"Failed" Leica Len Modern (post 1970s) Designs

It's interesting to see what people here believe which Leica lens

designs after 1970's were "duds." (I decided to limit it to

post-1970's because that is my main interest.)

Personally, from what I gather, I heard that the 28-70 f3.5-4.5 zoom

R-lens was considered a "failure" from an optical standpoint. Some

people complain about the Sigma design despite the Leica endorsement.

I don't know whether the most recent version of this lens is good but

I would suspect it to be a better performer than any of the AF Sigma

lenses of today.

To be controversial, I think that the rare 35-70 f2.8 zoom R-lens was

a complete "failure" for Leica in my honest opinion. It was one of the

best optical performers of either M or R series but Leica wasn't able

to do a high production series for this lens because of the high

percentage of rejects. Thus, for me, a failure since this lens is

relegated to collector's status (geewhiz why over 8 grand?). And

ironically this is a standard zoom lens in Canon and Nikon mounts

which makes me wonder whether Leica was too stringent in their demands

for this lens design.

Again, it would be fascinating to see which Leica lenses people here

don't care for. :)

28/70 has too much distortion. Other wise ok.

21 3.4 vignetts to unacceptable degree. True wide angle design limitation. 21 pre asph is much better.

24 R does not behave properly off axis within debth of field. Typical problem with early floating elements.

Sold the last two and still use the zoom where it won`t show.

Not too bad considering all are someone else`s design with Leica`s name on them.

Hi Alfie

Series 7 Summicron-R 35s - had 2 or 3 of'em. They had loads of flare. Finally got the later, smaller version; been happy with it.

GaryP

"To be controversial, I think that the rare 35-70 f2.8 zoom R-lens was a complete "failure" for Leica in my honest opinion. It was one of the best optical performers of either M or R series but Leica wasn't able to do a high production series for this lens because of the high percentage of rejects. Thus, for me, a failure since this lens is relegated to collector's status..."

For a minute there I thought you were talking about the 35mm Summilux-M Aspherical (1st version with 2 asph surfaces). With this criteria it too must have been a failure despite its outstanding performance. Maybe instead of "failure" these abbreviated runs could be characterized as "works in progress".