Is Elmar-R 180/4 a really bad lens?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 hours ago, jensthoes said:

…I don‘t think so - the lens system is very clean and clear.

This lens is - by far - outresolved by this camera (with 24 MP FF it‘s nearly the same).

Best,

Jens

 

A lens cannot be outresolved by a sensor or the other way around. The two are additive factors in a closed imaging system, not exclusive. In other words: a better lens will always look better on the same sensor, a better sensor will always produce better results with the same lens. 

[jankap]

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!

The crop - the cows - as inset.

[fernando_b]

2 hours ago, jankap said:

 

The crop - the cows - as inset.

👍

[crony]

Hi, a few more samples LEITZ 180mm Elmar ser# 2785799 on a SONY A7R2 f 5,6 , cropped, handheld :

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

The Elmar works well for my furry and feathered friends. Of course, if I were after high yield, I would use my SONY A7R2 with the SONY FE 4/70-200

or my NIKON D800 with the Sigma 150-600.

One uses vintage lenses for the fun of using them. And very often, one is surprised, how well they perform, even by modern standards.

I enjoy this experience with my 30 year old Mercedes S-class, too ... ---

[Shepherdphotographer]

5 hours ago, crony said:

One uses vintage lenses for the fun of using them.

First of all, thank you for your pictures! This is not always the case, it is not the case for everyone, however: not being able to afford a Leica M system (lenses, above all) and wanting to avoid the rangefinder, as well as harboring a certain hatred towards the electronic viewfinder, even if of high quality, there is who, like me (and we are not very few !!), looking for the Leica yield, which only Leica is able to give, because only Leica is Poesia, buys Leica R optics and mounts them on digital FF reflex bodies (Nikon or Canon, for example) and the results, believe me, only of the highest level, because the Leica Rs are at the same level, if not higher, than the Leica Ms (current and otherwise), especially due to the fact that they were designed for a reflex, in its time.

[frame-it]

6 hours ago, crony said:

One uses vintage lenses for the fun of using them. And very often, one is surprised, how well they perform, even by modern standards.

Exactly.

its fun, and the images are very nice.

 

for example >>>

GFX50R + Leitz Elmar 35mm LTM [1946]

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 July 23, 2021 by frame-it

[Charles Morgan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Never thought it anything other than a very good lens. 

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!

[crony]

9 hours ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

First of all, thank you for your pictures! This is not always the case, it is not the case for everyone, however: 1)not being able to afford a Leica M system (lenses, above all) and wanting to avoid the rangefinder, as well as harboring a certain hatred towards the electronic viewfinder, even if of high quality, there is who, like me (and we are not very few !!), looking for the Leica yield, which only Leica is able to give, because only Leica is Poesia, buys Leica R optics and 2)mounts them on digital FF reflex bodies (Nikon or Canon, for example) and the 3)results, believe me, only of the highest level, because the Leica Rs are at the same level, if not higher, than the Leica Ms (current and otherwise), especially due to the fact that they were designed for a reflex, in its time.

Hi, thank you for sharing the background for your decisions. 1)You want to have the Leica experience without the high M entrance fee. 2)I used to attach LEITZ, Minolta, ZEISS and Nikon

SLR lenses to mirrorless cameras to take pictures of wildlife in my garden, as shown above. 3)Many vintage SLR lenses show excellent performance, on mirrorless bodies, too.

The Leica expert Erwin Puts stated that R lenses are often better than their contemporary M counterparts, also due to the larger diameter of the R lens mount and the lenses. 

This explains why recent mirrorless "FF" bodies, like Nikon Z or Leica SL have a bayonet with a large diameter, compared to M. (The consequence of this is, however,  that

the original advantage of mirrorless cameras, their compactness, disappears. Many mirrorless cameras now with lenses are the same size as their DSLR equivalents.) ---

Over the years, I moved from adapting lenses to use mostly native solutions. I use Leica M9s, SONY A7R2s and a NIKON D800. I am quite happy with my mixed portfolio ... --- 

[Shepherdphotographer]

5 hours ago, crony said:

Hi, thank you for sharing the background for your decisions. 1)You want to have the Leica experience without the high M entrance fee. 2)I used to attach LEITZ, Minolta, ZEISS and Nikon

SLR lenses to mirrorless cameras to take pictures of wildlife in my garden, as shown above. 3)Many vintage SLR lenses show excellent performance, on mirrorless bodies, too.

The Leica expert Erwin Puts stated that R lenses are often better than their contemporary M counterparts, also due to the larger diameter of the R lens mount and the lenses. 

This explains why recent mirrorless "FF" bodies, like Nikon Z or Leica SL have a bayonet with a large diameter, compared to M. (The consequence of this is, however,  that

the original advantage of mirrorless cameras, their compactness, disappears. Many mirrorless cameras now with lenses are the same size as their DSLR equivalents.) ---

Over the years, I moved from adapting lenses to use mostly native solutions. I use Leica M9s, SONY A7R2s and a NIKON D800. I am quite happy with my mixed portfolio ... ---

 

[Shepherdphotographer]

I'm very happy with my equipment, too. It has always been evolution, but witn Leica I have found what I searched.

