Re: [Leica] Hoods/Filters etc

[abpeking <abpeking@public.bta.net.cn>]

>The 60mm filter size is also used by Hassleblad, no? There was a time when
>it was only used by the 180 Apo Telyt. But then there were four or five R
>lenses and now three M lenses. That's pretty standard, if you ask me.
>Series filters were required for lenses with detachable hoods of a certain
>type. They are also thinner to avoid vignetting. As for your theory that
>Leica wouldn't have tested it, is just plain too unbelievable. That's too
>significant part of the performance parameters for a lens to not have
>picked up on. They are standardizing sizes, and now you cry foul? No wonder
>they're confused. :-)

Eric,

I deduce from your observations that you have not had to deal with the 
odd sized filters: try to get a 60mm FLD even in Germany and you might 
understand my frustration! The Hasselblad mount is B60 (a bayonet type) 
which is well supported both by them and most every filter maker I know 
of. The two remaining M lenses with 60mm mounts (50/1 and 75/1.4) were 
both introduced in 58mm but then inexplicably redesigned for 60mm. I 
too would not like to think Leica fails in its testing or homework - 
but then how else do you explain these changes and the 280/2.8 filter 
situation mentioned earlier? 

And yes I know how series filters were used but cannot think why Leica 
continues to use them decades after they were commonly available. That 
they are thinner, lacking screw threads, is true but vignetting issues 
seem largely irrelevent since they need a further structure in front of 
the filter mount to hold them on - such as an internally ridged lens 
hood or filter adapter ring. That a manufacturer might want to push a 
proprietary (or effectively proprietary) filter size is not 
unreasonable (annoying yes) but if they do not then offer more than a 
couple of these filters and at the same time talk of professional 
standards I see a contradiction. I mean with Leica we are dealing with 
a very small part of the overall 35mm market and IMHO they cannot 
afford to persist with idiosyncracies such as odd filter sizes if they 
want to satisfy color transparency shooting pros. There are solutions 
to some of the problems I have cited but they are often complex, 
inconvenient, relatively inefficient and needlessly expensive and harm 
rather than enhance Leica's reputation among professionals.

Anyhow on a more positive note tell us a bit more about your R8 
experiences: I would be interested to hear if you have found a way to 
speed up the recycling time on your Metz 40MZ: I use one but find even 
with underdogs it is too slow much of the time. Unfortunately it is 
designed to not accept high-voltage packs (another instance of German 
pro equipment ignoring current pro preferences??!!) and I have not been 
able to try the P40 auxiliary pack but from what I have been told it is 
probably not the answer either. Otherwise it is a great unit. If I 
could fit it to my Jackrabbit pack I would be happy...

I also heard that Leica would fit different filters in the 19mm turret 
'if you provide the right-sized ones yourself' (and I quote a senior 
Leica manager). Have you ever heard of anyone doing this? In opposition 
to some of my own earlier complaints I have found that Heliopan makes a 
set of filter mount clamp-on doodads which might be the answer for the 
19mm users who need to use other filters: they make three sizes (70, 75 
and 80mm) which clamp around the front of the lens and have (I think) 
72, 77 or 82 filter mounts.

Bests

Adrian Bradshaw
Photojournalist
Shanghai, China