Robert Seeney Posted January 23, 2012 Share #1  Posted January 23, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello everyone  After my recent 90mm thread and scouring dealers, I eventually plumped for a late German model of the above lens which arrived today.  A quick inspection was good - focus was great, aperture ring good. I then did the flashlight test and noticed 6 serious scratches on the rear element along with quite a bit of smaller marks - I feared it might be the tele elmarit known issue. I emailed the dealer and expressed my surprise at the scratches - I also noted the rear cap was split and no front cap was present. However, decided to try some shots.  Sun behind my back and below the building behind me, metal lens hood on. First few shots of a garden table and a shed looked good but shots of hedges were very poor - even though he hedge filled the frame and there were no nearby sources of reflected sun, the upper middle third of each image was hazy/flared - I even went into full shade between 2 walls and had flare/haze in exactly the same position  Over 50% of shots were unusable with probably a further 20% needing considerable work in Lightroom  I knew the lens would have a tendency to flare but this lens is unusable  I have emailed the dealer to inform them that I will be returning he lens but I thought I would get some quick advice from the forum about what may be causing this - is this a poor example of the lens or perhaps an indication of damage?  Real shame because it is wonderfully compact!  Thanks in advance  Rob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Hi Robert Seeney, Take a look here 90mm tele elmarit. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
smb Posted January 23, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted January 23, 2012 Marks/scratches on the rear element tend to have more of an effect on the image than marks/scratches on the front element. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted January 23, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted January 23, 2012 Rob, sorry to hear your tale. I no longer have my fat version of this lens (owned for over forty years from new!) but, from memory, I am surprised that the rear element has so much wear and tear. I always kept the caps on my lens when not in use so apart from the occasional use of a blower, I never actually touched the rear glass. Against that background I would be suspicious that, at least, some injudicious cleaning has been done in the past. You are right to be upset. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 23, 2012 Share #4 Â Posted January 23, 2012 I currently have a late Canadian version of that lens, it's the fourth Thin T-E I've owned through the years. None of them suffered from T-E rear-element disease, none of them flared more than any other Leica lens I own. Maybe just lucky. I sounds like you got one that had been the victim of abuse. For all you know it's been stripped and reassembled by some clod with no business doing it. That's the thing about buying older lenses, and why it's critical to deal with a source that will take the lens back with no hassle or restocking fees. Â BTW if you search for another sample, the German versions have a focus throw of 90 degrees vs 180 for the Canadian ones. Makes for (slightly) quicker focusing, yes, but also it's harder to be as precise. Depends on what you consider paramount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 23, 2012 Share #5 Â Posted January 23, 2012 While the TE-M will flare, this sounds much worse (sun behind you and behind a building?!) Â Agree with smb - rear scratches are bad news compared to front scratches. There are no longer spare parts to replace the rear elements (a sealed group) so this lens is basically a paperweight unless someone wants the "David Hamilton" look. _______________________ Â "......the German versions have a focus throw of 90 degrees vs 180 for the Canadian ones." Â Not that simple - the Canadian I have now (SN 329xxxx) has the 90-degree focus throw. Early lenses had 180, late lenses have 90. Somewhere in between, this change was made, but not directly linked to assembly location. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 23, 2012 Share #6 Â Posted January 23, 2012 Has anyone ever 6 bit coded one of these? Could one assume before 6 bit code work Leica takes a look to confirm lens is OK versus a paperweight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted January 23, 2012 Share #7 Â Posted January 23, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anyone ever 6 bit coded one of these? Could one assume before 6 bit code work Leica takes a look to confirm lens is OK versus a paperweight. Â I just sent my 90 Tele-Elmarit in to New Jersey to get it 6 bit coded and to have it calibrated ( it has some back-focus). $230 for coding (yikes), but I can't get a self coding to work because there is a screw on the mounting flange very near where a mark needs to be. I will let you know if they say anything else about the lens. If I recall correctly, the rear element is pretty far inside the lens.. I don't see how you could scratch it accidentally, it almost has to be a careless cleaning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted January 24, 2012 Share #8 Â Posted January 24, 2012 Has anyone ever 6 bit coded one of these? Could one assume before 6 bit code work Leica takes a look to confirm lens is OK versus a paperweight. Â My 90 Elmarit-M came back from being 6-bit coded with a calibration certificate, so I think it's safe to assume that Leica NJ would not perform the work if the lens could not meet spec. