Tri Elmar discontinued

[TJV]

What's this I hear about the normal Tri-Elmar being discontinued?
I would have thought that it was a good little alternative for people who aren't obsessed with a need for speed. Judging by a lot of reviews it also seemed a real sharp lens.

I see people over at LUF are speculating what other lenses may or may not be due for axing or redesign. I'm not sure.
Judging by the new 28 2.8 ASPH, I'd think that Leica would be well advisede to push a range of great quality small lenses that are less labour intensive to make and therefore cost less at the retail end. A new Elmar range would be nice, ditching the 90mm 2.8 but making good small 2.8's from 21 upto 75. At the moment the Zeiss lenses look great because they are very high quality and comparitively very cheap. Keep the Extreme High Price Products, just offer a slower, lower cost alternavie range for the average enthusiast who'd up until the M8 most likely have just spent the money on L glass.

Just a thought.

 

[Rob-F]

Once I got used to the bulkiness of my TE, I found myself using it all the time for outdoor daytime shooting. Supposedly it is less good at 28mm compared to 35 and 50, but I have yet to see anything wrong with it. I don't know why they would discontinue it.

 

[Ken Ford]

If I ever get another chance to make a UK trip, a Tri-Elmar would be in the bag! Sadly I can't afford one anytime soon...

 

[Tom A]

I did have a version II of the 28/35/50 tri-Elmar for years. Rarely used it as I found that I could probably live with a 28 f4 and in an emergency a 35 f4 the thought of a 50f4 made it pretty well useless to me. It also suffered from a major ergonomic flaw. The selector for the focal length was located exactly were I wanted the focus ring! I kept shifting the selector and missed out on focus! I did complain to Leica about it and they said "We used a focus group to establish that position". i did not say what I thought of the focus group!
The new 16/18/21 is another matter. I have tried out a couple of them and find it quite useful.The step between 16-18 is small and I suspect they put it there because they could. I would have been happy with a 16 and 21 focal lengths only and a small finder with the two frames in it (and a dedicated finder for the M8). The "Thing" that now goes under the decription "Multi finder" is a joke. It looks like you stuck a Minox on top of the camera. Well, at least they are evidently giving it away with the lens.
I did some shooting side by side with the 16/18/21 against my 21/4 P VC lens and there was no noticable difference between them. I uspect that a 15/4,5 and a 21/4 P lens would serve most off us just as well (as well as saving us $2000+).

 

[trph_2000]

I took the Leica M8 course and the instuctor raved about the WATE, which
he said was perfectly suited to the M8.