leica f4 vs f2.8 90mm M

[biglouis]

I keep seeing some cracking leica f4 Elmar 90s as well as some equally cracking 2.8 Elmarit 90s. The difference is that the Elmarits are sometimes four times the price of the Elmar in equivalent condition.

I would mainly be shooting outside with this type of lens (I do very little if any interior shots and I have an up to date SLR with equally up to date TTL flash for anything in that direction).

So, based on experience, given that I would normally be shooting with 100ASA transparency film am I going to really miss the extra stop if I go for an Elmar versus an Elmarit? Or should I just eat the cost difference and wait for the right Elmarit.

LouisB

[dkpeterborough]

You don't say which 90/2.8 Elmarit you are considering ... personally I would go for the Mk II version made from 1990 onwards as it is a superb performer ... the 90/4 Elmar is also a good lens but was originally designed in 1931 before computers were used as aid to lens design and testing ... please consider getting a copy of Leica Pocket Book 7th Edition which gives performance data and MTF graphs for just about all Leica lenses up to year 2000 .

I actually bought a used and dented Mk2 Elmarit and had it serviced by Leica and it is superb ... it replaced my Tele Elmarit which had a split rubber hood ... the rubber hoods are scarce and show their age ie they split easily.

Dunk

[doubice]

Louis.

I assume that you are referring to the original 4/90mm Elmar and not to the latest close focusing version.

The original 4/90mm Elmar can indeed be bought rather cheaply. It is however, a lens designed in the 1930's, with an optical design that did not change until the last few years of its production - late 1950's. For slides (especialy for slides...), you would be better off with any of the 2.8/90mm Elmarits, be it the original longer version or the later 'fat' and short Tele-Elmarit.

The latest 1960's version of the 4/90mm Elmar was a three-element design, which is highly prized on the collector market. It was available in a standard and collapsible mount - both versions can be rather pricey, but not because of performance; rarther because of their scarcity.

All the best,

Jan

[leicapfile]

Louis,

If you don't need the extra stop, find an 90mm Elmar-C.

Small, sharper and more contrasty than any 90 mm before, including the Tele version and the Elmarit 2.8.

Its only downfall is trying to find filters for it.

Jerry

[doubice]

Louis,

I forgot about the 4/90mm Elmar-C - that is a great lens. The only drawback is that it uses 5.5 series filters, which are just about impossible to find. If you get one, make sure it comes with its collapsible lens shade - those are also tough to find.

The same lens was also available under the Rokkor name, as it dates back to 1970s', when Leica co-operated with Minolta. Both the Elmar-C and the Rokkor-C were made for the Leica CL and Minolta CL. The 90mm Elmar-C and the Rokkor-C were identical optically and both were made in Germany. The Rokkor-C version uses more common 40.5mm filters.

More information can be found here:
Leica and Rangefinders Forum: Minotla 90 f/4 = Leica?

and here:
Leica M Lens Users Guide

Good luck,

Jan

[nrj]

Originally Posted by doubice

Louis.




The latest 1960's version of the 4/90mm Elmar was a three-element design, which is highly prized on the collector market. It was available in a standard and collapsible mount - both versions can be rather pricey, but not because of performance; rarther because of their scarcity.

All the best,

Jan

I owned the 3 element elmar and the other elmar design (4 elements I think). The 3 was extremely good, sharp and good contrast- better than the 4 element which I didn't keep long because it wasn't particularly sharp. Colour rendition on the 3 was slightly cool. I kept a warming filter on it. The filter rotates when focussing. It handled well on the M2 and M6. I sold it in favour of the 135 but it was much easier to use
Nik

[sungnee]

You did not say which film you plan to use.

It might surprise you to learn that film is more important than the lens in the rendition of the photograph. The best thing to do is to try different lens/film combinations and see which one you like.

Just as an illustration of one of the things I have discovered by trial and error in 26 years of Leica usage: the older Leitz lenses have lower colour saturation, which pair very favourably with Fuji films because Fuji films tend to have high colour saturation. With modern Leitz lenses it was disastrous because the colour saturation of modern Leica lenses is also extremely high. The resultant photographs had colour so super-saturated that details were lost.

We also don't know if it's sharpness that you're after. Actually if sharpness is your only concern you'll probably be better off with the other major German brand. I know that Leica in the last decade have become rather obsessed with sharpness but personally I think that's a mistake.