[ramarren]

To the original question, I'd hardly consider the Elmar-R 180mm f/4 to be a "bad" lens. It might not be the technically best optical performer in the R-mount lens compendium, but it wins on size, weight, and overall usefulness because of same. I have had one for about a 8 to 10 years and use it regularly, originally on the Leica M-P typ 240, then on the SL, and now on the CL, both with and without the 2x Extender-R. Occasionally I fit it to the CL using the Focusing Bellows-R for doing three dimensional, small subject macro work. It seems to work fine in all cases. 

https://flic.kr/p/DPWi3a

Tree #1107 - Guadalupe River Park, San Jose 2016 :: Leica SL + Elmar-R 180mm f/4

NOTE: Can I say again, here, just how crappy the latest revision of the l-camera-forum is with respect to adding a link to a photograph that I have on Flickr or any other image server? This used to be easy, now it is either impossible or about as much of a PITA as you can possibly get. 

G

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 July 26, 2021 by ramarren
Stupid l-camera-forum image embedding nonsense

[Ornello]

The 180mm Elmar is a fine lens. I owned one for a while, and was astounded at how good it was. I now own the Elmarit V2, which is not much bigger or heavier.

[fernando_b]

14 hours ago, ramarren said:

Stupid l-camera-forum image embedding nonsense

😂

[Shepherdphotographer]

21 hours ago, Ornello said:

The 180mm Elmar is a fine lens. I owned one for a while, and was astounded at how good it was. I now own the Elmarit V2, which is not much bigger or heavier.

Have you seen differences about bokeh and colours between Elmar-R 180/4 and elmarit-R 180/2.8 v2?

[Ornello]

On 7/27/2021 at 1:18 PM, Shepherdphotographer said:

Have you seen differences about bokeh and colours between Elmar-R 180/4 and elmarit-R 180/2.8 v2?

I bought the Elmar back when it came out, 1977. I sold all my equipment back in 1983, and then reacquired much of the same equipment about 10 years later. At that time, I acquired the 180 Elmarit V1, which was a huge, heavy lens. I then decided to sell it and get the newer V2, and found it to be vastly superior to V1, and much more portable. I do remember using the 180 Elmar with Kodachrome 25 on a trip to Toronto in 1979. Photos taken with it were superb in every way. There is no criticism to be made of this lens. None! Given the small size and light weight of the Elmarit V2,  though, I see no reason to own both.

 

See these, taken with the180mm  Elmarit-R V2

 

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 July 29, 2021 by Ornello

[Shepherdphotographer]

@Ornello:  I had both Elmarit-R 180/2.8 v1 and v2: I found v1 more delicate than v2, with less cotrast, also if with less sharpness (but sharpness isn't important for me) and, for this reason, I sold v2. Certainly, for its weight, I could choose v2 and not Elmar-R 180/4 for my light tele for light escapes, it's true. 180/4 is a good lens, you said....., but certainly less correct (for chromatic aberrations and flare, first of all), against 180/4 and both are light. However, also by your samples here, I can see the more contrast of v2......., but thank you for your precious contribute!

 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Shepherdphotographer

[Shepherdphotographer]

On 7/21/2021 at 2:31 PM, jankap said:

It is namely for me unclear, what you intend. The MTF curves seem to give you the lens, you describe. I personally have the f/3.4, very happy with it. 

What could I do with MTF??!! They aren't interesting for me, absolutely!!!! As I written, I'm searching for a light tele prime Leica lens, delicate, with excellent bokeh, less contrasted, with Leica's soul and colour: 180/3.4 has got a bad bokeh, because it has got others characteristics and it starts to be an APO, so bokeh is sacrified; it is a hard lens, contrasted, not delicate, aggressive, also if very correct for colours. Bokeh of a f/4, as 180/4, can't be naturally excellent, because a lens 180/4 can't have bokeh as its point of force and it was born to be lighter, simple, economic, less correct. For this reason, probably I will choose 180/2.8 v2 and I will not sell v1, which I'll use for others kinds of shots.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Shepherdphotographer

[Ornello]

21 hours ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

@Ornello:  I had both Elmarit-R 180/2.8 v1 and v2: I found v1 more delicate than v2, with less cotrast, also if with less sharpness (but sharpness isn't important for me) and, for this reason, I sold v2. Certainly, for its weight, I could choose v2 and not Elmar-R 180/4 for my light tele for light escapes, it's true. 180/4 is a good lens, you said....., but certainly less correct (for chromatic aberrations and flare, first of all), against 180/4 and both are light. However, also by your samples here, I can see the more contrast of v2......., but thank you for your precious contribute!

 

 I don't follow you. Please explain.

I have owned four of the six Leitz 180mm R lenses. I would rank them as follows, for pictorial photography:

1: 180mm APO-Elmarit-R (by reputation)

2: 180mm APO-Summicron-R (by reputation)

3: 180mm Elmarit-R V2

4: 180mm Elmar-R

5: 180mm Elmarit-R V1

6: 180mm APO-Telyt-R 3.4

 

 

Edited July 30, 2021 by Ornello