Re: [Leica] Leicaflex SL Lenses

["Bud Cook" <budcook@attglobal.net>]

Here's a post worth saving.

BTW, I have an SL/SL-2 2X extender that's like new in the box.   If anyone
is interested in this hard to find item, please e-mail me.   I used it on
one trip and to test it out on a Macro Elmarit.  It turns the 60 into a darn
fine 120 f/5.6 macro.
budcook@attglobal.net

Bud

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans-Peter.Lammerich" <Hans-Peter.Lammerich@t-online.de>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:47 AM
Subject: [Leica] Leicaflex SL Lenses


> Muhammad,
>
> I find that since two or three years the second-hand prices of older R
lenses
> are rock bottom, at least here in Germany.  In particular the new zoom,
apo and
> ROM lenses made many people to upgrade their gear. Now a good three cam R
2.8/28
> (E48/Series VII), R 3.5/35-70 (E60) or R 2.8/135 (E55) can be found for
around
> DM 1000, a R 2/50 for under DM 700. With two cams and serial filter mount
the R
> 2/50 and R 2.8/135 are in range of DM 400 and DM 700, respectively. The R
2.8/35
> or R 2.8/90 nowadays are considered as slow lenses in a not so exciting
focal
> range and thus second hand prices a moderate, say DM 700 for the 35, DM
1000 for
> the 90. Two cam versions should be 30% less, but then you also get an
older
> optical and mechanical design. Add the cost for a 50/2 and compare the
package
> to the 2.8/35-70 apo-asph! A classic outfit, comprising a 2.8/28, a 2/50
and a
> 2.8/135 will cost about DM 2700. Compare the merits of the compact and
fast
> 2.8/135 with the current zoom alternatives, the slow 4/80-200 or the heavy
> 2.8/70-180!
>
> Quality fanatics have traded their Apo-Telyts R 3.4/180 for the new model,
so
> dealers sit on large numbers of them.  Asking prices are in between DM
2000 and
> DM 2500, but some negotiation will certainly yield a lower price. I saw a
two
> cam R 3.4/180 for under DM 2000! But I should remark that according to
> statements from Erwin Puts and others, the 3.4/180's actual performance is
not
> up its reputation which evolved 25 years ago.
>
> Most of the first generation R 2.8/180 and R 4/250 (Series VII filter) are
> available as three-cam lenses anyway, either factory fitted or converted
by the
> previous owners.  Prices are as low as DM 1000, but consider their poor
close
> focussing capability (app. 2.5m for the 180)  and that they are
considerably
> heavier and bulkier than the more expensive (DM 2000 to DM 2400) second
> generation (E67 filter thread).
>
> For macro work everybody wants the R 2.8/100 apo, so go for the R 4/100,
either
> the lens head with focussing bellows or the discontinued version with
focussing
> helical which would be a better general purpose lens! I however remember
an old
> test in the German "FotoMagazin", saying that the 4/100 was inferior to
its
> contemporary Japanese competitors (low contrast).  It was indeed the last
> traditional, four lens Elmar design in Leica's range of lenses! If stopped
down
> for adequate depth-of-field at close range, the actual difference in
optical
> performance between the R 2.8/100 apo and the R 4/100 may not be so great
> anymore. On the other hand the R 4/100 has one clear advantage over its
"apo"
> rival: distance from front lens to subject! Even the R 2.8/60 is better
than the
> R 2.8/100 apo in this respect. Take note that there are different macro or
1:1
> adapters. There are dedicated adapters only for use with either the 2.8/60
(1:1
> adapter) or the 4/100 (1:1.6 adapter), available in two and three cam
version.
> For use with R3-8 bodies there is "macro adapter" for all R lenses, with
and
> without ROM chip.
>
> The non-apo extender 2x also is available in a version for Leica R3-8 and
for
> SL/SL2 with the latter being more rare and expensive. In this context I
would
> like to know how a 2.8/60 plus non-apo extender 2x compares to the
2.8/100,
> 4/100 or 2.8/60 with macro or 1:1 adapter?
>
> If you really want the option to use the lenses on a Leica R later, it is
> cheaper to go for three cam lenses now. A conversion is possible, but is
> certainly more expensive than the price differential. A conversion would
make
> sense if you already own the lenses, but do not want to trade them against
> lenses of unknown origin or technical condition. Another aspect are lens
hoods
> filter threads. Newer lenses in the 28mm to 50mm range have built-in,
> retractable hoods, older lenses have larger clip-on hoods. Newer lenses
have
> standard filter threads (E55, E67 etc.), older lenses un-threaded "serial"
> filters. To reduce cost note after the introduction of the R3, Leica
omitted the
> Leicaflex/SL cams on some lenses in the 35mm to 90mm range. With the
exception
> of the R 1.4/80, a conversion is possible, but expensive.
>
> Older Leica lenses are of course outperformed by the current Leica lens
designs,
> but offer the same, if not better mechanical built quality and "feel" at
greatly
> reduced cost. After all, its time to buy!
>
> Hans-Peter
>
>