90mm Leica M Suggestions

[Fedro]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had a TE thin 11800 that eventually fell apart and I duly bought a more recent (and in better shape) one that I still use 

I am not much of a 90 mm person, but that is the kind of lens that I love having as you can just put in your pocket and take out if you need reach

I had the APO cron for a while but sold it as I found I was not using it often enough (too nose heavy for my taste)

[adan]

4 hours ago, RayD28 said:

BTW, I'm assuming your photo with the redline is to show an example of flare but my inexperienced eye just can't see it.  Is the flare on the store front or on the grate in the foreground?

No, that sample was to show the resolution and fine details in the grating.

Here's what the flare looks like, shot under my "acid test" for flare - my dining-room table with a chandelier overhead just outside the picture. Note "column" of foggy flare down the center. This example with no lens hood.

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!

And another more "real-world" example - the bright sky top right (and beyond the picture area) is producing the veiling flare and "graying out" the contrast and crisp shadows.

And here's what causes it - bright light(s) in front of the camera reflecting from the inside of the rear barrel, even though the barrel is blackened and partly ribbed.

I have not yet found any lens hood that really helps - it's that extreme (if and when the light is in just the right (or wrong) place).

I even tried to make my own "gobo"ed hood by taking the best of Leica's own hoods - the metal 12575 - and adding a slip-on rubber cap over the hood, and cutting out a rectangle in the cap to block any light not actually in the field of view. Worked better, but still occasionally allowed "leakage" - and was clunky and large and sort of spoiled the "ultra-small lens" experience. Plus the chopped-up rubber cap fell apart after a month or so.

I'm considering whether I can make some kind of round, black-paper "baffle" to fit inside the back of the lens, to block those reflections

Otherwise, I'm better off if I simply avoid any shooting into the light. Or at least test the light. Light inside the picture area often produces less flare than light just outside the picture.

 

Edited February 1, 2019 by adan

[pico]

adan, you might be interested in painting over the glossy black with Stuart Semple's BLACK 2.0

 

 

[RayD28]

9 hours ago, adan said:

No, that sample was to show the resolution and fine details in the grating.

Here's what the flare looks like, shot under my "acid test" for flare - my dining-room table with a chandelier overhead just outside the picture. Note "column" of foggy flare down the center. This example with no lens hood.

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!

And another more "real-world" example - the bright sky top right (and beyond the picture area) is producing the veiling flare and "graying out" the contrast and crisp shadows.

And here's what causes it - bright light(s) in front of the camera reflecting from the inside of the rear barrel, even though the barrel is blackened and partly ribbed.

I have not yet found any lens hood that really helps - it's that extreme (if and when the light is in just the right (or wrong) place).

I even tried to make my own "gobo"ed hood by taking the best of Leica's own hoods - the metal 12575 - and adding a slip-on rubber cap over the hood, and cutting out a rectangle in the cap to block any light not actually in the field of view. Worked better, but still occasionally allowed "leakage" - and was clunky and large and sort of spoiled the "ultra-small lens" experience. Plus the chopped-up rubber cap fell apart after a month or so.

I'm considering whether I can make some kind of round, black-paper "baffle" to fit inside the back of the lens, to block those reflections

Otherwise, I'm better off if I simply avoid any shooting into the light. Or at least test the light. Light inside the picture area often produces less flare than light just outside the picture.

 

Adan, thanks again for the great information.  The real world shot you show concerns me because I could see the faring problem causing constant problems in spontaneous/reportage shots.  The 11800 is so appealing but having to deal with the threat of flare is a turnoff.  

8 hours ago, pico said:

adan, you might be interested in painting over the glossy black with Stuart Semple's BLACK 2.0

 

 

Pico, I'm not very handy so I would never try painting any part of a lens.  Do you know if it's something a qualified technician would do, and do you know how successful it might be?  

11 hours ago, Fedro said:

I had a TE thin 11800 that eventually fell apart and I duly bought a more recent (and in better shape) one that I still use 

I am not much of a 90 mm person, but that is the kind of lens that I love having as you can just put in your pocket and take out if you need reach

I had the APO cron for a while but sold it as I found I was not using it often enough (too nose heavy for my taste)

Federo, you and I are thinking along the same lines.  I don't believe I'd use a 90mm very often but it would be nice to have a small one that could fit in a coat pocket.  Did you also have problems with flaring?

