Elmarit, Tele-Elmarit, "Fat" etc 90mm on M9

[pelagia]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am considering buying a 90mm Elmarit, used, probably an older version. Would appreciate to hear your experiences with different types of this lens on M9. Especially handling, mechanical characters, any focusing issues, viewfinder obtrusion, 6-bit coding easyness. I am not that much interested in praises and picture examples. Thank you!

[Delcredere]

I have a Leica Elmarit - M 1:2.8/90mm (1998 E46)*weight 560g and use it for portraits, particularly black and white. I have had no issues with it of the kind you mention and like it a lot. But I tend to leave it at home more and more because of the weight.

[TomB_tx]

The first Leica lens I bought was a version 1 ("fat") tele-Elmarit in 1968. This and the later model are very handy due to their size and f2.8 speed. I don't use a 90 much on the M9, but when I do I'm always pleased with the results.

[jaques]

I recently got an Elmar C made for the CL cameras- like the 40mm summicron the Elmar is amazing bang for the buck and works well on the M9. My example is smooth to operate and focusing was no issue- a very nicely made lens and small.

 

This is the first shot I took with it:

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!

[ayewing]

I have a Tele Elmarit M which is light (225G.), slim so it causes no obstruction to the 90mm field of view and very little to the wider field of the viewfinder. At F2.8 it is fast enough and quite sharp but improves a little on stopping down.

 

I bought mine second hand and as focusing was a bit stiff I sent it off for a bit of TLC as well as coding. The coding is not entirely staightforward as there is a screwhead in the coding area but Malcolm Taylor made a very neat job. The lens focusing is now silky smooth and accurate and the M9 recognises the coding reliably.

 

I am very happy with it and see no need to spend a lot on a more modern lens.

[lars_bergquist]

I have used a number of 90mm Elmarit or Tele-Elmarit lenses, including the first one from 1958. They usually get better the later they are. The 'thin' Tele-Elmarit (1974–1989) is wonderfully small and light, just the thing if you have to move far under your own power. Wide open it is quite sharp on axis while the edges and corners of the field are a bit soft – no problem if you are doing portraits. Stopping down to 4.0 improves the performance very considerably, and the lens is brilliant at 5.6. The lens takes a folding rubber hood with a retaining ring for a Series 5.5 filter (which may come with the lens) or you use 39mm filters and the dear old 12575 snap-on hood, the same as is still offered for the Macro-Elmar!

 

I now use the 1990–2008 Elmarit-M. It is rock solid but weighs in at 410 grams as against 240 for the Tele-Elmarit. It is tack sharp from f:2.8 and in fact one of the best lenses, all lengths, in Leica history. It is sought after so expect to pay a price for a good one. If you find one!

 

One lens you can find, new, is its successor, the 90mm Summarit. Don't underestimate it. It is not a second rate lens for beginners but a first class optic, well built. If I were in the market for a mid-speed 90mm lens now, I would adopt it without the least hesitation.

 

The old man from the Age of the 9cm Elmar

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am considering buying a 90mm Elmarit, used, probably an older version. Would appreciate to hear your experiences with different types of this lens on M9. Especially handling, mechanical characters, any focusing issues, viewfinder obtrusion, 6-bit coding easyness. I am not that much interested in praises and picture examples. Thank you!

 

There have been several different 90mm lenses with the name Elmarit or Tele-Elmarit, so it would help if you could identify the one you are considering. The last version, identifiable by it's built-in lens hood and 46mm filter size, is said to be the best optically. I owned one, but found it too close in size and weight to my Summicron that it defeated my purpose of a travel lens. The original 90mm Elmarit (recognizable by its pebble-grain Vulcanite wrapping near the base) is said to be optically excellent but of lower contrast than others, although I have never owned or used one. In between are two Tele-Elmarits. The first is commonly referred to as the "fat" version, the second as the "thin" version. I own one of both, and can't find any real difference in their performance, so I tend to prefer the "thin" version because it is barely larger or heavier than a 50mm Summicron. Some people complain that this lens has a tendency toward flare, but I have not experienced it to any degree. A portion of them have been found to suffer some sort of severe degradation of an internal element or its coating, visible only by inspection with a bright light shone at an angle, and which is not economically feasible to repair. So that would be something to watch out for.

