New lower-priced line of Leica 'M' lenses

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...stem/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-ass lenses then stick to a SLR
with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most.


"UC" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...stem/summarit/

On Aug 9, 9:22 am, "nathantw" wrote:
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-ass lenses then stick to a SLR
with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most.

"UC" wrote in message

oups.com...

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...stem/summarit/


Cheap
Fast
Good

Pick any two

On Aug 9, 9:22 am, "nathantw" wrote:
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-ass lenses then stick to a SLR
with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most.

"UC" wrote in message

oups.com...

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...stem/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.

"UC" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 9, 9:22 am, "nathantw" wrote:
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-ass lenses then stick to a SLR
with a zoom lens. I see this lens line lasting 2 or 3 years at most.

"UC" wrote in message

oups.com...

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...stem/summarit/


f/2.5 isn't 'slow' any means. How often do you use that f/1.4 lens at
f/1.4?

"nathantw" wrote:

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-ass 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!"

On Aug 9, 3:07 pm, Tony Polson wrote:
"nathantw" wrote:
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-ass 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!"


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
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!"

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.

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.

Bret Ludwig wrote:

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.

On Aug 11, 2:44 pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
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!"

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.

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.

****ing moron.....