 

13 hours ago, lct said:

From f/2 to f/2.8 and less than $1,500 the choice is rather limited. Among my own copies, my favorites would be:

1. Elmarit-M 90/2.8 # 11807: A bit soft at f/2.8 but plenty sharp above. No significant flaw. Built like a tank.

2. Summarit-M 90/2.4 # 11684:  A bit more acutance than the 90/2.8 above, especially at f/2.8. No significant flaw but the lens is a bit soft at corners below f/5.6. Hard to find at $1,500 but the previous 90/2.5 (# 11685) has the same optical qualities AFAIK. I have no experience with it though

3. Summicron-M 90/2 # 11123: Almost perfect but bulky.

4. Summicron-M 90/2 # 11136: Similar rendering as Elmarit above, a bit soft at f/2 which is fine for portraits, but much CA.

5. Tele-Elmarit-M "thin" 90/2.8 # 11800: The most compact 90/2.8. Similar rendering as Elmarit but flare prone when light sources are outside the frame. 

FWIW

lct, you are another contributor that always provides thorough details and examples and I thank you for taking time to respond.  I especially appreciate you mentioning the model numbers.  

 

 

Edited February 2, 2019 by RayD28

[pico]

3 minutes ago, RayD28 said:

Pico, I'm not very handy so I would never try painting any part of a lens.  Do you know if it's something a qualified technician would do, and do you know how successful it might be?   

I have built a lot of cameras, painted the internals of many lenses and would do it without hesitation.

[Fedro]

4 hours ago, RayD28 said:

Federo, you and I are thinking along the same lines.  I don't believe I'd use a 90mm very often but it would be nice to have a small one that could fit in a coat pocket.  Did you also have problems with flaring?

yes, you need to be careful with like Adan and many others on this forum have regularly pointed out. Not a deal breaker for me but everyone is different so try one if you can

[otho]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had Summarit 90/2.5 - equally perfect mounted on M or A7R3, but I traded it for APO 90 few years ago because super sharpness, sweeter bokeh and overall improvement. But it's heavier and significant bigger (off course more expensive too)...

Edited February 2, 2019 by otho

[a.noctilux]

On 1/31/2019 at 12:41 PM, RayD28 said:

I might get a 90mm Leica lens and appreciate your suggestions. My initial criteria are: f2.8 or faster; small/light weight, and less than $1,500 used.  I looked for comparisons but only found Rockwell's sight and its not current.  Thanks in advance.

Jumping to conclusion here: in my use f/4 lens is fine now but which one ?

First 90 was the Summicron-M 90mm (time of simplicity, decades ago trio Cron 35/50/90 in M),

then came some f/2.8 for lighter lenses : T-E with it's famous flare, Elmarit nice but a bit longy and heavy side.

Happier when I use for macro and everday use : Macro-Elmar-M 4/90 with or without macro-adapter.

Now I just carry around my "last but oldest 90" Elmar 4/90mm in LTM plus M adapter that can be used also on my LTM Leica.

This last one is a kind of good surprise in use and results are great (for me) even at f/4 no flare.

Have fun with either one.

 

[adan]

More 90TEM flare, from Friday night at the gallery (very flare-prone locale). I think I may make it my new acid-test subject for flare - at least the pix are more interesting.

No hood used, I was going for the "small, pocketable" configuration. Just to sort of define how variables affect its behavior.

First situation, setup overview with a 21 - note bright multi-head lamp in background, right.

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!

First shot with the 90 TEM - ugly

2nd shot with the 90 in that light - I stepped about 2 feet to the right to aim more to the left, away form the background lamp - flare disappears (pix processed identically as to setting for blacks, shadows and contrast).

Next situation: Stage shots - note LED spot tracklight actually in the first picture, no flare. Then I panned to the right to photograph the lead singer, also no flare.

 

 

[RayD28]

Interesting, Adan.  Do you see a pattern here or is it as random as it seems to me?  

[adan]

There is a pattern - the light source has to be 1) outside the picture area, but 2) inside the lens's image circle.

As I noted in post #22, the source of the 90TEM flare is mostly reflections off the inside the lens barrel (or camera body) - behind the glass parts. If a bright light source is far enough off to the side or top/bottom, it doesn't get projected at all (it isn't within the image circle), and if it is in the picture itself, it is being projected onto the film or sensor, not the black metal around the lens or inside the camera, and thus not reflecting from anything as flare.

In this schematic (approximate dimensions), if there is a bright light source within the various pink areas, it may bounce off the inside of the lens or camera and then hit the film or sensor as foggy veiling flare. A bright light in the white zones outside or inside won't produce the "reflective" flare. It also shows why a normal round lens hood will help, but not remove the chance of flare completely. My home-made rectangular "key-hole" cap+hood did quite well - but is kludgy and clunky.

Thus, when I pointed the camera at the male guitarist and included the spotlight in the picture, minimal flare - and when I pointed the camera at the singer and put the spotlight well outside the image circle, no flare. Same for removing the flare in the artist-dude portrait - I just changed position so that the guilty light was farther to the right, outside the "pink zone."

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!

Edited February 3, 2019 by adan