Leica 90mm f2.8 on a Leica CL(?)

[crow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After getting a 40mm summicron for my newly bought CL, I intend to buy a 90mm.

The f2.8 is the one I prefer cause it is sharper, I like all the shots I've seen on the internet, and I bet darkroom printed images are sharper than the f4 too. So it is a must after the 40mm. Question is that because the CL has a shorter base rangefinder is this a problem, the f2.8 stop 90mm? I've read that it doesn't get along fine with tele lenses. Is this a bad combo, 90mm +faster than f4=f2.8 lens?

[tobey bilek]

I believe you have been doing your homework correctly.

 

90 2.8 is a bit large for the camera except for the tele elmarit. version 2. That lens is not great at 2.8 and there are issues with optics going bad. Mine is fine, however. It was the Leica rep`s sample in 1985 so maybe that has something to do with it.

[crow]

OK,

I'll go the other way around then.

Sometimes I want a ready made answer, don't feel like searching too long, and the forum is just exactly what I need.

I also got a Leica IIIa.

I know a couple of 90mm screw mount lenses as being a bit low contrast, if I am correct,

sort of like the 50mm summar, also one of my lenses. Right or wrong what's previously said,

is there a screw mount tele as sharp as the M 90mm f2.8( even if it is of a slower aperture- supposing I shoot outside)?

Or, could I use an M to M39 adapter? In which case which version(s) as sharp as possible?

[luigi bertolotti]

OK,

I'll go the other way around then.

Sometimes I want a ready made answer, don't feel like searching too long, and the forum is just exactly what I need.

I also got a Leica IIIa.

I know a couple of 90mm screw mount lenses as being a bit low contrast, if I am correct,

sort of like the 50mm summar, also one of my lenses. Right or wrong what's previously said,

is there a screw mount tele as sharp as the M 90mm f2.8( even if it is of a slower aperture- supposing I shoot outside)?

Or, could I use an M to M39 adapter? In which case which version(s) as sharp as possible?

 

Yes... the Elmar 90 3 elements.. an excellent sharp lens even wide open... but is easier to find it in bayonet mount... : not as compact has the Elmar C or the Tele Elmarit 2,8, but a very good lens... being chrome, it looks a bit "aliene" on the CL... ... but with its black vulcanite ring at its base, it isn't a bad view, imo.

Of course, is anyway an "out of system" choice (btw, it's typically more costly than the Elmar C) : the Elmar C was designed for the CL, and its hood is "safer" than the one for the Elmar about viewfinder obtrusion (but I am not sure it's a real issue.... I haven't anymore my CL and can't check...)

[crow]

Reading Ken Rockwell's article comparing different Leica 90mm lenses, I tend to want to save not for an aspherical, but for the Elmarit-M 2.8, simply because at this point I think of sharpness being very important to my aesthetics.

Reading it twice makes me realize that far more important is the camera's rf "calibration" or adjustment.

Question is, what does a technician have to have in terms of equipment in order to perform such a task? Of course, shooting and developing large prints should give a clue as to how well adjusted the rangefinder is. Who in Athens, or Greece can perform such a task successfully and in the best possible manner? Anyone I can trust sending my camera abroad, like an honest old technician who doesn't charge too much?

[lct]

At full aperture and w/o magnification, all 90/2.8 lenses are out of the accuracy range of the Leica CL's rangefinder. In round figures, the effective baselength of the latter is 19mm IIRC whilst its critical baselength is 29mm at f/2.8. Hence the widest aperture of f/4 on Elmar-C and M-Rokkor 90mm lenses. In practice you can get good results at f/2.8 from time to time though but your hit rate will remain generally low. Unless you can use a magnifier of course in which case you would need at least a 1.4x one to get a similar accuracy as that of a 90/4 w/o magnification.

[crow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Now this restores my faith in forums in general. I couldn't have thought this my self, and yet seems so right to try. I got my self an OM 300mm Zuiko tele for my Olympus system a while ago. It came with three glasses, two in OK condition , the third one broken at the side. They could work as magnifies only they're big. Are there any such magnifiers for the CL viewfinder to accommodate on the outside? Will look for one.

I will also ask if it is easy to align the rf of CL. If you read my other tread in this forum, under "Other Leica Products", you'll understand what I am talking about.

Any step by step directions on how to do that?

[lct]

You would need a magnifier like those ones but i don't know if they work on the CL.

Leica Camera AG - Photography - LEICA VIEWFINDER MAGNIFIER M 1.25x & 1.4x

The last time i've held a CL must be two or three decades ago i'm afraid so i don't recall how to align its RF if i ever knew that sorry.

[crow]

Yea,

since the CL viewfinder casket is rectangular, and the Leica one you're talking about is circular, then why not go with a different brand? Leica costs 200gbp. A canon or nikon or Olympus one costs about 1/10th of the L price. Thanks for the input, you all.

[giordano]

Don't forget that the CL can focus a f/2.8 lens just as precisely as a f/4 lens as long as you don't use an aperture wider than f/4.

