. When they see the actual price tag, which reflects the R&D, plus production costs, demand certainly will decline.

There are some things that I want but cannot afford because in reality I don't need it. Want and need: two very different things.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Demand is in the potential buyer's mind. When they see the actual price tag, which reflects the R&D, plus production costs, demand certainly will decline.

There are some things that I want but cannot afford because in reality I don't need it. Want and need: two very different things.

Dear Mike,

Not always all that different. I need at least one camera to help me earn a living. I like rangefinders, and have used Leicas for many years. Trying to work professionally without digital is too much like hard work. How much do I need an M9? I could probably do all I needed with my old D70. But I wouldn't enjoy taking pictures as much, so I probably would't get such good pictures. Also, I'd need to buy some more Nikon-fit lenses.

Cheers,

R.

 

[saxshooter]

That Canon 24L II is a great lens. Focuses a lot closer than the 24 Summilux too.

 

[The Meaness]

I think the fact that Zeiss already offers a 21/2.8 and a 25/2.8 and Leica the 21 and 24 Summiluxes also makes it prohibitive for something else to enter the market. Cosina could potentially offer f1.4 or f2 lenses in these FLs, and they have not shied away from "large" lenses in the past. Will they be able to craft such lenses and stay price competitive, though? With the ZMs hovering around 1k, will they be able to come in around that number or lower? Don't they have other, more profitable interests at the moment like m4/3 and the SLR market?

 

[zhengpeng]

With a superwide you need an accessory finder for accurate framing. But then you'd need to look through the regular VF to focus at big apertures. Pretty inconvenient...

Then Sony NEX would be a good platform.

 

[zhengpeng]

I'll offer a WAG (wild a$$ guess) that the ratio of 21mm & 24mm Summiluxes sold by Leica compared to 21mm & 24mm Elmarit-ASPH's is about the same as the ratio Canon sells of EF 24/1.4 L's to EF 16-35/2.8's (the modern version of the 24/2.8 prime). When I was a working PJ it was pretty unusual to see anyone using the EF 24/1.4, nearly everyone carrying Canons had the wide 2.8 zoom.

For digital camera, f2.8 lenses would be good enough. But for film, people may want faster ones..

 

[zhengpeng]

^ "My, what a large .sig you have." 😉

Too busy recently. Otherwise spring is a good time to clean up stuff that are collecting dust in the corner.🙁

 

[zhengpeng]

I think the fact that Zeiss already offers a 21/2.8 and a 25/2.8 and Leica the 21 and 24 Summiluxes also makes it prohibitive for something else to enter the market. Cosina could potentially offer f1.4 or f2 lenses in these FLs, and they have not shied away from "large" lenses in the past. Will they be able to craft such lenses and stay price competitive, though? With the ZMs hovering around 1k, will they be able to come in around that number or lower? Don't they have other, more profitable interests at the moment like m4/3 and the SLR market?

I just found that CV now has 25mm/f0.95 for 1099! Wow, I wish I didn't just buy the ZM 21/2.8.

 

[FrozenInTime]

I just found that CV now has 25mm/f0.95 for 1099!

And Panasonic makes a 20 f/1.7 ......

Unfortunately like the Voigtländer 25 f/0.95 it is also for the x2 crop factor micro 4/3 format.

 

[zhengpeng]

And Panasonic makes a 20 f/1.7 ......

Unfortunately like the Voigtländer 25 f/0.95 it is also for the x2 crop factor micro 4/3 format.

Yes, you are right. I just realize it. Thanks for pointing out.
I also notice that now Zeiss is making 15/2.8 ZM, 😱 WOW