Why aren't there more goggled lenses?

[retinax]

Hi all,
I've been wondering about this, having never used a goggled lens... wouldn't many of us prefer goggles over an external viewfinder? I imagine googles would be very convenient for wider lenses that most cameras don't offer framelines for. Yet, none of them are being made any more. To my knowledge, only 35mm lenses were ever offered with goggles, and the idea was to use them with the M3, which didn't have 35mm framelines. And there was a 135 with goggles as well I think. Seems useful too, because the framelines for longer lenses are so small.
But why didn't this idea carry on? They could have made 28s with goggles for exactly the same reason, there were no framelines for 28mm in the Leica rangefinders until the M4 (?). And never for wider lenses. Just economic reasons? External finders aren't exactly cheap, either...
Wouldn't you love, for example, a 21 with goggles so you don't need an external finder (or a Bessa R4)?
Any thoughts?
J.

 

[raid]

The extra size and weight make goggled lenses less attractive for potential buyers. Users also complain about distortion in the viewing. Then, some people see such lenses as being "ugly".

 

[Gregm61]

At one point in the past, I believe it was Tom A who "goggled" a few 21mm f2.8 Elmarits for users who were looking for exactly that. I see one pop up on eBay from time to time.

It was the M4-P that introduced the 28mm and 75mm frame lines, so the M4 and M4-2 only have as wide as 35mm frames in the finder.

 

[raid]

There is a $1000 difference between goggled and non-goggled Summicrom 35/2.

 

[retinax]

Greg, cool, I didn't know about that, of course Tom A has already done it!

Raid, I see that many don't like the goggles, so they'd rather just use the internal framelines that most more modern M cameras have for 35mm. I'm thinking about lenses for which there are no internal framlines though. Then it is the choice between external finder and goggles. And many also dislike external finders.

 

[zuiko85]

If goggles are bulky and ugly and external finders are not preferred either then that is what SLR's are for.
Although retro-focus wide angle lenses can be huge and oversized, especially in the digital age, this is not always true if maximum aperture is kept within reason.

 

[Rob-F]

I might like to have a goggled 21mm or 24mm so I would not need the aux. finder. I might even like a goggled 28mm. But the drawback is that rather than being a tiny lens easily carried in the smallest of bags, it would occupy a whole compartment in an FX-5b or F-6, etc.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I used goggled and I used EVF. This is why I prefer framelines even more.
With goggles camera becomes unbalanced. And to me Leica is the instrument for fiddling. I can't fiddle for hours if it is unbalanced. EVF makes my nose stuck to camera back and head must be turned. How to fiddle with blocked nose and head in not right position?

 

[Gregm61]

Greg, cool, I didn't know about that, of course Tom A has already done it!

I couldn't remember all the exact details, but went back and found a post in the Leica forum from 2007 with some additional description...


"...I've hear that Reinhold Mueller in Toronto does this. He and our own Tom Abrahamsson collaborated on the idea if I'm not mistaken. No idea on the cost - why not call Reinhold and ask him?..."

It's done by Reinhold Mueller to Tom A's design to any 21, altho' it works
best with a 21/3.4 SA, which can then be permanently affixed to your M4-p.

"...I had it done to a 21/2.8 non-asph elmarit. I love it, although it is a
little dark, and framing is inexact. It is still better than dropping,
breaking and losing V/F's. FYI, the focus link to the R/F is inaccurate
after gogglization - but with the immense DOF of the lens, I leave mine set to 1m and don't worry about it. IF it gets critiacl close up wide open in
poor light, you might want to focus using another lens/body combo, and
transfer the distance setting.

Reinhold does a great job, it is (expensively) reversable. The cost is
slightly lower with the SA than the elamrit, but is around $500-$650.

I'm plucking up the courage to have the same done to my 24. (only lost one finder to date!) Best of light, and apologies to several for an on-topic post."

 

[raid]

I traded off my non-goggled 35mm Summicron and I kept the one with goggles. I had both versions.

 

[Bill Clark]

I don't use goggles. My 28 with my M4 works just fine.

As Clint has said, "You just gotta know your limits!"

Even with my Barnacks the same. Don't even know if goggled lenses are availlable.