Tri-Elmar

[geejay]

Hi Guys,

I’ve just purchased a Tri-Elmar 28/35/50 F4 lens V1 from Ffordes.

I brought this lens for the mainly outdoor daylight shooting that i do, this lens seems to have a love hate relationship with Leica shooters from what i have read today. It’s size and small maximum aperture is the main bone of contention.

I hope I’ve not brought a lemon, the convenience of a do it all lens (well almost) appeals to me.

Won’t know for sure until it arrives sometime next week.

Your thoughts guys on this lens would be much appreciated,thanks.

Kind regards,
Graham.

 

[Godfrey]

I had the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm for a while. Excellent performer, just as the 28-35-50mm is reputed to be. Both suit a lot of general purpose uses and minimize the lenses you need to carry.

It's the modern "have to have ultra-ultra fast lens all the time" meme that makes them unappealing to a lot of people, I think. That and the fact that they're a bit on the bulky side.

G

 

[james.liam]

Much of the 'criticism' comes from its lower contrast, some distortion at 28 and tendency to flare at 50 when dumb enough to shoot into direct light. The front element, reportedly sourced from Hoya, is irreplaceable so guard it with your life. On an M9, its f/4 aperture was problematic. No more.

It's an engineering marvel, a film-era lens that's especially lovely on a Monochrom. If the expectation is a combo of a 28 Elmarit ASPH, 35 Summarit and 50 Summicron v5, you will be sorely disappointed. All multi-focal length lenses are compromises.
Put it on an M10, throw a small 21 (or CV or Summarit 75) in your bag (or pocket) and you have the most flexible, lightweightt M travel kit ever. Any new bi-tri (super) elmars will be $10k+ and unforgivingly modern.

 

[a.noctilux]

Graham,
I bet that when you use this MATE for a while you would have your own ideas.
- I'd add that the VF blockage (mainly at 28mm setting) about 1/4 "black lower right" can be or not "needing" external 28 VF (like me), so you will "see".
- 1 meter focus can be limiting factor (not me as I'm used to that in LTM Leica)
- I used a hood taken from my Elmarit-M 21 asph., but nothing changed in flaring 50mm
only more VF blockage
- now my wife use it with pleasure, I've almost sold the lens
- I'm happy to use it ( from time to time borrowing from her ) when I don't want to change lenses


Arnaud

 

[Rob-F]

I often compose in depth, and I routinely check my DOF scale to make sure that both foreground and background are sharp. That calls for stopping down, so the f/4 aperture was no limitation for me. Finder blockage was no big deal; I just threw a 28mm finder in the shoe.

So why did I sell it? The DOF scales on this lens--a forest of zigzag lines--are very hard to use. By the time I traced a line from the distance mark to the f-number, my light could be gone, or the subject moved away! If that's not a problem, then there's no problem. Take good care of it and you should be fine!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Total waste of money. You already have lenses which are superior to it.
Changing compact lenses on film cameras is totally not big deal.

 

[wosim]

The Tri-Elmar 28-35-50mm is my absolute favourite for travel. Take the Tri-Elmar 16-18-21mm, the lightweight Tele-Elmarit-M f2.8 90mm and a Summilux 35mm (or Zeiss Distagon) or 50mm for low light and with 4 small lenses you are prepared for any situation.

Here you can find all reviews about this lens I know so far:

https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/leica-camera-lens-reviews/links-testberichte-reviews/testberichte-objektive-leica-lens-reviews-28mm-35mm#h.p_lJiWD2Jau1pU

 

[AusDLK]

absolutely NOT a waste of money

I owned both the v1 and v2 in years past, sold them in two of my "I have too much camera stuff" purges and when Tri-Elmar prices had surged

but I recently bought another v1 (which I prefer over the v2: the metal hood of the v2 is easily bent out of shape; the DOF scale on the v2 is just awkwardly usable and rather unsightly)

it's TONS less expensive than three separate Leica lenses of the same focal lengths -- and I challenge anyone to tell me "oh, so much flare, so much distortion, why do you use such a crappy lens?"

no regrets, it lives on my M10-D

and remember, you're this from Famous Photographer 🙂

 

[Rayt]

I shot this with film and was limiting with a yellow filter and triX but the lens is great at f4 so wasn’t much of a sacrifice. Now with digital and shooting iso3200 all day with the tri Elmarit at f8 it is as good as any 3 most used Leica lenses.

 

[geejay]

Thanks to all for you interesting reply’s,
Received the lens today seems to work like a dream, masterpiece in lens engineering.

Won’t be using it until Christmas as its a present from my wife.(feeling very grateful).

All the best everybody, say safe.

Kindest regards,
Graham.

 

[a.noctilux]

Graham,
while waiting you can have some infos and opinions on the MATE at LUF
https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/311600-thinking-about-a-283550-tri-elmar/


https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topi...mply-very-smart/?tab=comments#comment-3558351


You can try out if the vague frame setting at 28 is not on your lens, and "see" if the .58
hide less with the lens set at 28mm than .72 for example.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

I owned a 3E, as Erwin Puts calls it, some years back (the E49 version) and it was an excellent performer. There are very few downsides to owning one over the three primes (speed and size about sums it up).

 

[james.liam]

I owned a 3E, as Erwin Puts calls it, some years back (the E49 version) and it was an excellent performer. There are very few downsides to owning one over the three primes (speed and size about sums it up).

Why did you part with it?

 

[Bill Blackwell]

Why did you part with it?

Good question! There are allot of cameras and lenses I should have never parted with. Like most people I operate on a limited budget - I sold it in order to acquire something else. I don't remember exactly what.

There was a time - due to my distain for the M8 (I won't get into that now) - in which I got out of Leica altogether. At that time I got rid of all of my M lenses in favor of Canon. It was around that time I sold the Tri-Elmar.

Later I jumped back in with an MP-240 and I'm reasonably happy with Leica once again (now with an M10-P).

I'd love to get another Tri-Elmar (I have tried to make that work), but I just don't have the resources for one these days. The E49 version has the same lens formula, but has a depth of field scale and less VF blockage. It also tends to fetch allot more compared to the E55 version.