All this endless talk about new camera bodies got me to thinking. What about the really important stuff..like lenses? If you could boss around the lens wizards in Germany, what would you set them to designing? For an M, I'd request a 24/2 ASPH and an 115mm/2.8 APO to replace the too long/slow 135/3.5. And what about the R series?

-- Marc Williams (mwilliams111313MI@comcast.net), May 31, 2002

Answers

75/2 Summicron (but probably not in this lifetime)

75 Lux is too heavy for my travels, and I have the 50/1 when I need the speed... A 75/2 or 75/2.8 would be the answer to my request!

-- Kevin Baker (kevin@thebakers.org), May 31, 2002.

A faster Tri-elmar with closer focusing, hopefully not too much heavier than the current model. These 3 focal lengths satisfy most of my shooting needs.

-- Rich Weiss (richardkw@hotmail.com), May 31, 2002.

Marc, I'm pretty happy, I think I'll just stay where I'm at.

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), May 31, 2002.

Like you said...the 24/2 asph woohoo! Would complete my arsenal of lenses quite well. I think I'd like it in chrome. : )

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), May 31, 2002.

Marc: just out of curiosity, which frame lines would you use with the 115 APO-Elmarit-M? 90 or 135?

I could get tempted by a 21 ASPH f/2.8 that was reduced in size to the depth of the 21 f/3.4 Super-Angulon or Zeiss Biogon - 55 filters are OK but about 5mm shallower. Optional goggles for use on a .58/.72 body would be fun, too!

The 75 f/2 APO is also on my 'might actually buy a Solms product' list. But Leica considers the 75/90s to be versions of the same focal length - the 'Lux would have been a 90 except that it would have blocked the finder even worse than it does now. So since they already have f/2 and f/2.8 lenses in this grouping, they won't bother.

Leica has already more or less stated they aren't going to upgrade the 50s, since they want to keep the 'entry' prices down, and can't justify R&D for 'cheap' loss-leader lenses. (50 Summilux a 'loss leader' - hee- hee!)

But they might put the 'O'-Leica 50 f/3.5 into an M mount.

I suspect Leica's lens designers are being kept busy with R stuff at the moment: a cheaper redesign of the 35-70 f/2.8, tweaking the 90 APO for an R-barrel, etc.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 31, 2002.

1.5 X apo teleconverter for making a 90 into 135 mm lens.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), May 31, 2002.

Pure heresy! But I'd like a 105mm f2.5 - - just like my son-in-law's Nikon. IMHO, it's probably the best portrait and "close landscape" lens ever produced. It's ideal for framing the face and shoulders. Narrower DOF than the 90, but much more than the 135. - - and, you could use the 90 framelines in an M series for the landscape shots.

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), May 31, 2002.

Another vote for a 24/2 ASPH.

-- Luke Dunlap (luked@mail.utexas.edu), May 31, 2002.

one more vote for a 24/2 - though i would prefer a 24/1.4, but that is asking too much.

-- Matthew Geddert (geddert@yahoo.com), May 31, 2002.

I'll second the 75 Summicron, I'd buy one NOW. The 24 Summicron would be good too, but... my shooting would use the 75 more.

-- Charles (cbarcellona@telocity.com), May 31, 2002.

George; the 105mm F2.5 Nikkor is available used in LTM. It was introduced by Nikon in the 1950's..It uses the standard 52mm filter size too! Mine has a tripod socket also..The lens design is the older 105mm lens design which is a Sonnar type; which is sharpest from 10 feet to infinity...The F nikon use same formula until 1970?; then the Nikon F 105mm lens design was changed to a Gauss type..It is better in sharpness when used closer than 10 feet...I have owned all three of these lenses at times...The LTM Nikkor is heavy..It shows up on ebay several times per year..Its lens coating is alot harder than Leicas of that era...When used on my M3 one may either use the 135mm or 90mm adapters..I tend to use my 90mm adapter; which I use also with my Russian jupiter-9 85mm F2

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 31, 2002.

Andy, I'd use the 115mm frame lines on the M9 'cause that's how long I'd be waiting. Now the 28/2 ASPH is a real possibility. Actually, my first instinct was a 75/2 APO. My favorite 2 focal length kit is a 34/1.4 ASPH and a 75/1.4. It would be nice to see how much smaller a f/2 would actually be.

-- Marc Williams (mwilliams111313MI@comcast.net), May 31, 2002.

Marc; at first I thought the 115mm focal length was odd; then I realized by optics box has a 113mm EKTAR process lens! Kelly

-- Kelly Flanigan (Zorki3c@netscape.net), May 31, 2002.

A 21-26 (yes, 26 - this is not a typo) -35 Tri-Elmarit that didn't block the VF and performed as well as the current lenses in those focals.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), May 31, 2002.

