Very nicely done project Fred. I also use the thin B + W UVA filters for protection on all of my Leica lenses where they fit.
I really wish that leica would standardize the style and ergonomics of its M lenses to optimize handling, and small size. You would think after all these years making them they would know which design language works best. My current leica M lenses are all current generation. Yet they differ in build and ergonomics in ways that are a bit frustrating.
I find my 35mm Summilux ASP FLE II to be about perfect for me in this regard. The aperture ring is perfect, smooth with solid but quiet click. Focus ring is perfectly smooth, and has just the right sized focus tab. The twist out to extend hood is also an excellent design. It works perfectly with the UVA filter installed. I wish Leica could use this as the design for all of current generation M lenses.
My 50mm Summicron v5 comes very close to the 35 Lux. The aperture rings and focus rings are excellent. The pull out hood is both smooth and solid, but just one step behind the twist out of the 35 Lux in my opinion. But close enough not to bother me. It also works perfectly with the UVA filter installed. But then Leica leaves off any focus tab at all. This means I have to have a completely different grip and rotation method to focus the lens. Frustrating to say the least. I keep trying different aftermarket tabs, but none of them are any good. Why no tab Leica, why?
My 21mm Super-Elmar is perfect in all respects with excellent rings and tab, Ergonomics and handling are excellent. But it has a big, awkward screw on hood. It is also impossible to mount both a UVA filter and the hood. So, most of the time the hood is unmounted, and i only put it on when shooting where flare is a problem.
Why Leica feels the need to make every lens look and handle differently I will never understand. Certainly it would be better to have a consistent design language and ergonomic approach. After all, they protect such things like a Mother Bear when it comes to the M body.
Agreed, 1bwana1, regarding the infinite small differences between lenses being a source of frustration/confusion. I had hopes that the design language of the Apo-Summicron-M 35mm would propagate to the other new M lenses, but that was a one-off in terms of: i. focus ring having 360 degree knurling (my preference) and ii. the curious hood. 35mm isn't my favourite focal length, but that lens design seems so correct that I almost want to buy it purely because I fear we'll never have such a well designed M lens again.
Just when I thought some industrial design consistency might be sticking, e.g. regarding the similarities between the new close focus Summilux-M 35mm and 50mm lenses, the new close focus 28mm Summicron-M has a slightly different style for the aperture ring. A purely cosmetic difference, for sure, but why? The M lineup has such stark contrast to the SL series of Apo-Summicron-SL primes, which share almost identical housing. In some ways I prefer the quirkiness of the M lineup, but what I would actually prefer is a series of lenses in the Apo35M style. Ahh well.
To keep this relevant to the thread: after some back and forth emails with Tim Ketzer at Leica customer care after Fred started this thread, Leica began working on a finishing ring for the 28 Summilux-M, and I'm happy to say I have received one in the post over the holidays. Unfortunately, I've been travelling and do not yet have it in hand. I'll be able to pick it up this coming weekend and will share more then. I do not know if they will become available for general purchase, or if they will be included in the box with new sales of the 28 Summilux-M, but it wouldn't hurt to reach out to Leica customer care to ask!
philipj wrote:
To keep this relevant to the thread: after some back and forth emails with Tim Ketzer at Leica customer care after Fred started this thread, Leica began working on a finishing ring for the 28 Summilux-M, and I'm happy to say I have received one in the post over the holidays. Unfortunately, I've been travelling and do not yet have it in hand. I'll be able to pick it up this coming weekend and will share more then. I do not know if they will become available for general purchase, or if they will be included in the box with new sales of the 28 Summilux-M, but it wouldn't hurt to reach out to Leica customer care to ask!...Show more →
Fantastic to hear that Leica was so responsive to your inquiry on this regard! Kudus to Leica!
Jan 10, 2024 at 10:18 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
1bwana1 wrote:
Very nicely done project Fred. I also use the thin B + W UVA filters for protection on all of my Leica lenses where they fit.
I really wish that leica would standardize the style and ergonomics of its M lenses to optimize handling, and small size. You would think after all these years making them they would know which design language works best. My current leica M lenses are all current generation. Yet they differ in build and ergonomics in ways that are a bit frustrating.
I find my 35mm Summilux ASP FLE II to be about perfect for me in this regard. The aperture ring is perfect, smooth with solid but quiet click. Focus ring is perfectly smooth, and has just the right sized focus tab. The twist out to extend hood is also an excellent design. It works perfectly with the UVA filter installed. I wish Leica could use this as the design for all of current generation M lenses.
My 50mm Summicron v5 comes very close to the 35 Lux. The aperture rings and focus rings are excellent. The pull out hood is both smooth and solid, but just one step behind the twist out of the 35 Lux in my opinion. But close enough not to bother me. It also works perfectly with the UVA filter installed. But then Leica leaves off any focus tab at all. This means I have to have a completely different grip and rotation method to focus the lens. Frustrating to say the least. I keep trying different aftermarket tabs, but none of them are any good. Why no tab Leica, why?
My 21mm Super-Elmar is perfect in all respects with excellent rings and tab, Ergonomics and handling are excellent. But it has a big, awkward screw on hood. It is also impossible to mount both a UVA filter and the hood. So, most of the time the hood is unmounted, and i only put it on when shooting where flare is a problem.
Why Leica feels the need to make every lens look and handle differently I will never understand. Certainly it would be better to have a consistent design language and ergonomic approach. After all, they protect such things like a Mother Bear when it comes to the M body....Show more →
Hi Steve,
I always thought, but maybe I am wrong, that the reason wider lenses have focus tables and longer lenses do not is because of the frame lines. 28mm and 35mm lenses have of course much wider frame lines and the tab lets you focus the lens without having your fingers intrude into the frame. In contrast 50mm and longer lenses with smaller frame lines allow you to focus using your fingers without the fingers intruding into the frame. So, I always thought the presence and absence of the focus tabs makes a good deal of sense.