 

In any event, I would make sure you can return the lens for a full refund if it doesn't focus tack-sharp on your M9. 90mm lenses are fairly ubiquitous and it doesn't seem worth it to me to buy one knowing you'll need to send it away for time and money to get it adjusted.

 

To the coding, only the late version Elmarit and the "thin" Tele-Elmarit are on Leica's list of retrofittable lenses for coding. However there is always aftermarket or DIY coding possible. I have never bothered coding any of my lenses of 50mm or longer, as I don't think the coding does anything significant other than put an identifier in the EXIF data. And the M9 can be set manually do to that if you really want it.

[algrove]

I own many 90 mm and love them all for different reasons, but the smallest f2.8 tele-Elmarits at 226 grams are by far the tiniest. They are subject to flare but a long lens hood can reduce that along with careful positioning of the sun.

 

The Elmarit M f2.8 with built in hood is very small to my feel.

 

The f2.0 pre APO Summicron is very good to my eyes.

 

The f2.0 APO Summicron to me is the best I own, but also the heaviest.

 

Now that should confuse you.

[adan]

handling: No question the 90 Tele-Elmarit "thin" (1974-89) is the smallest and lightest. I've made the mistake of getting rid of one of these about 4 times - and have always had to replace it as the one long lens for M that maximizes the "not as heavy as an SLR" character of the system. I get hives if I don't have one around - even though I'll pull out a monstrous 75 f/1.4 when the light requires.

 

mechanical characters: I've frequently run across pre-1975 90 f/2.8s with stiff focusing. A function of age and how well they were maintained. Rarer in the later "thin" Tele-Elmarit, and I've never seen it in the last (1990-2007) version. No question that the last version has the strongest "build" - and the weight to go with it.

 

any focusing issues: as a function of the stiffness, the first 90 Elmarit (long, leatherette band around lens) has a push-rod to link the deep-set focus cam to the camera, and those are prone to sticking if the lubrication has dried up and the return spring is weak. I. E., you focus the lens, and the rod (and thus the RF image) skips and jumps, or doesn't move at all, rather than tracking smoothly. A cleaning should cure this, however.

 

I will say I've always had the greatest focusing success with the Tele-Elmarit "thin" version - across multiple samples.

 

viewfinder obtrusion: Again, 90 Tele thin is the smallest and blocks the finder least, so long as no shade is used. Focus close (lens extended), and use a shade, and all of them will intrude into the 90 image area to one extent or another. The plain Elmarit of 1959-74 is the longest and most intrusive.

 

6-bit coding easyness: covered - although any 90 f/2.8 can have coding marks added with a permanent pen, and most of the Tele-Elmarits have a screw head in just the right place such that a bit of grime in the depression turns it into the exact "black" coding spot for the "thin" Tele-Elmarit. Owners have posted here several times in surprise that their "uncoded" 90 is recognized by the M8/M9.

[Ecar]

The Elmarit-M is, no doubt, a first-class lens. However, its size and weight - and price on the used market - are comparable to the (faster) Summicron. This is why I didn't keep it in the end.

The keeper, IMHO, is indeed the thin Tele-Elmarit, as long as it's in good condition: good handling, lightweight (perfect for travel) and great image quality (although possibly a small notch below the Elmarit-M). The hood is fairly long (I use the reversible 12575) but takes care of potential flare - it does block the viewfinder a bit, but this is extremely manageable in practice.

Am flying to India tomorrow and the Tele-Elmarit is making the trip too...

[StephenPatterson]

I had the "Fat" Tele Elmarit, and it's a nice lens, but the prices these are bringing now make it hard not to consider the 90/2.8 Elmarit-M, which is a much more modern lens that matches better with the M9, IMHO. I don't feel the Elmarit-M is too large or heavy, and it's very easy to get the lens 6-bit coded if you really desire. Of course the only advantage is recording the lens info in the EXIF data, but for some that is important.

 

The 90 APO-Summicron-M is a much bigger, heavier and more expensive lens.

 

I ended up selling my "Fat" Tele Elmarit and purchased a mint 90/2.8 Elmarit-M, which I've been very happy with.

