maccaco Posted August 28, 2012 Share #1 Posted August 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello. I have a Elmar-C 90/4 in perfect condition and focus properly on my M8 but I'm circling a Tele Elmarit 90/2.8 but I have doubts (very big). Worth the change? Regards! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 28, 2012 Posted August 28, 2012 Hi maccaco, Take a look here Elmar-C 90/4 vs Tele Elmarit 90/2.8 on M8? Doubts!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted August 28, 2012 Share #2 Posted August 28, 2012 I bought my Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 30 years ago, it is not a bad lens at all but it has too much flare for my taste. If you want a better 90 open at f/2.8 the last Elmarit 90/2.8 is the way to go. The Tele-Elmarit remains the smallest 90/2.8 though, it has almost the same size as your Elmar-C. Aside from that, the last Elmarit is unbeatable IMHO. To get the same quality in a smaller package, the Macro-Elmar 90/4 is a superb lens as well but it is more expensive by far. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted August 28, 2012 Share #3 Posted August 28, 2012 I used for lot of years my Tele Elmarit 2,8 : I preferred it over the Elmar C (but used this only on the CL, not on M8) but mostly for esthetics (I love chromes...) and ergonomics : to be sincere, the feature I appreciated more was that you could use the standard case of Ms with the TE mounted on;: in terms of rendering there was not such a difference, expecially for the fact that at f 2,8 the TE was really flare-prone. I agree that if you want a step-up, last Elmarit _ M is the (bulky...) choice... I got one 2 years ago and by then is MY 90. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 29, 2012 Share #4 Posted August 29, 2012 BTW i was referring to the "thin" Tele-Elmarit. I have no experience with the "fat" one. Luigi must be referring to the latter i guess as the "thin" one did not exist in chrome version if memory serves. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted August 29, 2012 Share #5 Posted August 29, 2012 Yes, you are correct... all my considerations are around the "nano"/"fat" Tele Elmarit 90... never had the Tele-Elmarit M (the black only one, shaped very similar to the Elmar -C) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share #6 Posted August 29, 2012 Thanks for the contributions. I am a stickler for compact lenses, and even I can sacrifice some performance in exchange for weight and compactness. I'm even considering the canon 100/3.5 LTM (very small, light and good DoF and Bokeh) although he has 1m minimum focus (is that bad?). More Doubts!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 29, 2012 Share #7 Posted August 29, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have no experience with the Canon 100/3.5 lens but it takes 40mm filters IINW. Not easy to find out UV/IR filters this size i guess. A step up ring and a 40.5mm filter could perhaps fit though, i don't know. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share #8 Posted August 29, 2012 For my research is true, it uses 40mm filters and so I drew back for it. Too bad, it seems good lens. I think in the end I'll stay with my Elmar-C 90 and still enjoy it. I research now Lanthar CV 90 3.5 but I think it is not too good investment by only 0.5 spot of light... What other options 75-90-100 mm will be small and not very heavy, and with decent aperture? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ldhrads Posted August 29, 2012 Share #9 Posted August 29, 2012 Recently got a thin TE 90. What a neat lens. If you are a stickler for compact lenses, this is great. I have an APO Summicron 90 that I like, but this lens is much better for carrying around, light, handles easily. Beautiful images. I've had no problem wide open, I posted a portrait recently (Julia) with this. at 5.6 it's remarkably sharp. At 2.8 it has a nice softness. Keep your eye on the Bay, I just saw one go unbidded on at $450 that had a recent Leica NJ CLA. If I hadn't already gotten one I would have snapped it up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted August 29, 2012 Share #10 Posted August 29, 2012 A clean 'thin' 90mm Tele-Elmarit is a fine thing to have in your jacket pocket when you are travelling light. Performance is decent wide open, though with visibly soft corners. At f:4 it is good, very crisp at 5.6 over the entire frame, and brilliant at f:8. And it weighs just 240 grams! The lens takes either a 35mm filter on the mount or a Series 5.5 in the collapsible rubber hood. If this is lost or in bad shape, use the dear old clip-on 27525 hood that can be reversed on the lens. It was introduced in 1956 as the IUFOO and is still in use as the hood for the Macro-Elmar – a Leica accessory that can compete with the table tripod in longevity! But remember, a hazy lens is probably a lost lens, except as a decorator. But this was a problem mainly for some early lenses – it probably had to do with the lubricants used – and after all these years, a lens that is not hazy will probably never be. The old man from the Age of the 9cm Elmar Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 29, 2012 Share #11 Posted August 29, 2012 ...What other options 75-90-100 mm will be small and not very heavy, and with decent aperture? Rokkor-M 90/4. A tiny bit shorter than the "thin" Tele-Elmarit (pic), same sharpness more or less and less flare. 40.5mm filters available on e**y. Not sure if it is significantly better than your Elmar-C though as i have no experience with the latter. 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/186677-elmar-c-904-vs-tele-elmarit-9028-on-m8-doubts/?do=findComment&comment=2099387'>More sharing options...
maccaco Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share #12 Posted August 29, 2012 Well, another candidate: Voigtlander 75 / 2.5 Heliar ... interesting! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 29, 2012 Share #13 Posted August 29, 2012 I have no experience with this lens either. According to J.M. Sepulchre, it is sharp at f/4 and on but rather soft with serious focus shift at f/2.5 and f/2.8. If you're after a small and sharp 75, the best one is probably the Summarit 75/2.5 aside from the more expensive Summicron 75/2. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share #14 Posted August 30, 2012 Thank you lct! Since these lenses 75-90 are not much used by me, but I like to have in the bag, I'll do an investment by Voigtlander (probably). I have the 25 and 40 and am very happy. I will continue studying this issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted August 30, 2012 Share #15 Posted August 30, 2012 I have the 90/4 elmar c, the 90/2.8 elamrit-m (not tele elmarit), and the 90/2.0 Summicron (last non asph version). While all are execellent, I most often use the elmarit-m, it is optically excellent, 2.8 is fast enough most of the time, and it is much smaller and lighter than the summicron, which I now use mostly as a portrait lens. The elmar c is a great 'stealth' lens since it is small enough thart observers will not take it seriously, but it's optical results in ist range are very serious. If I could only keep one 90, it would be the elmarit-m ... H 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted August 31, 2012 Share #16 Posted August 31, 2012 I've had the "fat" TeleElmarit since 1968, and have gotten very good results. I use it rarely, as I usually prefer a wider view. Last year I added the 75 2.5 Voigtlander, and now use it more than the 90 TE. It is a very nice lens, inexpensive and small enough to carry for the occasional shot 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted September 3, 2012 Author Share #17 Posted September 3, 2012 Last year I added the 75 2.5 Voigtlander, and now use it more than the 90 TE. It is a very nice lens, inexpensive and small enough to carry for the occasional shot I just did that. I hope to use it more than the Elmar-C 90. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 5, 2012 Share #18 Posted September 5, 2012 Do not trade for 2.8. It is "soft" unlike modern lenses full open. It will be nice at 4. Compare this with how your Elmar C does at 4. Many have some decementing or other obvious optical defect in rear group and it is not repairable. Mine is fine. I think if it were to happen, it would have done so by now. Inspect before you buy. It is a nice pocket lens. 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.