90mm Elmar Macro collapsible. Anybody use this with M10?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 90/4 v1 cannot focus in RF mode with the macro adapter v2. For use in RF mode, better choose the macro adapter v1 with goggles (14409).

[Advertisement]

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

[Petrus de Vortice]

On 9/25/2022 at 11:39 PM, Jean-Michel said:

I doubt very much that you would find anyone who actually owns this lens, new or old, complain about it.

I’m afraid you’ve found one.

My brand new copy exhibits all sorts of imperfections—it actually seems so bad that the lens cannot be used as intended (for detailed copying and reproducing antiquarian books and houseplants, of course).

In many cases, the lens appears to ruin the ‘pixel structure’ of images with magenta/green fringing that don’t disappear smoothly in downsampling.

Sharpness isn’t above average either.

Macro-Elmar-M with or without adapter performs much worse than Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro and it even loses to some lenses not optimized for close-up photography at all (e.g. Summilux 50mm & Summicron 35mm respectively).

Leica M11 might be too cruel a tool for this secret gem?

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!

[jaapv]

That is lateral CA which is easily corrected -and effectively- by your postprocessing program. However it should not do this to a level of ruining photographs, if at all. Return it for an exchange. In fact, it should show less aliasing on a high resolution sensor. (which is another problem in your second shot). Which editor do you use? 

[3D-Kraft.com]

The comparison shots of the bookshelf were taken at quite different lighting conditions (left with tungsten(?), right with daylight). Not really comparable.

[lct]

29 minutes ago, Petrus de Vortice said:

Leica M11 might be too cruel a tool for this secret gem?

Not my feeling. M11, 90/4 macro, FF & crop:

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!

 

[Jean-Michel]

4 hours ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

The comparison shots of the bookshelf were taken at quite different lighting conditions (left with tungsten(?), right with daylight). Not really comparable.

Not to mention that the Macro-Elmar shot is simply out of focus. No idea what the other image is all about. And, pray tell, what is 'pixel structure'? 

[Petrus de Vortice]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, Jean-Michel said:

Not to mention that the Macro-Elmar shot is simply out of focus. No idea what the other image is all about. And, pray tell, what is 'pixel structure'? 

Please excuse my amateurish lighting! I ran out of daylight, so I had to improvise. 🤡
The other tests however indicate that the difference between the rendering remains more or less like this.

However, the Macro-Elmar-M image is not out of focus.
The center crop is pretty much as sharp as my copy delivers.

With the ‘pixel structure,’ I was trying to refer to the green/magenta glow becoming dominant at harsher magnifications.
The piece of fount in the second image is course made of lead, for example, but its surface is ruined by green and magenta glow throughout.

Attached you’ll find two fresh corner crops.
Lighting conditions should now match.
Summilux Asph. (11892) on the left and Macro-Elmar on the 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!

[Jean-Michel]

Hi,

Not easy to comment on small web-sized images, however, and it is not meant as any kind of criticism:

Your Macro-Elmar shot is abut one stop darker than the Summilux.

The purple/green fringing visible on the Macro-Elmar should have been automatically corrected by your RAW processor, if you have that set-up. I use Lightroom. Or you can manually do so if your processor does not recognize your lens, and that is unlikely.

I assume that your original images are DNG. If you only record JPGs then all bets are off as any adjustments are strictly made by the in-camera processor. I have no idea of how well or poorly the fringing is corrected in camera  I only use DNG. Correcting the purple/green fringing is not possible on jpg files.

The type of work you do may also require polarized lights, and polarizer on the lens of course. You really need to control your lighting whenever you document this kind of subject – you may have both convex and concave book spine, etc., etc., oh what fun! 

 

[tappan]

One of our Electric Blue Acara tropical fish.
Very nice colors on this South American Cichlid.
1/250th @ F5.6
20,000 ISO
M10-P
90mm Elmar Macro Version 1, at Macro setting with newer type macro adapter
 

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!