pcdikran Posted February 23, 2008 Share #1 Posted February 23, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm just wondering why prices for the old 5-lens Tele-Elmarit-M 2,8/90mm (fat version) are higher than of the thin 4-lens type? Is the old one the better one? In any case it is much lighter but I love the old style design of the other one! Any differences in performance, sharpness etc.? Thanks! Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 Hi pcdikran, Take a look here Tele Elmarit M 2,8/90mm- fat or thin- which one is better/differences?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
peter_n Posted February 23, 2008 Share #2 Posted February 23, 2008 It may be that the earlier thin TEs had a 5-10% chance of etching inside the rear sealed pair of lenses. Or perhaps that the lens has a propensity to flare. I have only used the thin TE and IMHO it is a wonderful little lens. A bit soft wide open but so what? It's very small and light and perfect for travel. I've posted a couple of examples from mine below: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/?do=findComment&comment=491216'>More sharing options...
telewatt Posted February 23, 2008 Share #3 Posted February 23, 2008 The (fat version) is softer and not as sharp like the thin one, but not bad! a nice vintage lens. The older Elmarit 2,8/90mm of the same time is better than the fat version too. regards, Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent10D Posted February 23, 2008 Share #4 Posted February 23, 2008 The fat Tele Elmarit seems to be a bit of a collector's item. Where I live silver versions sell for around twice the price of the more common black ones. I have a black one which I use occasionally, but it is a bit soft and you really have to watch out for lighting situations that might result in flare ... because it will flare at the slightest provocation. But it does deliver images that have a nice look, and the compact size is a real advantage for traveling. But I will add that it is the only Leica lens I own that I have ever considered selling. Haven't been able to bring myself to actually part with it though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 23, 2008 Share #5 Posted February 23, 2008 Personally, I think the old fat TE is a very good lens : I have a chrome one, and it's MY 90, simply. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted February 23, 2008 Share #6 Posted February 23, 2008 This is the old Elmarit I bought 4 weeks ago...nice vintage look and very good performer...and quite cheap today.. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! regards, Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! regards, Jan ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/?do=findComment&comment=491286'>More sharing options...
andym911 Posted February 24, 2008 Share #7 Posted February 24, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just recently purchased the TE in excellent condition. Main reasons were size weight and excellent quality...for what I need.A really good 'take everywhere' lens. Here a quick example. I don't know the differences in the Fat one sorry. andy Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/?do=findComment&comment=491491'>More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted February 24, 2008 Share #8 Posted February 24, 2008 I bought the 90mm 'FAT' and it arrived yesterday. It handles really nicely, has good colour rendition, contrast and sharpness to my eyes. Here's a couple of samples I shot yesterday. Graeme Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/?do=findComment&comment=491557'>More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted February 24, 2008 Share #9 Posted February 24, 2008 Elmarits seem to sit well with digital technique dont they. Those colour shouts are really nice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcdikran Posted February 24, 2008 Author Share #10 Posted February 24, 2008 I don't know the differences in the Fat one sorry. andy Andy, here are the variations of the Tele-Elmarit-M 2,8/90mm: TE fat in black (1966 - 1974) and silver (1964 - 1974) with 5 lenses, TE slim only in black (1974 - ?) with 4 lenses. I'm not shure, but difference in weight is about 100g. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/?do=findComment&comment=491681'>More sharing options...
andym911 Posted February 24, 2008 Share #11 Posted February 24, 2008 Thanks.. I have the slim one (right picture) regards Andy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary B Posted February 24, 2008 Share #12 Posted February 24, 2008 I have been shooting with the Fat Chrome TE for about 30 years and I can say that the Fat Lady really sings in B&W or colour. GaryB Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hoffman Posted October 29, 2008 Share #13 Posted October 29, 2008 Just bumping up this thread to remind some of you that by the time you install that gigundo lens hood on the thin Tele-Elmarit, it makes your outfit pretty darn large. So, yes, it's slim and compact but you need the hood and that makes the thing as long as a 90 'Cron! Over and out! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted October 29, 2008 Share #14 Posted October 29, 2008 I have been shooting with the Fat Chrome TE for about 30 years and I can say that the Fat Lady really sings in B&W or colour. GaryB I have only just discovered this thread and found it interesting that an old lens still generates discussion. I bought mine new in 1966 and could never bring myself to upgrade it, either to a later version or to the faster Summicron. It handles brilliantly on my M3, less so on my M6/.58 where the frame is rather small, but workable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leitz_not_leica Posted October 30, 2008 Share #15 Posted October 30, 2008 I had a 90/2 in chrome...to big and heavy, quite soft opened-up...sold. 90/2.8 Thin...very sharp, very small and light...developed etching, useless in daylight...sold. 90/2.8 vintage Elmarit, came as part of a kit, nice lens/vintage look, had 75/1.4 and 90/2 at the same time...sold. 90/2.8 current, too sharp, but won't sell it. It's in storage while I travel. 90/2.8 Black Fat is with me at the moment, delivers the goods, vintage look/pop. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hoffman Posted October 30, 2008 Share #16 Posted October 30, 2008 Black Fat Tele is my choice as well. Small, cute, light and perfect blend of vintage and modern look. I bought a mint one from 1970 on The Bay for $500.00 earlier this year. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scargo Posted February 6, 2010 Share #17 Posted February 6, 2010 Feb 6 th 2010. Today I purchased a 90mm Tele-elmarit for a great price $250. missing both caps, mounting red dot missing. Live in the US Looking for the rubber hood w/cap and a source the buy a red dot. Thanks, Rick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted February 7, 2010 Share #18 Posted February 7, 2010 Unless you do it by feel a lot, I'd steal wife's nail varnish instead, some of the red dots vanish overnight... There must be an 'elephant's grave yard' for them somewheres. Oh and I got a fat and the two long CVs = 75 and 90, all are reasonably small and light. Noel Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted February 8, 2010 Share #19 Posted February 8, 2010 (edited) The thin TE draws nicely (it was designed by Mandler) but it flares easily. It needs the big hood (12575) they made for it and the 135 Tele-Elmar. Carl Edited February 8, 2010 by cbretteville Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted February 9, 2010 Share #20 Posted February 9, 2010 Wasn't the first version of the 90mm Tele Elmarit M, which I have, also designed by Mandler? I always use the specified lens hood which provides good protection against light and stray fingers! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.