How about a 35/75 2.8 Bi-Elmar?

-- Paul Chefurka (paul@chefurka.com), May 31, 2002.

35mm, f1.0 need not be asph in the old style pre-asph mount.

-- steve (leitz_not_leica@hotmail.com), May 31, 2002.

I'm not sure if this is technicaly feasible, but I would like a small and compact 90/2 Summicon, the size of the old Tele-Elmar 90/2.8. Heck I would even settle for a updated Tele-Elmar 90/2.8.

How about a Tri Elmar 35-50-90 / f3.5 or f4? Leica will never make a very fast Tri-Elmar, because it would cut in the sales of their primes.

feli

-- feli (feli2@earthlink.net), May 31, 2002.

I'd like the Elmar from the "O", in LST.

-- Willhelmn (wmitch@hotmail.com), May 31, 2002.

Paul, I like your idea of a bi-elmar. It would be even better if there is a 35/75 bi-summicron.

-- WP Cheng (cwpcsl@netvigator.com), May 31, 2002.

I would like to see a line of very small LTM lenses from Leica to compliment an updated IIIf. The IIIf shall have M style loading but able to use the new Barnack Rapidwinder. The lenses licensed from VC but with all glass elements and made in Germany with standard Leica quality brass mount . The lenses shall include the existing 21mm f/4, 24mm f/4, 28mm f/3.5, 35mm f/3.5 VC versions. Leica should not charge more than twice as much as Cosina and that should be possible since they share the same mount.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), May 31, 2002.

I've said this a few times before in answer to similar questions: a 75-90-135/4 TRI-Elmar to complement the 28-35-50.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), May 31, 2002.

George & the group; here are two Views of the 10.5cm F2.5 Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-P LTM on my M3.....Note the tripod socket in the second photo...This is one of my never sell lenses. regards Kelly

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 31, 2002.

Hello,

I'd suggest a "Leikon" adapter for the back of any Leica lens. Thereby making it compatible with my F3. Sort of an Adaptall II for leica lenses. It would need to be AI compatible, and a set of Nikon ears would be particularly stylish.

Imagine the possibilites of interchangeable screens, multiple exposure capability, motor drive like greased lightning, TTL flash, AE, and 100 viewfinder etc.

Then when you want to go completely manual, you put the lens back on the M or R whatever.

They your camera would instantly be a Likkermat M, or a Neica R3.

-- David Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), May 31, 2002.

Kelly, maybe my question is stupid, but is your lens RF coupled?And what framelines do you use?

-- Olivier (olreiche@videotron.ca), May 31, 2002.

I'd like the 75/2 also. Supposedly it already exists and has for some time. However the DOD won't let Leica release it to the public as it was funded by them to ride only on satellites (the unmanned image taking kind).

Hardly seems fair, since we all paid for a piece of them.

Best,

Jerry

-- Jerry Pfile (Jerry Pfile@MSN.com), May 31, 2002.

Costs fifty dollars

-- Chad Hahn (thehahns@cornhusker.net), May 31, 2002.

Olivier; yes the lens is rangefinder is coupled....It is actually a good question! I tend to use the 90mm lens frame the most; and leave some room because the 105mm is a longer lens...The lens focuses to about 3.9 feet; the last focus scale mark is 4 feet...The tripod mount is 1/4-20...I have also used this lens on the Bessa R..focusing is not as good as the M3; but one has a built in light meter! Kelly

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 31, 2002.

Here is the Nikkor 13.5cm F3.5 on my M3..

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 31, 2002.

How about a Bi-Elmar 21-24 f2.8 kept reasonably slim. It would save all that agonising of choosing between these focal lengths.

-- Robert Clark (robertclark@vsnl.net), June 01, 2002.

A Qua-cron ASPH/APO for 24/35/50/90 @ f/1 for the size of the 35mm 'lux pre-ASPH?

-- Greg Choong (greg_choong@yahoo.com), June 01, 2002.

Dear Marc and Friends,

The smartest think Leica could do is team up with Cosina and make Leitz versions of the 12/5.6, 15/4/5, 21/4, 25/4 (RF-coupled) and 28/3.5. Leitz optical tweeking and build quality for light and not too expensive (but marginally costlier than VC) Voigtlander based lenses.

I'd also like the M8 to have a conventionalback.

I absolutely argee that a 75/2 would be great.

Cheers,

Alex

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4u.or.jp), June 01, 2002.

Kelly - I'll certainly agree that you have an ideal setup to use that Japanese 105. The M3 provides excellent focussing capability for a tele lens. However, what I was thinking of was a new Leica-designed 105 f/2.5 or 2.8 APO, in an M mount, that I could use in place of the current 90 mm series.

