90mm Elmarit: thin vs. nano

[paperman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What about Image Quality?

Pros and cons?

Thank you.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[algrove]

What do you mean by "nano"? Which 90 exactly are you referring to?

 

There is the Tele-Elmarit , the Elmarit M, etc.

[tobey bilek]

The thin is a bit soft at 2.8 and from 4 on works like 1980 lenses. My 90 macro is clearly superior at any stop and focusing distance. Virtue is small and light.

 

Any 90 with tele in the name loses resolution up close. Floating elements or lens group is required to resolve it as in 75 Summicron 2.0, 50 1.4 `lux, 50 APO Summicron.

 

I tried a new 90 Elmarit when new back in the 80`s. It also went soft in close range as does my Summicron pre APO. The previous Elmarit made only for the reflex camera was less good at 2.8,, but superior in the close range. The last R Elmarit replaced the original and then it became a RF lens in a new mount.

 

A plain Elmarit 2.8 RF is better up close. Not a prize winner at 2.8 by todays standards, but from 4 on works well at and any distance down to 1:1. A very nice portrait lens.

 

My quick review of 90`s. Pick the the feature most important to you. I work with 90 macro and 75 Summicron.

[paperman]

What do you mean by "nano"? Which 90 exactly are you referring to?

 

There is the Tele-Elmarit , the Elmarit M, etc.

 

Sorry, for "nano" I mean the "fat" Tele-Elmarit (1964-1974)

"Thin" is the Tele-Elmarit (1974-1990)

[algrove]

There are many threads on here about the thin Tele-Elmarit and one just last week. They are prone to flare and one must use the longish lens hood to help a bit. I own a few copies of the thin, have no idea about the old thick versus thin. Maybe someone else can chime in.