Rich6284 Posted January 31, 2007 Share #1 Posted January 31, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can anyone tell me whether or not the Tele-Elmarit M is considered inferior to the Elmarit M in terms of sharpness and contrast? Thanks in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 31, 2007 Posted January 31, 2007 Hi Rich6284, Take a look here Sharpness of Tele-Elmarit. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted January 31, 2007 Share #2 Posted January 31, 2007 I do not know the general mood about Tele Elmarit vs. Elmarit (we speak abut 90, right?) nor I have ever read MTFs or similar (maybe you can find something technical in Erwin Puts pages); but I can give You my field impression, based on the fact that I used for years an Elmarit 90 BM, then found in the market a nice Tele Elmarit (1st type) and use it a lot: I definitely prefer the Tele and specifically regarding sharpness at all the stops I make use of (from 4 to 16, don't like to work at 2,8 with 90, except when searching for "no DOF effects"); add the dimension factor and.. no choice between the duo: together with the Summilux 35, it was the lens that convinced me that people in Canada did work certainly no worse that Wetzlarians Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted February 1, 2007 Share #3 Posted February 1, 2007 I use a "thin" Tele-Elmarit and can only contrast it to my 90/2 AA and of course it is not as sharp as that. However IMO it is plenty sharp for almost anything and the picture below was taken at f2.8 or very close to it. Its a very good lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted February 1, 2007 Share #4 Posted February 1, 2007 Luigi, I believe Rich's question was directed to the Tele-Elmarit vs. the current Elmarit-M 90mm. If so, I would have to say that the current lens is more contrasty and also is sharper wide-open. That said, the Tele-Elmarit still is an excellent lens, and differences will only be noticeable when comparing the results side by side. Many people like the Tele-Elmarit for its compactness. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 1, 2007 Share #5 Posted February 1, 2007 Luigi, I believe Rich's question was directed to the Tele-Elmarit vs. the current Elmarit-M 90mm. If so, I would have to say that the current lens is more contrasty and also is sharper wide-open. That said, the Tele-Elmarit still is an excellent lens, and differences will only be noticeable when comparing the results side by side. Many people like the Tele-Elmarit for its compactness. Andy I think You are right, Andreas, if the original request of Rich is related to the CURRENT Elmarit 90 : my Tele Elmarit dates 1964 ! If it happened that a current lens would not be better of a lens of similar specs of more tha 40 years ago... well, there really would be some problem inside Leica Company... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 1, 2007 Share #6 Posted February 1, 2007 I would say Peter's shot perfectly defines the 90 Tele-Elmarit-M (thin version - made 1972-1990) look. Lowish macro-contrast in backlighting (it's a bit flare-prone), but with a very nice micro-contrast (highlight edges along the girls' faces). A mix that makes for a "timeless" look to the pictures. I finally traded mine away after 5 1/2 years because its flare tendencies don't play well with the M8 (the smaller image area means more light spill onto the sides of the inside of the camera, and the shiny sensor surface doesn't help much, either). I really enjoyed it on film, though. The current 90 f/2.8 Elmarit (based on the optics for the SLR system) has only a bit more real resolution, but quite a bit more contrast and less veiling flare, which bumps up its "apparent" sharpness and knife-edge look. For Peter's shot it would have been a bit harsh handling that glancing light off the skin, and trying to hold tone in both the window and the shaded sides of the faces. IMHO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted February 1, 2007 Share #7 Posted February 1, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I added a Tele Elmarit M to my kit a fe months ago because it was so inexpensive and this is the product of its first outing. I am very please with its performance. The second time out, I lost some important shots because it flares like a pig ! Really need to be careful when pointing it at the light. Rolo 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! 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/14958-sharpness-of-tele-elmarit/?do=findComment&comment=158804'>More sharing options...
Rona!d Posted February 1, 2007 Share #8 Posted February 1, 2007 Nice shot, Rolo! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magyarman Posted February 5, 2007 Share #9 Posted February 5, 2007 Why people here always interesting which is lens better? Why he doesn't wander how can himself go to better like fotografer? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frc Posted February 6, 2007 Share #10 Posted February 6, 2007 Hi Magyarman, The best lens is the one you make the picture with. The worst photographer is the one that searches for the "right" lens when the picture should be made. It's not all about sharpness. The pick is not a 90 but tri-e Regards, Fr. 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! 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/14958-sharpness-of-tele-elmarit/?do=findComment&comment=163187'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.