50 mm Elmar-M f2.8?

[kenneth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am still pondering whether to consider one of these collapsable lenses instead of my 50mm Summicron and would be interested to hear from anyone who has used one. Although recommendations given so far have counseled against swapping for an Elmar I do also own a 35mm Summicron asph.

 

One article I read suggested that with an Elmar attached to an M6 one could carry it around in a shirt pocket however I take that with a pinch of salt unless Germans have shirts made of Loden cloth. I can't imagine walking around with an M6 in a breast pocket but I do take the point that the camera and lens would become very portable

[andybarton]

I was with Rolo yesterday; he uses an Elmar and keeps his M8+50 in his pocket.

 

Just look at his work, and Brett's wedding stuff shot with that combo, and you will see that it's a quality lens.

 

Since you like slow lenses, this could be a good choice.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

Kenneth, I just posted in your Summitar thread again.

 

Are you looking at the later model Elmar or the older 2.8? Both are nice lenses but the later model in particular is said to be excellent - I'd like one myself!

[offshore]

I owned one for a while and can attest it is a superb optic. My problems with it had to do more with what I'm used to in a Leica lens than anything else. I didn't like the collapsible it added another motion and delay to getting a photo. I also couldn't get used to the gap between the focus ring and the aperture ring way up on the front. Small things I know but I don't like to struggle around when I'm using my gear.

[jpattison]

Kenneth,

 

The older Elmar's aperture ring would turn with focussing, I found that annoying.

The newer Elmar-M you are considering doesn't do that.

 

Just a thought.

 

Best wishes,

John

[wizard]

Kenneth,

 

I own both the Summicron and the Elmar-M for some years, and use the Elmar more than the Summicron, mostly because the Elmar is somewhat lighter and may be collapsed (btw, shouldn't that be 'collapsible'?) and so consumes less space in wherever I carry my camera gear. My Tri-Elmar gets used most, however, I DO like this lens.

 

Qualitywise, you should have no hesitation to use the Elmar-M, mine is incredibly sharp, it really etches subjects into the emulsion. Very flare resistant, too. I sometimes feel that the Summicron renders colours slightly different, a little more luminous so to speak, but that is only visible under certain conditions (low light in particular) and direct comparison.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

[bill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To paraphrase earlier posters - it's not an "instead of" it's an "as well as". Quality is exceptional, but the USP is that it means the chance of having your Leica to hand (or pocket) is increased, and that can only be a good thing in terms of getting "the" shot.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[epand56]

Kenneth, since I've bought my latest silver Elmar 50/2.8 I find it very difficult to get rid of it.

It is always sticking to my M8.

And besides being so much portable and light (I tend to keep my camera free in my hand via a Sling when walk around shooting) the little marvel do an outstanding job. It is very, very sharp with a slight and very pleasant old fashioned draw.

Plus, I saw some latest versions selling for 350 euros, a lens that IMO is worth is weight in gold.

I didn't think a lens could appeal me so much.

[Shootist]

I had one and it is a very good lens. But it is not that small and if you use it on a M8, that needs a filter to block IR, and like to have the hood screwed in collasped it's not much shorter then a Summicron if at all.

 

I actually like the images I got from the Elmar more then I did from myCron 50. But neither of them compare to the 50 Lux ASPH so that is the only 50 I have now.

[epand56]

But neither of them compare to the 50 Lux ASPH so that is the only 50 I have now.

 

Shootist, I find the pictures from the Elmar and the Summilux so much different in terms of feeling and suggestions that I've decided to keep them both.

I must say, however, that when I don't have problems with light, my preference is often for the Elmar that is less cruel with details.

This said, I love very much how the Lux renders in low light.

In a way or another, the 50 is definitely my lens.

[bill]

I had one and it is a very good lens. But it is not that small and if you use it on a M8, that needs a filter to block IR, and like to have the hood screwed in collasped it's not much shorter then a Summicron if at all.

 

I can count the number of times I have used it with the hood attached on the fingers of one foot; it is extremely flare-resistant.

 

Remember also that Kenneth is a film shooter, and cares not for UV/IR filters.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Edited August 6, 2009 by bill

[Shootist]

I can count the number of times I have used it with the hood attached on the fingers of one foot.

 

Remember also that Kenneth is a film shooter.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

And what does being a film shooter have to do with whether or not you use a filter, UVa or colored filter for effect, and or use the hood to stop flare.

 

I didn't know some people had fingers on there feet. I always thought those were toes.

 

So you don't use hoods or filters of any type on any lenses.

 

Regards,

 

Ed

[bill]

And what does being a film shooter have to do with whether or not you use a filter, UVa or colored filter for effect, and or use the hood to stop flare.

 

Please see my edit - I suspect I made it after your post.

 

I didn't know some people had fingers on there feet. I always thought those were toes.

 

I was being "ironic"... it was an attempt at "humour".

 

So you don't use hoods or filters of any type on any lenses.

 

...that is a magnificently Olympian leap to a completely baseless conclusion...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[redbaron]

Epand56, where have you seen them for such a price? I really regret selling mine and I would like another one.

[mongrelnomad]

I love it - its small size and low-contrast feel make it my go-to lense if I'm expected back before nightfall. Most of my recent Flickr stuff is with this lense...

 

Any gripes? Just one - it is very badly designed: trying to unscrew the hood (to attach a filter) can unset the aperture ring. As I've just discovered...

[jaapv]

Actually, the newest Elmar-M is quite contrasty.

[wizard]

Actually, the newest Elmar-M is quite contrasty.

 

You beat me to it, Jaap. The old Elmar 2.8/50 has low contrast wide-open, but the new one is crisp right from the beginning.

[alun]

The current version is a gorgeous lens. Someone else said it isn't an "either/or -- it's an as well as" and I agree. I don't use 50s all that much but when I do tend to alternate betwen a current Elmar and a current Summicron. There are differences in rendition, there's no question about that: to my eye the Elmar is a gentler lens (not very scientific, I know); but the main differences are in handling and ergonomics. The Elmar is light, has a very short focus throw, and images 'snap' into focus. On the other hand, I sometimes feel that the camera feels a little more balanced with the heavier Summicron... It's well worth trying out if at all possible -- especially if 50s are your standard or preferred focal length.

[bybrett]

I was with Rolo yesterday; he uses an Elmar and keeps his M8+50 in his pocket.

 

Just look at his work, and Brett's wedding stuff shot with that combo, and you will see that it's a quality lens.

 

Since you like slow lenses, this could be a good choice.

 

Thanks Andy, it's my go everywhere lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mongrelnomad]

Actually, the newest Elmar-M is quite contrasty.

 

Not compared to my Summilux ASPH it isn't!

Edited August 6, 2009 by mongrelnomad