 

With that proviso, the old 90mm Elmarit and Tele-Elmarit are fine on the CL (though you may need to remove the lens hood when focusing close so it doesn't obscure the rangefinder patch). I don't have any information about the Elmarit-M on the CL but suspect that its greater diameter and permanently-attached hood will obscure the rangefinder patch at closer distances. The Summicron 90 isn't usable.

[crow]

I see. So got to be looking at the actual length of the lens too. It's just that the Elmarit-M shots on google images is so much sharper, capturing every wrinkle of an old person's face, so much more accurately than a regular 90mm 2.8, even the 3 element version. It is one step behind the aspherical, Elmarit-M. Otherwise, from the length point of view, getting in the way of the rf, the canadian tele-elmarit seems to be the ideal one, physically speaking. I have to go with the Elmarit M. Will find a lens from my OM collection, put on the front of the cl so I get an idea if and how much it blocks the rf/vf.

Thanks people.

Summicron c 40mm comes first!

[luigi bertolotti]

It has came to my mind that none has mentioned the Summarit 90 2,5; very compact, not too costly... I have never tested it, but have its 75 brother for my M8... and in terms of sharpness it is at THE TOP , even compared with my Elmarit-M 90 (the last version, I mean, not the "Canadian" Tele Elmarit-M).

[giordano]

It has came to my mind that none has mentioned the Summarit 90 2,5; very compact, not too costly... I have never tested it, but have its 75 brother for my M8... and in terms of sharpness it is at THE TOP , even compared with my Elmarit-M 90 (the last version, I mean, not the "Canadian" Tele Elmarit-M).

 

Good suggestion, Luigi. The only problem would be the same as with the Elmarit-M, whether the length and diameter of the lens (or lens+hood) are enough to block the CL rangefinder window.

[crow]

I see.

Well, for the moment my CL is enough.

I have to say that for tele I am OK with my OM system,Praktica, Nikon F3, and E-P1.

 

Leica IIIa and CL is OK for Leica. I am really impressed from the quality of my Summar. People have talked about it being soft. The digital images I've captured using it are sharp!

 

I am really impressed by the 90mm Leicas on the internet. Especially portraits with lots of crystal clear details. It is a must for the future, after the 40mm.

 

I have to have my Leica CL 's rf adjusted first. Rockwell says that sharpness between the tele-elmarit, the elmarit M and the 3 element differs insignificantly and that the rf focusing accuracy is more important. Do you agree on this? Are all Leica 90mm lenses capable of the same detail? Does he mean the same goes for enlarged prints?

[lct]

Later or current lenses like Elmarit or Macro-Elmar have more contrast than earlier ones and a better resistance to flare but resolution wise i would not expect significant differences at f/5.6 and on unless you're using fine grain films a lot.

[luigi bertolotti]

I see....

... Rockwell says that sharpness between the tele-elmarit, the elmarit M and the 3 element differs insignificantly and that the rf focusing accuracy is more important. Do you agree on this? Are all Leica 90mm lenses capable of the same detail? Does he mean the same goes for enlarged prints?

 

Rockwell isn't the Bible, but is absolutely true that focus precision DOES command IQ with a 90, expecially at 2,8/4 (*) ; on the contrary,as an owner of all the above quoted 90s, and having used them a lot, my firm idea is that the last Elmarit M is a step up in ANY sense, though I never used it on film (differently from the two other) : on digital the difference is evident even in 13x18 prints.

 

(*) the extreme case is the Summarex 85 used at 1,5...

[crow]

Yea,

definitely, if I have the money, the Elmarit-M is a must lens, even if I only use it with digital bodies. I know digital will evolve, and somehow have the impression that old analog bodies will be married to digital, thus there will be a fusion between the two. I don't like pixels, I love film grain. I like the ease of digital images, and the more permanent character of film. The Elmarit-M seems like a diamond indeed.

[lct]

Yes but it is significantly bulkier than small sized 90s like Elmar-C 90/4, M-Rokkor 90/4, "thin" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 or Macro-Elmar 90/4 so beware of the risk of blocking the viewfinder.

[pop]

I just had a look: both the 90mm Elmar-C 1:4.0 and the 90mm Elmarit-M 1:2.8 do, of course, block part of the viewfinder. However, even at the closest setting of 1m both clear the 90mm frame lines. IOW, the central part of the frame which more or less corresponds to the image being taken will not be obstructed by either lens.

 

Shots taken through the CL's viewfinder:

 

Elmarit-M @ 1m:

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!

 

Elmarit-M @ infinity:

 

Elmar-C @ 1m:

 

Elmar-C @ infinity:

 

The smaller set of framelines (which covers a bit less than one window pane) are the 90mm framelines of the CL. Apologies for the indifferent alignment. The shots were taken with a D-Lux 3 handheld in front of the eyepiece of the CL. The native lens shade was extended for both lenses.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

Interesting thanks.