What new ZM lens would u like 2.

[Roger Hicks]

The current prices for (used) Noctilux lenses are insane ... But is there a market for a new designed 50/1.0 at all ? Designing such a lens costs some money and relatively small companies like Leica, Zeiss, and Cosina will think twice about their investments ...

Dear Gabor,

Thanks to computer optimization, lens design nowadays is a lot less expensive than it used to be. Grinding aspherics and incorporating floating elements costs money, but if people are prepared to pay the price, an f/1 (or faster) is not difficult to build -- and to build with better image quality (objectively) than the original Noctilux.

Of course an f/0.9 (or faster) would sell like hot cakes to the collector/willy waver market: the fastest full-frame lens ever built...

Cheers,

R.

 

[maddoc]

Dear Gabor,

Thanks to computer optimization, lens design nowadays is a lot less expensive than it used to be. Grinding aspherics and incorporating floating elements costs money, but if people are prepared to pay the price, an f/1 (or faster) is not difficult to build -- and to build with better image quality (objectively) than the original Noctilux.

Of course an f/0.9 (or faster) would sell like hot cakes to the collector/willy waver market: the fastest full-frame lens ever built...

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger,

a f/0.9 or faster would be an interesting design for sure. What would you expect being the price for such a lens ? 2000 - 3000 $ if made from Zeiss and ~4000$ from Leica ?

If you would have the option (and money !) to buy either an used Noctilux for (theoretical value only) 4000 $ or a new designed f/0.9 from Zeiss for let's say 3000$ and having a more "neutral" image character compared to the Noctilux, what would be your choice ?

Cheers,

Gabor

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger,

a f/0.9 or faster would be an interesting design for sure. What would you expect being the price for such a lens ? 2000 - 3000 $ if made from Zeiss and ~4000$ from Leica ?

If you would have the option (and money !) to buy either an used Noctilux for (theoretical value only) 4000 $ or a new designed f/0.9 from Zeiss for let's say 3000$ and having a more "neutral" image character compared to the Noctilux, what would be your choice ?

Cheers,

Gabor

Dear Gabor,

Too many hypotheses for a rational answer. Who would make the faster lens, Zeiss or Leica? What would their design criteria be?

This would be an expensive lens to make -- and if it were in the ZI line-up it would be German-made like the 15/2.8 and 85/2, i.e. prices would be in Leica territory anyway. I'd be surprised at much under $5000 from either -- thats only about 3200 euros, after all.

On optical quality, I'd want to try both lenses to see which I liked better. After all, a 50/1.4 Summilux is 'better' than a 50/1.5 C-Sonnar in just about every possible way, but I love the look of the Sonnar. After all, the existing Noctilux seems to be love-it-or-hate-it, though many of the haters seem never actually to have used one.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Oliver H]

Hi,

... I have the CV 15mm & the 12mm lenses - and I`d like to see something wider than that. Do not care if it comes from CV or Zeiss.

Regards,

Oliver

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi,

... I have the CV 15mm & the 12mm lenses - and I`d like to see something wider than that. Do not care if it comes from CV or Zeiss.

Regards,

Oliver

Dear Oliver,

As far as I recall, the theoretical limit for a rectilinear-drawing lens for 24x36mm is 9-point-something millimetres.

It would be terrifyingly expensive, and sell in small numbers (where it would not be very price sensitive), so I suspect that if it appeared in ZI mount it would be German-made -- at which point you'd be looking at Leica-style prices anyway. It would also need a centre-grad filter for even illumination.

My own view is that probably, someone will make a 10mm lens sooner or later, but I don't know who and I don't know when. Given the limited demand and high price, with a lot of hand assembly, I'd back Zeiss Germany or Leica.

Cheers,

R.

 

[summaron]

On optical quality, I'd want to try both lenses to see which I liked better. After all, a 50/1.4 Summilux is 'better' than a 50/1.5 C-Sonnar in just about every possible way, but I love the look of the Sonnar.

Following Roger on this, what's the point of a neutral f/1 50mm--especially in the era of rather handsome 800 iso films--if it doesn't have a unique character. Part of the aura of a Noctilux is that it was made from the same glass as the Hubble telescope ("reaching for the stars" could have been its advertising slogal in the corny 1950's).

A new Zeiss could replicate a certain old formula or curious mid-stop, like the 1.2 and Canon did. For me it would be ok if it had different character at different stops as the old Heliar did (the one that looks a little like a reverse Tessar in Kingslake) or as somebody commented recently about the present C-Sonnar.

For conventional formulas, small would be the way to go, a small 45 or or smaller 50 or 35mm.

And the choice of a single coat, less saturated, less contrasty version, like the subtle pre-1970 Pancolar...

James

 

[Oliver H]

The 10mm lens

The 10mm lens

Hi Roger,

thanks for your reply. 10mm is the limit? Ok, I`d like to see a lens like that. Something about the centre-grad filter: I do not think it might be necessary. I`m using the 12mm without any filter and the results are pretty good.

Regards,

Oliver

 

[Roger Hicks]

10mm is the limit? Ok, I`d like to see a lens like that. Something about the centre-grad filter: I do not think it might be necessary. I`m using the 12mm without any filter and the results are pretty good.

Dear Oliver,

I feel the same way; if there were a 10mm, I'm not sure I'd bother with a centre grad either. But equally, I think you'd have to build a lens that could take one (unlike the Voigtländer 15/4,5) in order to expand the market to those who do need the even illumination for technical, not pictorial, purposes.

Cheers,

R.

 

[cam]

Thanks to computer optimization, lens design nowadays is a lot less expensive than it used to be. Grinding aspherics and incorporating floating elements costs money, but if people are prepared to pay the price, an f/1 (or faster) is not difficult to build -- and to build with better image quality (objectively) than the original Noctilux.

