 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / 35 mm / August 2007New lower-priced line of Leica 'M' lenses
http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/summarit/ At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the lenses they have to offer. Isn't the whole idea of owning a Leica is so you'll have fast lenses? If you want slow-a.s lenses then stick to a SLR with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most. > http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/summarit/ > At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell > lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > >http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/summarit/ Cheap Fast Good Pick any two > At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell > lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > >http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/summarit/ f/2.5 isn't 'slow' any means. How often do you use that f/1.4 lens at f/1.4? Actually, a Leica M is all about fast lenses. I'm all about available light, so the two go hand in hand. Since I actually use Nikon and my Konica Hexar film cameras and not Leicas I'm a little locked in with what they have to offer in terms of prime lenses. However, I use my lenses at full aperture anytime I can. Having that extra stop or two over a zoom lens is sometimes invaluable. I'm sure it's even more so with Leicas too. >> At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell >> lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > f/2.5 isn't 'slow' any means. How often do you use that f/1.4 lens at > f/1.4? >At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell >lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the >lenses they have to offer. Isn't the whole idea of owning a Leica is so >you'll have fast lenses? If you want slow-a.s lenses then stick to a SLR >with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most. I think the new Summarit lenses serve an entirely different purpose, one that has not yet been discussed here. We already know that an f/2.5 maximum aperture helps to keep the cost down so that people considering Carl Zeiss ZM glass will now consider a genuine Leica lens instead. But there is more to it than that. Leica's current range of lenses, with the exception of the recent 28mm f/2.8 ASPH and the 16/18/21mm Tri-Elmar, are optimised for superlative performance with film. Many have rear elements that come extremely close to the film plane. They cause huge problems with digital capture, even with the remarkable features of the M8 that enable them to perform far better than they otherwise would. When it comes to competing with Carl Zeiss, a range of lenses that work best with digital capture is a must have. The ZM range of lenses is already well suited to digital capture, and there is a risk that Leica may get left behind if and when a Zeiss Ikon D appears. Over the next few years, Leica will probably renew its M lens range, taking advantage of more efficient production processes and new types of glass while providing near-telecentric designs. This might lead to an M9 or M10 with a full frame sensor. Even if not, the new lenses may well give an even better performance on the 1.33X sensor than many of the more expensive optics in the current Leica range. I think you will find that the new Summarit lenses are optimised for digital, and are near-telecentric, with rear elements that stand well clear of the sensor. They will work equally well with film. I expect that they will also perform well used wide open, as Leica lenses do. So the answer to "Why Summarit? is "Optimised for digital capture!" > >At first I thought "it's about frickin' time. I guess Leica wants to sell > >lenses to real people and not just doctors and lawyers." Then I saw the [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > So the answer to "Why Summarit? is "Optimised for digital capture!" I don't doubt that Leica is working to better their position with regard to designs for digital capture, but I'd be hesitant to believe that the primary motivation for the Summarit line is digital. After all, many of the Leica lenses other than normals were Elmarits with f/ 2.8 apertures, so an f/ 2.5 speed is hardly a step backward. I believe the new line represents both improved production capabilities and design advances. I'm sure the new lenses will be fantastic performers. > > I think you will find that the new Summarit lenses are optimised for > > digital, and are near-telecentric, with rear elements that stand well [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the new line represents both improved production capabilities and > design advances. I'm sure the new lenses will be fantastic performers. Simply put, 90% of Leica sales are to prestiege consumers who buy them for Bigger-Dickerism and not their very fine photographic qualities. Leica's optical capabilities-what they CAN do if motivated-are not the best in the world by any means. Their optics are good because they are willing to put some build cost in and do have some talent. Panavision isn't a customer of theirs and I am dead nuts sure Panavision is the most discriminating optical customer in the world except for the semiconductor industry, and they are no longer using conventional optics at today's fab line sizes. Just how much film goes through Leicas anymore (or anything else) is open to some conjecture. It is probably not a growing market. Digital is here to stay and will take over even more share from film, though probably never all of it, and large format will probably be the last film market to go. As far as the sensor size goes perhape Leica will finally realize what I have for thirty years: 3:2 is not that great an aspect ratio and by reducing it the full _height_ sensor becomes a far more reasonable deal. 24x28 or 24x30 would be fine and a lot cheaper. > Simply put, 90% of Leica sales are to prestiege consumers who buy >them for Bigger-Dickerism and not their very fine photographic >qualities. Yawn. Plonk! Bye. > > > I think you will find that the new Summarit lenses are optimised for > > > digital, and are near-telecentric, with rear elements that stand well [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > and by reducing it the full _height_ sensor becomes a far more > reasonable deal. 24x28 or 24x30 would be fine and a lot cheaper. f.cking moron..... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.