CP+ 2017: HandeVision shows off prime lenses for mirrorless and Leica M

nope (as far as I know)

Feb 27, 2017permalink

kfahlman

They are indeed, rangefinder coupled.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

well, not the one on E-Mount ;-)

Feb 27, 2017permalink

kfahlman

He specifially asked about the "M" mount.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

yes! you are right. sorry...

Feb 27, 2017permalink

kfahlman

No worries, nothing to be sorry about!
If the "E" mount lenses had rangefinder coupling, then we'd have something to be sorry about! lol
cheers/k.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

deep7

That last one could be really interesting for special effects on micro four-thirds! Nice looking range of lenses.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Argesal

How can you assess an optical instrument using only the photo?
I have the impression that here we exceed in philosophy.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

aris14

Seems there is a rather important market for lenses... Too many manufacturers in many niches...

Feb 27, 2017permalink

AstroStan

Interesting lenses are increasingly becoming available in native Sony E-mount, though the 24-135mm range is getting the most attention (which makes sense for that weight/size category). I like that many of the new offerings are manual.

It would be useful if every announcement was accompanied by MTF charts.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Looks like the "feet" scale on the 35mm was coloured in hastily with a highlighter.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Nice sizes, compared to some recent offerings.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Irakly Shanidze

these lenses are of exactly the same sizes as leica summarit-m counterparts. in fact, the same shape too :)

Feb 28, 2017permalink

Will be interesting to see performance figures, as there are Sony E to Fuji X adapters. While both Sony and Fuji produce excellent glass, for some who use both mirrorless brands it might allow purchasing one lens for both full-frame and APS-C formats. That said, however, at f/2.4, the IQ would have to be extraordinary.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

http://www.kipon.com/en/articledetail.asp?id=103
I don't know if "extraordinary". I tried the 35mm (on M-mount with adapter on my A7R) and I'll go for it as soon as it get back on stock at Adorama

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Interesting. I'll keep watching for reviews. It has modern lens coating, I assume? And actually, now that I think about it, my Zeiss C/Ys are mostly f/2.8 and I don't mind a bit.

Feb 27, 2017*permalink

Are these the APSC or FF focal lengths?

Feb 27, 2017permalink

ZeevK

... full-frame 'Iberit' prime lenses is on display at this year's CP+ tradeshow in Yokohama, Japan.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

So the tiny 35mm lens would be ~23mm on my X-Pro?

Feb 27, 2017permalink

JonBush

The 35mm lens would be like a 52.5mm lens on your X-Pro.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

achim k

focal lengths are independent from sensor sizes!

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Old Cameras

Achim k: focal length is focal length regardless of the sensor size, but I think you know very well they are referring to the angle of view.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

virtualreality

@old
We are not here to play game of "what does he mean?".
Educating people when they are wrong, is fine with me.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Old Cameras

Virtualreality: then by all means, educate. In which case you would simply say that both focal length and sensor size determine the angle of view projected onto the sensor. Is that so hard?
I have a 4x5 camera, that makes the film roughly 127mm wide. I have a 180mm focal length lens. That yields about the same angle of view across the width of the film as a 50mm lens on a 24x36mm "full frame" sensor. Half the film width, half the focal length, same angle of view. That's educational information, which was already understood and is therefore unnecessary.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Of course I was talking about the equivalent angle of view.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Leica lenses are always full-frame, and the Sony full-frame cameras use the E-mount.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

The article also says Fuji, which is why I asked about my X-Pro2.

Feb 27, 2017*permalink

Understood. I shoot both both Sony and Fuji, too. I wasn't trying to be rude. I was confused by the way you stated your question. Yes, a 23mm lens would give the crop of a 35mm lens on your X-Pro2, if that's what you meant to ask. But regardless of the basic field of view of the lens (APS-C vs full-frame), a 35mm lens would give you a 52mm crop on the X-Pro2, as someone mentioned above. Sorry if I misinterpreted you question, and I wasn't trying to be holier than thou. BTW I prefer the Fuji for everything except architecture, where I need the full frame for 24mm shift lens. Fuji lenses rock.

