hendriphile Posted December 31, 2013 Share #21 Â Posted December 31, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) The 135mm Elmar F/4The 35mm Summaron F/2.8 The 90 mm Tele-Elmarit M Â +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 31, 2013 Posted December 31, 2013 Hi hendriphile, Take a look here Favorite sleeper lenses?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
MarkP Posted December 31, 2013 Share #22 Â Posted December 31, 2013 2.0/40 Summicron-C. Only just bought one with a CL but it is a joy to use on the M240 and renders beautifully on the M240. Â Â I agree with those posts about the Zeiss lenses - they punch way above their price range. Â Stephen is right about the 2.8/25 C-Biogon - I should use it more. Â The 4.5/21 C-Biogon is also amazing. I mainly shot for B&W on the M9 but the red edge became a real pain for the few colour photos I was using. If I only shot on film I would use it in preference to a 21 SEM. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted January 1, 2014 Share #23 Â Posted January 1, 2014 With the way the 90 Emarit-M's price has escalated in the last few years I doubt you can call it a sleeper any longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted January 1, 2014 Share #24 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Zeiss 'C' lenses in general. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 1, 2014 Share #25 Â Posted January 1, 2014 With the way the 90 Emarit-M's price has escalated in the last few years I doubt you can call it a sleeper any longer. Â Â Thanks. Amazing! You are right. The price seems to have doubled since I bought mine in 2009. It's a great lens for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted January 1, 2014 Share #26 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Thanks. Amazing! You are right. The price seems to have doubled since I bought mine in 2009. It's a great lens for sure. Â I wish I had bought mine in 2009. Â PS - "Land of Enchantment". Do you mean New Mexico, USA?, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted January 1, 2014 Share #27 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) The "fat" 2.8/90 Tele-Elmarit doesn't get as much respect as other 90mm Leica lenses, but I recently had it out on my M and found it did very well indeed. I shouldn't be surprised... Yes, it flares a bit when provoked. Â Second "no respect" lens is the Voigtlander 2.5/50 Color-Skopar, which early reviews labeled "soft". Mine is not, the review sample may have been. I got mine used at a very good price in 2004, but I think its reputation has somewhat recovered recently. It's really a very good lens, compact, sharp but with kindness and a touch of pincushion. Â Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted January 1, 2014 Share #28 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Another CV lens, the 28mm f/3.5 Color Skopar. It is a work or pure genius (as a few are in the CV range, its just a question of finding them). Made with a brass body, not alloy, it is tiny, it is sharp (as sharp as my 28mm Summicron), it has great bokeh, it is discontinued, it is hard to find. Worth keeping an Ebay search open for. They made them in other mounts, Nikon I think, and these do crop up, but you need the LTM version and an M adapter if necessary. Â I still see well priced 90mm Elmarit M's so I think this is still a sleeper because not many people outside the specialist photo forums seem to know about them, many assume the replacement 90mm Summarit will by default be 'better'. And yes, the 50mm Elmar M, under priced, under loved, and it shouldn't be, but perhaps people are more willing to believe in the more complicated lenses just because they are complicated. Â Â Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 1, 2014 Share #29 Â Posted January 1, 2014 My sample of the CV 50/2.5 is significantly softer than its Leica competitors (50/2.5, 50/2.8 v2). A nicely made lens though. Makes me think that i should use it more often for soft portraiture as the Summilux pre-asph i use for that is soft only at f/1.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 1, 2014 Share #30 Â Posted January 1, 2014 I wish I had bought mine in 2009. Â PS - "Land of Enchantment". Do you mean New Mexico, USA?, Â Â Yup, the "Land of Enchantment", it says so on my license plate. https://www.google.com/search?q=nm+license+plate&rls=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=4NLDUp66EszyoAT3rYLoDQ&ved=0CEAQsAQ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 1, 2014 Share #31 Â Posted January 1, 2014 The 21mm f/3.4 Super-Angulon remains an excellent lens despite colour issues on digital - which seem to have 'subdued' its popularity. Prices are not low, but copies can be still be found at reasonable cost. Its a very 'characterful' lens with superb central definition, substantial vignetting and a square aperture diapragm. I have one as well as the current 21mm f/3.4 and the two are very different but still compliment each other well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted January 1, 2014 Share #32 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Summaron 35 . Â +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted January 1, 2014 Share #33 Â Posted January 1, 2014 135mm F/4 Elmar 50mm Summicron (1966) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted January 1, 2014 Share #34 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Judging by the posts in this thread, the 35mm Summaron f2.8 and 90mm Elmarit-M, both of which I frequently use (film & digital) are rapidly moving out of the so-called 'sleeper' class! Â One non-Leica lens that never fails to impress is my ZM 21mm Biogon f2.8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 1, 2014 Share #35 Â Posted January 1, 2014 Well, after reading this thread, I do believe that any "sleepers" mentioned here will no longer be considered sleepers very soon, if not already. Â Let's go and wake up some sleepers in this New Year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebidwell Posted January 1, 2014 Share #36  Posted January 1, 2014 My favourite 'sleeper' lens has to be my " Leitz Tele-Elmarit -M 1:2.8 / 90mm Lens" S/No 3430489 and made in Germany in 1987. In saying that apparently the earlier Canadian made lenses developed a chronic etching problem of the rear lens. After purchasing the lens it was sent to Malcolm Taylor for a thorough examination and overhaul. He couldn't find anything to suggest my lens was suffering from this etching/fogging problem and I've used it ever since with no problems.  Regards  Mike B Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
escimo Posted January 1, 2014 Share #37 Â Posted January 1, 2014 unfortunately not anymore in my asset: Leica Macro-Elmar-M 4/90 Leica Summarit-M 2.5/35 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george + Posted January 2, 2014 Share #38 Â Posted January 2, 2014 Leica Summarit 1:2.5 / 75 Carl Zeiss C Sonnar 1.5 / 50 ZM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesurf Posted January 2, 2014 Share #39 Â Posted January 2, 2014 The 135mm Elmar F/4The 35mm Summaron F/2.8 The 90 mm Tele-Elmarit M +1 Â +2 Â The 90 TEM is a wonderful lens and I am so happy it has been a sleeper as I got it for a decent price. I've found it works really well even in difficult lighting; here's a concert image: Â Â Hope you all get to use one someday Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldash Posted January 2, 2014 Share #40 Â Posted January 2, 2014 Although I have a few superb Summicrons (35,50,65,90, etc.), I was surprised when my 90 Elmar f4 and 135 Elmar f4 were tested. Amazingly, they were a lot better than expected, despite their very simple optical designs. All of my lenses are the heavier chromed metal, no black plastic. Â The 2 Elmars above sell used for just a few hundred dollars, even when in very nice condition. I find it hard to tell a reasonable quality difference in the images produced between my 90mm f4 Elmar and my 90mm Summicron f2, when both are shot at about f 5.6 to f 8 Â I should note that I am not in the habit of cropping to a small portion of an image, and then blowing up the remainder to a 16x20 print! (I do portrait and outdoor scenery photography.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.