[Leica] The smallest M lens

[grduprey at mchsi.com (grduprey at mchsi.com)]

I keep either the 35'lux pre-asph, or the newer 28 Elmarit Asph on my M8.  
Both are pretty small.

Gene

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Man" <richard at richardmanphoto.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 2:24:50 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [Leica] The smallest M lens

The point is also that as small as the 35 'lux pre-ASPH is (that was the
first Leica lens I ever used - on a rental M6), it still not much smaller
than the 35 'lux ASPH, all things considered. So it's absolutely pointless
for me to have the 35 pre-ASPH. I could just take the ASPH instead.

The Perar made the M almost pocketable.

A total different class of animals. And I agree that the modern optics
would equal, if not exceed the old optics.

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Phil Forrest
<photo.forrest at earthlink.net>wrote:

> The 50 Elmar, any 35 Summaron, and especially the 35 pre-asph 'Lux are
> certainly not known for their corner performance at all. Even the 90
> Elmar is weak in the corners until it's stopped down. I'm willing to
> wager the 35 perar holds its own against the pre-asph Lux or either
> Summaron simply by virtue of modern design but also because those old
> lenses are not sharp across the plane until f/5.6 or even f/8.
> Granted, I love my Leica lenses because of their aberrations but to
> claim that Leica can do no wrong in comparison to this newcomer that is
> amazingly tiny then to bring up the very lenses that have the
> aberrations you complain about in the new one is just plain funny.
>
> Phil Forrest
>
>
>
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 02:36:17 -0500
> Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
>
> > There have always been plenty of very small footprint non descript
> > Leica lenes which add little to the weight and bulk of an M body yet
> > give full quality out to the edges as in the kind of quality one gets
> > into Leica for. And I'm not even talking about the collapable Elmar a
> > lens in chrome version my X has gotten a LOT of use out of. She also
> > uses or used the colorable 90 elmar. But the 50 works on an M9.
> > My 50 Summicron is light and small. My 45 Summicron C is lighter and
> > smaller. My 35 Summicron ASPH would be even lighter and smaller if it
> > were not the ASPH. And the summilux you can hardly tell the
> > difference. Half the Leica glass out there tends to be tiny.
> > The default filter size is 39. Those are my main filters for my Leica
> > glass. I have an old tiny 35 Summaron I could use on an M with an
> > adaptor. I got it for my LTM system
> > I'm not sure what the cache is for this Pera 35/3.5 lens.
> > What it opens up for the photographer that he didn't have opened up
> > for him or her before.
> > Mr. Miyazaki may believe that a well designed triplet exceeds a
> > Tessar but this one gives laughable results at the edges wide open.
> > It looks like shot through a car window at an angle. For all the big
> > bucks and rhetoric you get a Japanese hand built Holga.
> > And at the same price a new chrome 50 Silver Elmar went for a few
> > years ago when we got one.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> philforrest.wordpress.com
> gallery.leica-users.org/v/philforrest
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information