Difference between Leica 90mm f4.0 Macro Elmar-M 6-bit and without

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am thinking about Leica 90mm f4.0 Macro Elmar-M as light tele lens for landscape pictures while hiking. I already have 90mm tele-elmarit-m (thin) f/2.8 but I am not very happy with edge/corner even at f8. I have two questions:

 

Q1) Will I see a significant performance improvement in 90mm f4.0 Macro Elmar-M over what I have?

 

Q2) What is the optical performance difference between 6-bit and non 6-bit? I see big price difference between the two on ebay.

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[jdlaing]

I have the 90 macro and see an improvement. I couldn't tell you about 6 bit as opposed to non 6 bit as mine is coded.

I think,it is an outstanding lens.

[lct]

The "thin" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 is sharp in the corners at f/4 and on and vignettes very little there so it seems that your sample needs some CLA or calibration. The Macro-Elmar 90/4 is not sharper in the corners but has less flare and more contrast generally. It is also sharper at close distance and has a bit less focus shift than the thin T-E. Nothing to worry about in both cases though.

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!

[luigi bertolotti]

.....

Q2) What is the optical performance difference between 6-bit and non 6-bit? I see big price difference between the two on ebay.

I think it has not a significant impact on performance : better to say... the performance in itself is exactly the same : lens recognition adds some in camera corrections that can improve the image quality : but I tend to think that for the 90 it is not so important : maybe (I haven't the lens) the correction is more significant when you use the Macro adapter, which also has a code of its own.

 

Anyway, 6 bit coding can be always made, by Leica or labs, on a lens that hasn't it... I think the price differences one can observe in the market are mostly due to age, conditions, completeness of the kit (and of course, a Macro Elmar WITH Macro adapter costs significantly more than one without)

[tobey bilek]

My TE has sharp corners .    2.8 is not perfectly sharp.   The TE loses some sharpness in close range as does 90 2.0 pre APO and 90 APO. That is why the 90 needs a redesign with floating elements.

 

For sharp in the close range , you need the 90 Elmarit made for the visoflex . or the 90 macro which is better but does not have the versatility of the 90 Elmarit.

 

The 90 Macro does not lose sharpness close or far and has the more modern micro contrast of the best current lenses like the 90 APO.    The 90 2.0 APO, 90 Elmarit, 90 4.0 macro are all indistinguishable at distance, but at portrait distance, macro is the winner.   Leica would tell you this years ago.