Traditionally Leica lenses seemed to have been optimised for Kodachrome (64, I think), although I have never seen confirmations from Leica to that effect.

There are many internet forums on film and you may want to visit some of them.

Post-processing digitally is a poor remedy.

[wizard]

Originally Posted by doubice

The latest 1960's version of the 4/90mm Elmar was a three-element design, which is highly prized on the collector market. It was available in a standard and collapsible mount - both versions can be rather pricey, but not because of performance; rarther because of their scarcity.

Jan,

may I present a dissenting opinion? I am a lucky guy in that I inherited from my father one of the allegedly only 527 LTM 3-element Elmars. I have been using this lens since 1974 (my father was still alive at that time) mainly on M Leicas (via an original adapter ring), but also on LTM Leicas and, lately, on a Bessa R. From the very beginning I was stunned by the results this lens delivers, even wide open (I shoot slides almost exclusively). A few years ago, I did a test and compared this lens with inter alia an M-Rokkor 4/90 and a current Elmarit-M 2.8/90. The results confirmed my feelings over the years: This 3-element lens is a fantastic performer. It is almost as good as the current Elmarit, you would have to see shots side by side and projected very large to notice differences, if any.

The Rokkor lens is also very good, but vignetting is noticeable at f4 and 5.6, while the 3-element Elmar is completely free of vignetting.

Regards,

Andy

[biglouis]

Once again, a fantastic array of views which are most helpful. Thanks to everyone who contributed. I'll mull this over and decide what to do next.

Regards

Louis

[jaapv]

Originally Posted by doubice

Louis,

I forgot about the 4/90mm Elmar-C - that is a great lens. The only drawback is that it uses 5.5 series filters, which are just about impossible to find. If you get one, make sure it comes with its collapsible lens shade - those are also tough to find.

The same lens was also available under the Rokkor name, as it dates back to 1970s', when Leica co-operated with Minolta. Both the Elmar-C and the Rokkor-C were made for the Leica CL and Minolta CL. The 90mm Elmar-C and the Rokkor-C were identical optically and both were made in Germany. The Rokkor-C version uses more common 40.5mm filters.

More information can be found here:
Leica and Rangefinders Forum: Minotla 90 f/4 = Leica?

and here:
Leica M Lens Users Guide

Good luck,

Jan

The filters are normally in the Heliopan catalogue and can be ordered at the factory and Heliopan dealers.
Heliopan Lichtfilter-Technik Summer GmbH & Co KG

[biglouis]

Update: in the end I went for an Elmar -C off of e-Bay for UKP129 all in (including postage from Germany). At that price can you really go wrong?

Anyway, I doubt I'll see it this side of Xmas.

And thanks for the link to the filters.... very handy

LouisB

[doubice]

Originally Posted by wizard

Jan,

may I present a dissenting opinion? I am a lucky guy in that I inherited from my father one of the allegedly only 527 LTM 3-element Elmars. I have been using this lens since 1974 (my father was still alive at that time) mainly on M Leicas (via an original adapter ring), but also on LTM Leicas and, lately, on a Bessa R. From the very beginning I was stunned by the results this lens delivers, even wide open (I shoot slides almost exclusively). A few years ago, I did a test and compared this lens with inter alia an M-Rokkor 4/90 and a current Elmarit-M 2.8/90. The results confirmed my feelings over the years: This 3-element lens is a fantastic performer. It is almost as good as the current Elmarit, you would have to see shots side by side and projected very large to notice differences, if any.

The Rokkor lens is also very good, but vignetting is noticeable at f4 and 5.6, while the 3-element Elmar is completely free of vignetting.

Regards,

Andy

Andy,

I am in full agreement as to the quality of the three-element Elmar! My quip about performance was meant as a comparative note - one can buy a 2.8/90mm Elmarit (or Tele Elmarit) for about the same price as the three-element Elmar. Most of the money spent on the three-element Elmar will go towards its collector's value, while on the 2.8 lenses you will be paying for same quality and an extra f-stop. Both are superb lenses.

All the best,

Jan

[doubice]

Originally Posted by biglouis

Update: in the end I went for an Elmar -C off of e-Bay for UKP129 all in (including postage from Germany). At that price can you really go wrong?

LouisB

Louis,

Good choice and right compromise between price, size and maximum aperture!

Enjoy and all the best,

Jan

[biglouis]

Jan

Thanks. Hopefully I'll be able to share the fruits of my labours before too long

Louis