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted January 24, 2012 Share #9 Â Posted January 24, 2012 Don Goldberg did the 6-bit coding on my Canadian-made thin Tele-Elmarit 90 during a c/l/a. Works just fine... Â Regards, Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 24, 2012 Share #10 Â Posted January 24, 2012 1. Thin Tele-Elmarits can be 6-bit coded. (Why wouldn't they?) One of the first two lenses I sent to Leica for the free coding that came with an M8 purchase was my 90 TE-M. Â 2. "I just sent my 90 Tele-Elmarit in to New Jersey to get it 6 bit coded..... I can't get a self coding to work because there is a screw on the mounting flange very near where a mark needs to be." Â Which screw, if filled in with black (or just grime) - works exactly like the correct 6-bit dot. 90 TEs are the easiest to self-code, for just this reason. Â 3. All lenses that are six-bit coded by Leica are checked for calibration, before and after installing the new mount. Changing the mount COULD introduce focus errors, so they check before and after to make sure the lens is at least as good after the service as before. I have no doubt DAG and other reputable servicers do the same. Â No different than a mechanic taking a car out to make sure the brakes really work, after brake service. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted January 24, 2012 Share #11  Posted January 24, 2012 1. Thin Tele-Elmarits can be 6-bit coded. (Why wouldn't they?) One of the first two lenses I sent to Leica for the free coding that came with an M8 purchase was my 90 TE-M. 2. "I just sent my 90 Tele-Elmarit in to New Jersey to get it 6 bit coded..... I can't get a self coding to work because there is a screw on the mounting flange very near where a mark needs to be."  Which screw, if filled in with black (or just grime) - works exactly like the correct 6-bit dot. 90 TEs are the easiest to self-code, for just this reason.  3. All lenses that are six-bit coded by Leica are checked for calibration, before and after installing the new mount. Changing the mount COULD introduce focus errors, so they check before and after to make sure the lens is at least as good after the service as before. I have no doubt DAG and other reputable servicers do the same.  No different than a mechanic taking a car out to make sure the brakes really work, after brake service.  Andy, I could not get it to read after multiple attempts. I assumed the screw was interfering somehow as I have coded several Zeiss lenses with no problem. Maybe i didnt apply enough fill. At any rate, Leica USA will take care of it now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted January 24, 2012 Share #12 Â Posted January 24, 2012 I currently have a late Canadian version of that lens, it's the fourth Thin T-E I've owned through the years. None of them suffered from T-E rear-element disease, none of them flared more than any other Leica lens I own. Maybe just lucky. I sounds like you got one that had been the victim of abuse. For all you know it's been stripped and reassembled by some clod with no business doing it. That's the thing about buying older lenses, and why it's critical to deal with a source that will take the lens back with no hassle or restocking fees. Â BTW if you search for another sample, the German versions have a focus throw of 90 degrees vs 180 for the Canadian ones. Makes for (slightly) quicker focusing, yes, but also it's harder to be as precise. Depends on what you consider paramount. Â I have exactly same experience....a wonderful performer in my opinion, maybe just lucky I dont know but a real gem of a compact 90mm. Â good luck andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted January 24, 2012 Share #13 Â Posted January 24, 2012 I then did the flashlight test and noticed 6 serious scratches on the rear element along with quite a bit of smaller marks - I feared it might be the tele elmarit known issue.It does sound like some ham-fisted person was at the back element. It's actually easy enough to get at when the lens is set to infinity. I'd return it for credit and avoid that dealer in the future. It's a great little lens, I have a very late Canadian version and have noted the propensity to flare but have the Leica hood for it which I recommend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 24, 2012 Share #14 Â Posted January 24, 2012 I use the deep metal 90/135 clip-on hood (like the one Leica supplies with the 90 Macro Elmar). It does just about double the length (and girth, when reversed for storage) of the little lens but IMO it beats the OEM rubber hood for flare protection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 24, 2012 Share #15 Â Posted January 24, 2012 Never saw the OEM rubber hood. Anybody got a part number on it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted January 24, 2012 Share #16 Â Posted January 24, 2012 I've had a Tele-Elmarit pretty much the whole time since they came out. First the fat one, then the thin one and after I'd sold that bought another shortly after. Â The strange thing is that while it's not coded, my M8's read it as a 90/2.8??? The M9 doesn't, unfortunately. As it works well, and has the least flare of any T-E I've used, I'm not sending it anywhere. I always use the big hood, but it works almost as well as my late Elmarit-M. Â Henning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
smb Posted January 24, 2012 Share #17 Â Posted January 24, 2012 Part No. for rubber hood 11250 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 25, 2012 Share #18 Â Posted January 25, 2012 Yes the rubber hood of the "thin" Tele-Elmarit is # 11250 + hood ring # 11251 and hood cap # 11252. Beware that it accepts Series 5.5 filters only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.