I always thought, but maybe I am wrong, that the reason wider lenses have focus tables and longer lenses do not is because of the frame lines. 28mm and 35mm lenses have of course much wider frame lines and the tab lets you focus the lens without having your fingers intrude into the frame. In contrast 50mm and longer lenses with smaller frame lines allow you to focus using your fingers without the fingers intruding into the frame. So, I always thought the presence and absence of the focus tabs makes a good deal of sense.
Best wishes,
Steve
Hey Steve,
I trust the holidays were great for you and the family.
What you say makes sense theoretically I guess, and would be better accepted id Leica followed that logic. But at least in the 50mm FL Leica has not been consistent about this in their designs. Even in the current models some of the 50mm lenses do have focus tabs, and Some do not. It seem more related to barrel size than to FL and frame lines. The big Noct lenses tend not to have tabs. It looks like when you get to the 75mm and up FLs Leica is consistent in not putting focus tabs on them. These tend to have large barrel sizes. It seems they all have their own unique hood designs. Absolutely no consistency in hoods. I can see why in a collector view many will find these things interesting and enjoy the differences. But from a shooting point of view i find it not my preference.
In its M elns line Voigtlander seem to be even more inconsistent in hoods, tabs, aperture and focus rings, rim colors, and other things. This is probably also a by product of doing both vintage and contemporary styled lenses.
Especially with manual focus lenses which require so much connection between the photographer and the lens when shooting, I just think it makes sense to have as common a interface as possible. I would like my Leica m lenses to look, and operate as much the same as possible.
Fred Miranda wrote:
In Germany, indeed. I'm still uncertain whether this will be sold as an optical accessory for the lens or included with newer batches.
Here are some photos of finishing ring I received from Leica. As you can see it is based off of the 12468 hood as well, and thus shares the same threads with the nicely oriented end stop. The ring itself extends to the point where the square hood would begin on the native 12468, and you can see an ever-so-slight lip on the front of the ring where the step is on the native square hood. I guess this was pulled from a production run of the hoods and refinished as a ring. It looks and feels great on the lens, it is remarkable how much smaller the lens feels without the square hood (even if there is only a minimal difference in weight -- I measure 32.8g for the 12468 hood, and 14.7g for the finishing ring), and it looks just great without the exposed hood threads when not using the hood. Huge thanks to Leica for this, I think this is an excellent addition to the 28'lux.
philipj wrote: Here are some photos of finishing ring I received from Leica. As you can see it is based off of the 12468 hood as well, and thus shares the same threads with the nicely oriented end stop. The ring itself extends to the point where the square hood would begin on the native 12468, and you can see an ever-so-slight lip on the front of the ring where the step is on the native square hood. I guess this was pulled from a production run of the hoods and refinished as a ring. It looks and feels great on the lens, it is remarkable how much smaller the lens feels without the square hood (even if there is only a minimal difference in weight -- I measure 32.8g for the 12468 hood, and 14.7g for the finishing ring), and it looks just great without the exposed hood threads when not using the hood. Huge thanks to Leica for this, I think this is an excellent addition to the 28'lux.
The only thing I now wish for is a nice cap. ...Show more →
Very nice! Thanks for sharing. Hopefully they make this available for everyone who has one.
philipj wrote: Here are some photos of finishing ring I received from Leica. As you can see it is based off of the 12468 hood as well, and thus shares the same threads with the nicely oriented end stop. The ring itself extends to the point where the square hood would begin on the native 12468, and you can see an ever-so-slight lip on the front of the ring where the step is on the native square hood. I guess this was pulled from a production run of the hoods and refinished as a ring. It looks and feels great on the lens, it is remarkable how much smaller the lens feels without the square hood (even if there is only a minimal difference in weight -- I measure 32.8g for the 12468 hood, and 14.7g for the finishing ring), and it looks just great without the exposed hood threads when not using the hood. Huge thanks to Leica for this, I think this is an excellent addition to the 28'lux.
The only thing I now wish for is a nice cap. ...Show more →
Thanks for sharing the photos, Phillip!
I wonder if it's longer than the one I made..
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for sharing the photos, Phillip!.
I wonder if it's longer than the one I made..
The external dimensions are 10mm on this one. The small lip itself is almost imperceptible, you can physically feel it, but in terms of depth it must be a change of a couple of hundred microns or less. This is the same region that is elevated on the original 12468 hood, and I guess was turned down to have almost but not quite identically the same radius as the main section of the ring.
I believe you cut the hood at the position where this radius change occurs, so your ring should be a couple of mm shorter?
Finally a factory finishing ring for the 28 Lux. I feel like this confirms the assumption that the 28 Lux might be one of the last lenses to be updated with a close focus version since it's a fairly new lens design (in Leica terms).
philipj wrote:
The external dimensions are 10mm on this one. The small lip itself is almost imperceptible, you can physically feel it, but in terms of depth it must be a change of a couple of hundred microns or less. This is the same region that is elevated on the original 12468 hood, and I guess was turned down to have almost but not quite identically the same radius as the main section of the ring.
I believe you cut the hood at the position where this radius change occurs, so your ring should be a couple of mm shorter?
My custom ring measures precisely 9.6mm. It's long enough to accommodate a custom B+W UV filter that's just 1.4mm thin.
Received my modified "hood ring" from S K Grimes. The chrome finish is kind of flat black and it measured about 9.6mm. Serves well to protect the lens hood threads.
Next step is to make a super thin filter and a protecting cap.