 

Stephen

[Jon Pop]

I would like to get the "thin" tele-elmarit, but have the 90mm Elmar C f4 - pretty similar in size and shape (probably weight too but I haven't checked so could be wrong). It doesn't have the speed though, but if that's not an issue I think the Elmar C 90 is a great bargain. Good, clean ones can be had for cheap. I manually select 90mm f4 from the M9 menu and have had no issues. I don't use a 90 a lot, but I've been very happy with mine. It's been great on my MP as well. I've been surprised at the nice out of focus backgrounds at f4, something I'd thought was purely the domain of faster lenses...I'm not comparing, to be sure, but have always been pleasantly surprised with it.

[jaques]

it's funny- people talk about how special and unique Noctilux f1 bokeh is- then you take a (350$?) 90mm Elmar C lens and get this at f4- the fence is only just behind the duck- and you remember: shallow DOF has always been readily available in tele lenses...

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!

[bocaburger]

I own many 90 mm and love them all for different reasons, but the smallest f2.8 tele-Elmarits at 226 grams are by far the tiniest. They are subject to flare but a long lens hood can reduce that along with careful positioning of the sun

 

How do you do that...tractor beam?

 

BTW, one note of trivia (but perhaps not altogether trivial): the very last of the "thin" 90 T-E production, identifiable because they are marked as made in Germany, have a focus-throw of about ninety degrees, which is half that of the Canadian-made samples of that lens.

[algrove]

How do you do that...tractor beam?

 

BTW, one note of trivia (but perhaps not altogether trivial): the very last of the "thin" 90 T-E production, identifiable because they are marked as made in Germany, have a focus-throw of about ninety degrees, which is half that of the Canadian-made samples of that lens.

 

Any idea where the Made in Germany lenses serial numbers start?

 

Sun question answer, TOD, just TOD.

[rkglover]

Any idea where the Made in Germany lenses serial numbers start?

 

Sun question answer, TOD, just TOD.

 

Ken Rockwell's site indicates that the Tele-Elmarit was made in Germany beginning in 1987, and his site also provides information about serial numbers by year. For 1987, the first number listed for all Leica lenses is 3 422 891, so I suppose any Tele-Elmarit with that serial number or higher would be made in Germany. I also understand that the Made in Germany lenses are very hard to find.

[ayewing]

I do not think Ken Rockwell's information can be correct. My Tele Elmarit M was made in Germany and its serial number is 3378813.

[ayewing]

Ken Rockwell's site indicates that the Tele-Elmarit was made in Germany beginning in 1987, and his site also provides information about serial numbers by year. For 1987, the first number listed for all Leica lenses is 3 422 891, so I suppose any Tele-Elmarit with that serial number or higher would be made in Germany. I also understand that the Made in Germany lenses are very hard to find.

 

 

 

I think these figures may be inaccurate. The serial number of my German made Tele Elmarit M is 3378813.

 

Sorry for the double post - must have hit post button without realising

[Printmaker]

I have both an 90 Elmarit M (1993) and a 90 Tele Elmarit (1970). The Tele Ele was a wonderful lens until, like me, it grew a little stiff and hazy. In its prime, it rode in a pocket with me everywhere my M4 and 35 Summicron went. This lens was just a tad bigger than a 50 Summicron and from F4 to F8, it did a nice job. Today it is a paper weight.

 

My current 90 Elmarit M is razor sharp, not too heavy and goes everywhere with me and my M9/35 Summicron. I takes great portraits and makes a nice product and still life lens when I need a fast shot and don't want to pull out the big guns.

 

If you decide to get a Tele Elmarit, test it under as many different lighting conditions as possible. You might find a gem. But the chances are better that the glass is growing frosty.

 

The 90 Elmarit M is the better lens. I've seen them selling for more than a new 90 Summarit. That should tell you something about this lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TomB_tx]

I have both an 90 Elmarit M (1993) and a 90 Tele Elmarit (1970). The Tele Ele was a wonderful lens until, like me, it grew a little stiff and hazy. In its prime, it rode in a pocket with me everywhere my M4 and 35 Summicron went. This lens was just a tad bigger than a 50 Summicron and from F4 to F8, it did a nice job. Today it is a paper weight.

 

My 68 TE also developed optical problems (unsharp, very low contrast) so that I put it in a drawer for 10 years as useless. Then sent it to Gus Lazzari after reading about him in Rockwell's column. He restored and adjusted it, and it has been better than ever since then. Highly recommended - turn that paperweight into a great lens again!