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), June 01, 2002.

The smartest think Leica could do is team up with Cosina and make Leitz versions of the 12/5.6, 15/4/5, 21/4, 25/4 (RF-coupled) and 28/3.5. Leitz optical tweeking and build quality for light and not too expensive (but marginally costlier than VC) Voigtlander based lenses.

Alex, great idea, but let's not kid ourselves. If Leica were to make these lenses they would be at least four times more expensive -- and probably not significantly better optically.

-- Hadji (hadji_singh@hotmail.com), June 01, 2002.

"That Japanese 105mm..." George, have you checked the glass (and/or design) content in Leica's current lineup (especially R lenses)?

I agree with Kelly F.; the 105 Nikkor is the ne plus ultra of telephotos for the Leica if you like portraits. I use mine both with an M3 (perfect) and with a Hexar RF (challenging but worth it). What else do you need?

If Leica made this lens (unlikely due to the triple-cemented center group, which is now cost-prohibitive to make), they would likely destroy the whole purpose by minimizing aberrations.

If I had to pick a current dream lens, it would be a modern 50/1.5 Opton Sonnar in M mount, with its few optical shortcomings cancelled out through sparing use of aspherics.

-- Dante Stella (dante@dantestella.com), June 01, 2002.

How about a 50 1.0 from voigtlander for under 1k?

-- leonid (murkacat@hotmail.com), June 01, 2002.

Dante - No, I never checked the R lenses. However, I'd like to refer to the original question to which I posed an answer, viz., what I would pick as a "dream lens" - - not necessarily what would be practical either to design or to make. I just love that 105 format!

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), June 01, 2002.

Not much R&D for this one: A reborn 7-element 50mm "rigid" summicron with harder glass and multicoating.................

-- david kelly (dmkedit@aol.com), June 01, 2002.

A 50mm Summilux reconfigured to rival the performance of the current 35mm ASPH's.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), June 01, 2002.

Another vote for the 75/2.0 - I love everything about my 75/1.4 except for the size and weight.

Or perhaps a 50-75/2.8 di-elmarit? The latter could possibly be made only marginally larger than the 50 'cron without sacrificing anything but speed. You would have to remember which focal lenght you set, though, because the framelinses would not change ...

-- Ole Swang (ole.swang@sintef.no), June 02, 2002.

I'll third Kevin as re his wish for a 75/2 or even a 75/2.8 like I've already said here a dozen times. The only thing that worries me is that if they ever do get something like this out on the road, the prices of everything else will likely rise too.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), June 02, 2002.

Costs fifty dollars

Now, you're really dreaming. Personally, I wouldn't mind some sort of tri- or bi-elmar but with wider coverage, say 21/24, or a 15/21/24. That would be nice!

-- Hadji (hadji_singh@hotmail.com), June 02, 2002.

Current version 28mm ASPH Summicron f/2, with no modifications, sold through WalMart for $399.

-- Steve Brantley (superglidesport@mindspring.com), June 02, 2002.

Hi all,

I am dreaming of two lenses:

One should be a kind of revival of the 50 mm dual range with "ears" to allow small magnification macro-work (x0.5)

The other one would be a 180mm f/2.8 again with ears (like the old 135 f/2.8) which will use the 35 mm frame inside to compose the picture.

This will give the M system the approximate range of focal length commonly used with the present SLR's and allow to carry a rather compact single system instead of being complied to use a complementary one.

Firendly.

François P. WEILL

-- François P. WEILL (frpawe@wanadoo.fr), June 04, 2002.

I already said this above and elsewhere (75/2 or 75/2.8) -- the main thing here being something smaller, lighter, and focusable without a pipewrench -- but hearing all about a new 24, I wouldn't mind a 21/2 either.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), June 04, 2002.

I agree with the others, a 75mm Summicron seems a great idea. Not so sure about a 24mm f2. It already has 55mm filter - what would it have with an f2 lens - 60mm+ - too big.

For the R series I would like a 135mm APO-Summicron (assuming we really are getting an APO-90mm) or a new 135mm Elmarit. Probably a redesigned 24mm would be a good idea as would an APO-ASPH 35mm Summicron. They really do need a fast 28-70/35-70 zoom of superb quality which does not carry an outrageous price.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), June 04, 2002.

I think I'd like a 75mm Summicron also. Unfortunately, I don't know that Leica will ever do it, because as I understand it, the motivation for the 75 Lux was to make the longest f/1.4 that wouldn't clutter the finder too badly. Thus it was the need for a wide aperture in a longer-than-normal lens, that was its reason for being.

Still, if there is enough demand . . . Does Leica ever read our stuff?

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), June 05, 2002.