Feb 27, 2017*permalink

achim k

yes, but they should know that on every lens there is only one value for focal length, no matter if it is used for APS-C or FF (exception: some bridge or compact cameras with built-in zoom lenses).

Feb 27, 2017*permalink

You're not being rude, to clarify my question. Will the lens with 35mm printed on it give the same focal length/angle of view of an APSC lens with 35mm printed on it or a full frame lens with 35mm printed on it. (which would approximatly be an APSC lens with 23mm printed on it). If these are just the Leica M-mount lenses then it would most likely be the latter.

Feb 28, 2017*permalink

JonBush

And I was also speaking to the equivalent FOV of a 35mm lens on a (1.5x) cropped sensor camera in my response above. I was trying to be brief, and to the point, I did not intend to mislead with my answer. I figured we all knew what was being asked.

Feb 28, 2017permalink

virtualreality

@darngood
The printing changes depending what camera you put the lens on. For E-mount camera's the printing will be 35mm (equivalent). For Leica lenses the printing stays the same. On an APS-C camera, what you see through the viewfinder will be a crop of the actual image that is captured (cropfactor=1.6). Focal length will be 23^2 equals 529 mm because image is 2 dimensions, height and width. On Fuji camera's ISO value is off. For example ISO 200 on Leica camera equals ISO 100 on Fuji camera. This means less noise for Fuji camera. However one needs to increase aperture to compensate for lower ISO. So you would need f/5.6 instead of f/8. Bigger aperture means less DOF therefor apparent focal length will be 1.4 times 35mm (49 mm). This is why it is more difficult to design telecentric lenses for Fujifilm camera's. Lastly, 49mm on APS-C is the same as 35mm on full-frame cameras so in the end it doesn't really matter. The only thing you have to remember is that it's basically a 35mm lens.

Feb 28, 2017permalink

@darngooddesign: Any lens with 35mm printed on it will give you the field of view of a 52mm lens when mounted in front of an APS-C sensor. It wouldn't matter if that lens were full frame or not, as the lens focal length of 35mm never changes. A full-frame 35mm will be designed to throw a large enough circle to cover a full-frame sensor, but it can still be mounted on an APS-C camera. A lens of 35mm designed for an APS-C camera will not throw a circle that will cover a full-frame sensor (usually.) An example, of course, is the 35/1.4 made by Fuji. And yes, you are correct that a 23mm lens will give the field of view of 35mm on an APS-C camera.

Feb 28, 2017permalink

Mac McCreery

I think that they look lovely. If a little familiar!

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Tim Zhou

The company needs to work on the finish a bit more. The engraving looks a bit unpleasant.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

shigzeo

It must be a personal thing, because I've seen them up close, and they are precisely and carefully engraved.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Better than cheap, silk-screen paint.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Unsubscribe me please

I shouldn't judge this lens family, however, they look rather plain and rather agricultural when you compare them to Sigma, Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, Fujifilm and most of the well established makers.
There is no way on Earth I would pay their asking price given the competition.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

dabhand

Not even if the IQ was really good ? Appearance is the least valuable way of assessing the worth of anything.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

shigzeo

They remind me of late 1960s Leica lenses, which, while not beautiful, are iconic.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Vanitas Photo

I much prefer that the R&D for the lens is used mostly in the lens design rather than in the outer shell, call me dumb if you like, but I much prefer to have a normal looking lens that performs great optically.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

Angrymagpie

Looks agricultural???

Feb 27, 2017permalink

sh10453

"... they look rather plain and rather agricultural ..."
You mean like tractor blades, or fertilizer sprayers???

Feb 27, 2017permalink

AustinMN

@dabhand: "Appearance is the least valuable way of assessing the worth of anything."

I can agree with this most of the time, and certainly in this context I do, but might I suggest you think about one glaring exception: Visual arts, including photographs.

Feb 27, 2017permalink

GeorgeD200

I like the look: minimalist, straight lens tubes, not a lot of flaring or ornamentation, simple fonts and knurling. But then I like classic Leica lenses, too, which is clearly what they're aiming at.

Feb 27, 2017permalink