Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/08/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Tri-Elmar-M tested by CDI
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 17:26:17 EDT


I would be interested to know what your experience with the lense has been.
Do you like results you get with it?  Is the quality consistent at all focal
lengths? Have you had difficulty getting the viewfinder frames to change and
do the frames appear to be accurate?    Do you find yourself using one focal
length more than others and if you could do it all over again would you make
the purchase?   You stated that you don't use it as much as a fixed focal
length.  Which focal length do you use mostly?

Over the years I have found myself using the extremes with zoom lenses that I
own.  If it's 35 - 70, I find myself using 35 and 70 and seldom anything in
between.  Same thing with an 80-200 zoom.  My absolute favorite M lense is the
21mm aspheric.  I also have the 35/1.4 aspheric/ 50mm Nocto and a 90/2.8.  I
am giving serious consideration to a 75/1.4.  Do you have this lense and what
do you think of it?

Sorry for all of the questions.  I find LUGERs very helpful in responding to
equipment related questions.


 I like the Tri-Elmar, but it is quite a bit different from all of the other M
 lenses I have.  The focusing mechanism is unique.  It does not use the usual
 system.  It has a rubbery substance that deforms and acts to damp the
 feel.  It does not have the good feel that the other M lenses have, but it
 works fine.  One must understand that great feat of engineering of the Leica
 engineers in making this lens.  They accomplished something that the camera
 mount system was never designed to do.  Necessarily there are compromises.
 That being said, I like the lens, but don't use it as much as the fixed FL