Of course an f/0.9 (or faster) would sell like hot cakes to the collector/willy waver market: the fastest full-frame lens ever built...

well, i guess we'll find out after Photokina as that's what Leica will be unveiling... but prices opined, crack me up. my guess is at least $8000.

(though i'd like it to be less so i can nab a used Nocti at an affordable price 😛 )

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

In addition to a dual 35-50 f/2.8 (hell, I'd settle for f/4 if the price and size were right), I'd like a fast modern 50mm lens. Something to compete with the latest Summilux at a more reasonable price. I don't think that's too far out there.

 

[Roger Hicks]

well, i guess we'll find out after Photokina as that's what Leica will be unveiling... but prices opined, crack me up. my guess is at least $8000.

(though i'd like it to be less so i can nab a used Nocti at an affordable price 😛 )

Well, yes. All I meant was that if Zeiss Germany made one, they MIGHT be able to do it for 3200 euros, though like you, I doubt it: 4000-5000 euros ($6000-$7000) is likelier. What Leica's pricing policy might be is another guess entirely, and again might be affected disproportionately by speed (f/1, f/0.95, f/0.9) for reasons of marketing. I'd be surprised if it were much over 5000 euros ($7000) for an f/1.

But I have to stress that while my 'informed guesses' are better informed than some, I genuinely don't know exactly what is coming, and from whom, in the 50mm focal length.

Cheers,

R.

 

[cam]

Well, yes. All I meant was that if Zeiss Germany made one, they MIGHT be able to do it for 3200 euros, though like you, I doubt it: 4000-5000 euros ($6000-$7000) is likelier. What Leica's pricing policy might be is another guess entirely, and again might be affected disproportionately by speed (f/1, f/0.95, f/0.9) for reasons of marketing. I'd be surprised if it were much over 5000 euros ($7000) for an f/1.

d'accord.

i just bought a mint current Sonnar for a great price in the hopes it will quell my Nocti lemmings (haven't received it yet, so i can't comment). despite my love of speed (France can get so dark in the winter), i'm realistic about ever being able to afford it. if i'm wrong, i will kiss the sky!

 

[kram]

The leica Noctilux had been around for a long time, so a modern Zeiss lens could best it easily. Look what happened with the VC 50mm Nokton, peole were saying it was better than the leica f1.4 (again an old design) but at a much reduced cost. Leica went away and came out with a modern f1.4 (similar price to the oput going f1.4) and everyone raves about it. If Leica bring out a new improved Noctilux at the same price as the old one (I can't se why not) it will be a step improvement on the old one. Therefore, if you were Zeiss, you can either release a 50mm f1 (or wider) made in Germany for a similar price to the Noctilux (groan), or how about a 50mm f1.2 made in Japan for ~$1900. Roger, any idea what would sell better? Could you make a compact 50mm f1.2 sonnar, or is f1.5 a practical limit for this lens design?

Hummm 10mm f5.6 - a bit too wide for me.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Could you make a compact 50mm f1.2 sonnar, or is f1.5 a practical limit for this lens design?

Well, a lot depends on what you define as 'Sonnar'. A Sonnar is a triplet derivative, but for f/1.2 and f/0.95 Canon switched to sort-of-symmetrical lenses, though you could (with difficulty) defend the design as a triplet with the front glass split into two air-spaced glasses; a doublet; and the rear glass split into a doublet and singlet. So no, I don't think a Sonnar-derived ultra-fast is very likely.

All right, I'm no lens designer, but put it this way: I'd be surprised.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[kram]

I ask because the sonnar is a compact design (as well as offering a different signature).
only abit longer before we know. Not many people have voted for the 4 focal length lens. Looks like rf uses are easily pleased with just a HIGH QUALITY single focal length. I seem to be using my 35mm more than ever.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I ask because the sonnar is a compact design (as well as offering a different signature).
only abit longer before we know. Not many people have voted for the 4 focal length lens. Looks like rf uses are easily pleased with just a HIGH QUALITY single focal length. I seem to be using my 35mm more than ever.

Well, yes, compact designs are easy IF you don't want maximum speed, illumination, edge sharpness, etc.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Zenjitsuman]

Since we have less than FF digital sensors now and likely in the future a 70-75mm lens would be a good focal length for a new lens.

A high IQ at wide open aperture would be preferred at F2.0. That is fast enough for most film photography and certainly fast enough for digital photography.

Leica has a fabulous lens in this focal length and at F2.0 too but its too expensive for most users to afford. Zeiss should be able to make a lens for one third the price of the Leica.

 

[kram]

Nah, Zeiss would make the lens to fit the frame lines of the current ZM Ikon. So no 40mm + 75mm. Wider stuff than 28mm (and telephoto e.g 135mm) you need a external finder as they're not cover by the viewfinder range. Wait for a FF sensor, another 18 months😕 (could be). Only a week to go now; what would be a big let down for me.... 85mm f2.8, useful for some, but not for me (would make sense to have one in the ZM line up though). 50mm f2.8 (my f2 is great, for me to even think of an 2.8 50mm, it would have to be dinky and fab quality all round... and AT LEAST 20% cheaper than the 50mm f2, unlike the 35mm f2.8 in the UK..which ONLY costs 6% less:bang:. Has any one in the UK got one?).

 

[DavidC]

a pancake 35mm f2. or any compact, lightweight lens with punch that I can carry all over to any function and not feel weighted down.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I would really love a slow, medium telephoto. Nothing faster than 3.5, please. F4 would be ideal. But, with a classic formulation, like, say, a 'tessar.'

Oh...wait.....