Jump to content

New Tri-Elmar 16/18/21


Recommended Posts

Does anyone know if the maximum aperture remains constant through the focal length range? From the photograph, it looks like an f4.

 

I think that's a really useful focal length range to have. If it's full frame, I'd consider it for my film cameras. And with the crop factor, it's right there for the M8 at 21, 24, and 28mm equivalent.

 

Quality and cost are going to be huge factors though ... not sure how this lens will hold up against the primes, and it's got to cost an arm and a leg regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One posted price is about 3500 euros for the lens, and the finder comes with it.

 

Not clear if that includes European value-added tax or not, though. In any event likely it

will be THE most expensive lens in the M lineup (not counting 'collectibles'). But that does

include 3 focal lengths. How much would separate 21, 24, and 28 lenses cost (and weigh)?

 

Looks like Leica has replicated the whole "built-in" frameline system from the M bodies,

including the serrated illumination window for the frames (right window). Bulky - but it

does mean we'll be able to "see outside the framelines" with all the wide focal lengths.

 

Note that people planning to go entirely digital will not need this finder - the current

round 21-24-28 accesory finder will match this lens perfectly. Only film shooters will need

the 16-18mm 'full-frame' framing (until such time as a full-frame "M9" digital shows up).

 

Although if the finder comes with the lens anyway, that may be moot.

 

On the whole, I'm glad I have my discrete (in both senses of the word) 21 and 24

viewfinders, whether I get the lens or not.

 

Another observation - the very long tube-like structure means this is likely a "digital-

friendly" optical design. By the time the light has traveled through that long barrel it will

be very perpendicular to the image plane, at least for the area of the M8 sensor. May have

significantly less fall-off than a straight 21 lens.

 

Looks a lot like a scaled-down version of the zoom on my Sony R1 - which is basically a

huge long lens with a grip attached - at "24mm" (actually 14mm) the Sony/Zeiss lens has a

longer light path than my Leica-M 90, and about 4 times as long as my C/V 15mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference between 16 and 18 on the cropped sensor is almost exactly the same as between 21 and 24 on the full 35mm frame...which is why the 21-24-24 viewfinder for a film M would be usable as a 16-18-21 viewfinder on the M8.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, as Jonathan points out, the purpose of this lens is to maintain the existing M focal

lengths for people switching to the M8's cropped image area.

 

As such, it covers exactly the same EFFECTIVE focal length range as a hypothetical

"21-24-28" Tri-Elmar would for film users. I.E. the ratio of 16 to 18 is the same as 21 to

24 (roughly).

 

If Leica had produced ONLY a 15/16mm f/2.8 lens to equal a "21" on the M8 - I would

have been very happy - but people who prefer the 24mm view would have been

disappointed. Conversely, if Leica had produced only an 18mm f/2.8 prime lens - the 24

users would have been happy, and I would have been disappointed.

 

I think given the constraints Leica had to work under (deadline, money, and the fact that M

lenses must be compact so that they don't block the rangefinder focusing image), this was

Leica's way of meeting the "field-of-view" preferences of ALL their customers migrating to

the M8 without having to design and produce TWO different lenses.

 

I think a super-wide f/2.8 prime is still likely down the road if the market seems to

support it. But it will likely cost as much as this lens - the trade-off being aperture speed

vs. 3 lenses for the price of one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh - and YES:

 

1. it is f/4 at all focal lengths - variable max. apertures are for SLRs

 

2. it covers the full frame, if film users want a set of superwides. That's why the finder

includes fields of view settings for "real" 16 and 18mm fields of view, as well as the

21-24-28 fields for M8 users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If full frame (or indeed cropped) why 16,18,21mm? - hardly worth the extra size, weight and money as well as at least one lost stop. Why on earth not say 16, 21, 28 (or 24) in the first place? Hardly useful to a wide audience - how many 16mm owners also lust for 18mm?

 

Surely the very useful 28,35,50mm's spacing set some sort of useful benchmark for the Tri-Elmar product concept! Or, am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...