Jump to content

A lightweight 90


Julian H

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

I am looking for a 90 to complement my M4-2* and 50 collapsible Elmar-M when I go hiking and [modest] climbing. I really like what I see written about the late Elmarit but I fear it is too heavy and too big. I was looking at the Tele-Elmar M but reports of flare and potential optical issues [haze?] put me off.

 

What else compares to the Elmarit and is smaller and lighter and not too expensive? I am open to other brands and wonder about the Apo Lanthar? 

 

Cheers, Julian

 

* I will also use it on my M262 but I don't take it hiking / climbing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I am looking for a 90 to complement my M4-2* and 50 collapsible Elmar-M when I go hiking and [modest] climbing. I really like what I see written about the late Elmarit but I fear it is too heavy and too big. I was looking at the Tele-Elmar M but reports of flare and potential optical issues [haze?] put me off.

 

What else compares to the Elmarit and is smaller and lighter and not too expensive? I am open to other brands and wonder about the Apo Lanthar? 

 

Cheers, Julian

 

* I will also use it on my M262 but I don't take it hiking / climbing.

Macro-Elmar-M 90

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Macro Elmar-M is indeed the smallest and lightest, but fairly expensive. I like the 90 Elmar C, made for the old Leica CL. People warn that focus may not be best on an M body, but mine has been perfect on M6, M9, & M10 as well as my old CL.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Macro Elmar is reallythe top... but, given that your camera is a M4-2, for mountain usage I'd go for a fine Elmar collapsible (even in VG conditions, they are no costly) or for a Tele Elmarit V1 (a bit more costly, but a really fine lens... I used mine for years) ; is someway heavy but really VERY compact, and, differently from the collapsible Elmar, has no sort of issue with your digital M.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've actually used the 90mm APO-Lanthar, mostly in the mount for Canon EOS (same glass) and it is exceptional at rangefinder distances (1 meter - infinity). A bit weak in the close-up range (0.7 meters or so).

 

260 grams in Leica LTM mount (requires thin adapter for M use) - so only 30g heavier than the Macro-Elmar, and a sturdier mount.

 

http://www.opticallimits.com/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/553-voigtlander90f35nex

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I think the weight and size of the Apo-Lanthar is okay, and it will mostly be used focussed at a distance. Is the 90 Elmar-C [CL lens] and the Rokkor version the Voigtlander's equal, or better? The Macro Elmar is not on the cards for me, although no doubt lovely I really can't spend that sort of money on a lens and then be camping or in shared mountain huts. It might very well be okay but I would worry too much so it would always be on my mind. The thin TE is ideal but I have read about optical issues due to age which really put me off finding a good copy.

 

Julian

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't tried the Lanthar, but I've been very impressed with the Elmar-C, especially since I picked it up for well under $300 US, and it looks like new. It can be a true bargain. I also have a 1968 TE version 1 (my first Leica lens in 1968), and a 90 Summarit. The TE spent years stored away after it suddenly would not give a sharp focus plane. Finally got it repaired a few years ago - a rear element had shifted position - and it has been fine since. In fact, all 3 of these give lovely images.

But of these the Elmar-C is the smallest and lightest. It used to be my travel kit with a CL and 40 Summicron C.

Erwin Puts notes that the Elmar-C has a very similar optical layout to the Macro Elmar, and also seems to be optimized for near distances, so is excellent for portraits and such. Mine came with the leather pouch and original rubber hood,which is still in fine shape after 40+ years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I think the weight and size of the Apo-Lanthar is okay, and it will mostly be used focussed at a distance. Is the 90 Elmar-C [CL lens] and the Rokkor version the Voigtlander's equal, or better? The Macro Elmar is not on the cards for me, although no doubt lovely I really can't spend that sort of money on a lens and then be camping or in shared mountain huts. It might very well be okay but I would worry too much so it would always be on my mind. The thin TE is ideal but I have read about optical issues due to age which really put me off finding a good copy.

 

Julian

If Macro Elmar is not in the cards (for you) then thin TE is second best option. What optical issues are you talking about? Flare?

 

On a digital with LV you can check for flare before shooting and can control it by moving or using extra shade by hand. On Film you don't have that option for sure.

 

Other issue could be RF alignment. Where your RF works with rest of the lenses but off only with 90mm. In that case it becomes RF alignment issue for the whole set.

Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

Always liked 90mm lenses, i mush have a dozen of them but i have no experience with the Apo Lanthar at all sorry. If f/4 is fast enough for you the very best one is the Macro-Elmar 90/4 but the M-Rokkor 90/4 for Minolta CLE (not CL) is not far from it and is much cheaper. A bargain and a keeper to me. The Elmar-C 90/4 is sharp but no more so than the Rokkor and the latter flares a lot less, especially when strong light sources are just outside the frame. At f/2.8 the smallest and lightest Leica is the Tele-Elmarit "thin" 90/2.8. Great little lens but better choose the German version from 1987 if you can find one as it flares less than the earlier Canadian one as far as my copies are concerned at least. Now it is still a flare prone lens which needs a long hood anyway. The Elmarit 90/2.8 v2 is a better lens in that it flares less but it is significantly more bulky and it has more CA than the Tele-Elmarit. My advice if you need a small 90 in a budget, pick the Rokkor you won't regret it. But again it is the model for Minolta CLE made my Minolta in the eighties, not that for Minolta CL made by Leitz in the seventies. The latter is just a clone to the Elmar-C 90/4 with different filters. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would without question jump for the late Elmarit if it were smaller and lighter! 

I have read [perhaps too] much on the www about problematic thin T-E's, degradation between lenses, fungus, flare etc which discourages me buying one.

Hi LCT thanks so much for your detailed post. How can I be sure of the later Rokkor? There is one says made by Leitz on the front ring, is that the earlier CL one, and the better Minolta version below?

minolta-90-4-03-604x640.jpg

 

Thanks for your help all, its much appreciated  :)

 

Julian

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is it: M-Rokkor 90/4 for Minolta CLE. The M-Rokkor 90/4 for Minolta CL has the same design as the Elmar-C 90/4 and a « MADE BY LEITZ » engraving on the front ring (pic). Happy snaps :)

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Confused. The S/no on your pictured lens is 1976, the Minolta CLE came out in 1980? Surely the Minolta for the CLE looks like my posted photo?

 

The CL (both Leica and Minolta versions) came out in 1973.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...