why wide-angle lenses are expensive?

The Canon 25mm is a Zeiss Topogon clone as is the Russar. The one CQ has is a pretty attractive price as Roland indicates. If you want a more classic look you should give one a try. I tried 2 different Russars last year. The later black one was OK. For me I prefer the more modern CV 4/21. Topogons are interesting lenses. So tiny when made for 35mm format. It's a popular scheme for LF Aerial photography .

Topogon.jpg
 
f16sunshine said:
The lens is f5.6. RF coupling is not important with such a slow wide lens.
Click to expand...

Of course, that's true -- but to be honest, the Russar lens offers a Leica screw mount, so an adapter for the M-Leica is necessary.
With the result that the customer has quite the same "comfort" as using an adapted SLR super-wide ;-)
 
radi(c)al_cam said:
Of course, that's true -- but to be honest, the Russar lens offers a Leica screw mount, so an adapter for the M-Leica is necessary.
With the result that the customer has quite the same "comfort" as using an adapted SLR super-wide ;-)
Click to expand...

Well the two big advantage of RF wides over Reflex versions are size and distortion.

The smallest 21mm Reflex I have tried was a Zuiko 3.5/21 most are larger. It was great but still barreled quite a bit and was already bit larger than the Elmarit 21 which is a big 21 by RF standards.
Many RF offerings have nearly zero distortion.
Add to that what amounts to an extension tube to make an adaption to M mount and it now makes for an unwieldy kit.
Doable though if need be.
 
The original Nikkor SLR 2.1cm/4 (and also the Canon 19mm?) lens was only usable with mirror lock-up and it was optically identical to the (now) very expensive original RF lens; it is not retro-focal (very deep rear element) and can be Leica adapted (without RF coupling).

See for instance http://cameraquest.com/nf214.htm or ebay item 380214805239 (BIN of 450 with finder).

Roland.
 
Yep, the original 19mm FD mount lens had to be used with the mirror locked up. It was supplied with a hoy-show mounted 19mm finder. Canon later redesigned the lens to make it a retrofocus design that eliminated the mirror lock up requirement
 
The Canon Adapter B, which dexdog referred to, lets you put a Canon FD lens on an LTM camera and opens up a whole world of possibilities. You can then get adapters for Nikon, Exakta, Pentax M42, Tamron Adaptall, and all the T-Mount variations--TX, YS etc. All of these give focus to infinity. Vivitar, Sigma and others made lenses in the 17 and 18mm range and possibly wider that are relatively inexpensive.
 
ferider said:
If you get a good sample, these can be excellent. BTW, the Orion 28/5.6 is great, too. The Russar often comes with a great 20mm finder, that is missing in the listing you mention.

Roland.
Click to expand...

Dear Roland,

And a bad one can be impressively bad. Too much luck involved for my taste.

Oh: and surely 28/6.3.

Cheers,

R.
 
The Orion 28/6.3 is an interesting lens. pretty sharp, lots of tone, low contrast. Essentially weightless and tiny.
 
any example photos of russar lens? The examples I found on flickr are not nice and I am not sure if they are representative.
 
wgerrard said:
We know this... how? Does anyone own a CV lens that is stamped "Made in China"? Is there evidence for any of the rest of those assertions?



If Germany was actually socialist Leica would be owned either by the state or its workers. In any case, it seems Leica believes it is important that Leica's employees be paid acceptable wages. Otherwise, they could farm the work overseas, much as many Western multinationals have, shamefully, done.
Click to expand...

I think the guy you responded to was referring to Germany's extensive welfare state and high minimum wages. Japan also has extensive welfare state social services and workers there are well paid, so I don't understand the people who claim that things can be made cheaper in Japan. Japan, Germany, and even the USA all have similar labor costs in high-skill industries like optical manufacturing. Leicas cost what they do because they make them in small quantities, and because people are dumb enough to pay the ridiculous prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom