Looking for cheap M 90mm

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I once had the three "M-Rokkor" lenses 28/40/90 (sold long ago), when I used Minolta CLE.

Out of nostalgy, I bought back 40mm lens for my Leica Ms but having other nice 80mm, I don't need the M-Rokkor 4/90 because it was the less used with CLE.

This 90 was replaced by TE 90 "thin" (having some flare problem) almost as compact/light as the 4/90 with benefit of f/2.8.

Later I use Elmar 90 in LTM with nice result after Macro-Elmar-M and they are quite different in rendering.

I don't know which one I prefer having other 90mm when I need.

 

I can say for the OP that would be first raisonable choice for the M-Rokkor 4/90, as the Macro-Elmar-M 90 can be far more expensive.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Deejaybeephoto]

On 8/21/2024 at 1:39 PM, pippy said:

The 90mm f2.8 Tele Elmarit-M is cheap (in LeicaWorld), a good performer, tiny, light and commonplace. It takes 39mm filters but a step-up ring should be easy to source.

Pretty good review of it here;

https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/90mm-f28-tele.htm

Philip.

Funnily enough, just bought one of these old lenses - made in Germany and coded.  It was a ‘good’ price, mainly because it has a few very minor scratches on the front of the lens. Very pleased with it so far, although I can tell very early on that it’s not the sharpest lens at 2.8. Interestingly, before buying, I did a search by the serial number and it turns out it was owned by a Forum member here a number of years ago.

Not sure about I’d give much credence to Rockwell’s opinions though ☹️

 

[pippy]

2 minutes ago, Deejaybeephoto said:

...Not sure about I’d give much credence to Rockwell’s opinions though ☹️...

😸

My own personal view is that Mr. Rockwell is an entertainer who posts a good many interesting facts with a few zany opinions thrown-in for good measure. As a general rule his reviews do tend to be informative (IMO) just so long as we understand that it might be neccessary to sift out some of the more nonsensical bits!

Philip.

[Kl@usW.]

Am 21.8.2024 um 23:44 schrieb pippy:

Is the 90mm f2.8 T E-M particularly prone to haze? If so then that is news to me. Sorry, Chris, to read that you bought a dud.

There are (justified) reports that it can suffer from flare when the sun / light source is just out-of-frame but, for my needs, this is inconsequential. Others' needs will be different.

Mine was picked up in near mint condition for £300 / 350 Euros / $390 and it is a stellar performer. I do have three other Leica 90's in M-mount (two v3 Summicrons and a Summarit) but the T E-M is always my choice when travelling light / heading abroad. Partly due to its tiny size and light weight but also because it shares the same E39 filters as my other 'travel' lenses

In terms of image quality I couldn't find fault with its performance in any way whatsoever.

Philip.

Philip, you may find more on the TEM-haze issue here.  https://johnnymartyr.wordpress.com/2023/07/11/leitz-90mm-tele-elmarit-thin-review/

Some decades ago I owned an early version, used it a lot for hiking and only by  chance found out it had a massive haze. Leica Solms looked after it and after that  I was astonished I had a contrasty lens. Well, 30 years later a bought a new one, after selling the shelf queens Apo-Cron and Summarit , now in the knowledge about the haze. Mine wasn't cheap, late miG versions are neither cheap nor frequent. But it´s a joy to use and it came with the original rubber sunshade and dedicated front lid. One of my most used travel lenses.

K. 

[fotografr]

On 8/21/2024 at 6:59 AM, Ralf said:

Leica Elmarit M, great lens, second hand readily available and quite affordable, however filter size 46mm.

Another vote for the 90 Elmarit. Razor sharp, excellent bokeh, light, small-ish. I've never read anything but glowing reviews of it. I have one and don't use it a lot but when I do I'm always happy with the results.

(I see I'm too late, but if anyone else is looking for a great performer in a 90, I'd highly recommend this lens.)

Edited August 23 by fotografr

[fotografr]

20 hours ago, burchyk said:

Voigtlander APO-Skopar 90/2.8 is a splendid lens. I love mine.

HP5+ in HC-110

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!

That's a 50mm f1.4, is it not?

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

15 minutes ago, fotografr said:

That's a 50mm f1.4, is it not?

My understanding - which might well be incorrect! - is that the photograph was taken using the lens...but it did confuse the hell out of me when I first read the post!

😸

Philip.

[pippy]

50 minutes ago, Kl@usW. said:

Philip, you may find more on the TEM-haze issue here.  https://johnnymartyr.wordpress.com/2023/07/11/leitz-90mm-tele-elmarit-thin-review/

Some decades ago I owned an early version, used it a lot for hiking and only by  chance found out it had a massive haze. Leica Solms looked after it and after that  I was astonished I had a contrasty lens. Well, 30 years later a bought a new one, after selling the shelf queens Apo-Cron and Summarit , now in the knowledge about the haze. Mine wasn't cheap, late miG versions are neither cheap nor frequent. But it´s a joy to use and it came with the original rubber sunshade and dedicated front lid. One of my most used travel lenses.

Thanks very much, Klaus, for taking the trouble to locate and post the link to the thread; it made for interesting reading.

As it happens just this morning I decided to carry out a studio-test of my own T-E-M and the results I obtained confirmed what I thought I had remembered from when I executed a similar test (yet not as carefully controlled nor as in-depth) when the lens first came into my possession.

The test today(*) involved shooting test-frames at 1m, 2m and 3m distances and at f2.8 / 4 / 5.6 / 8 and 11. As with the review of the lens in Johnny Martyr's link my copy also front-focusses quite noticeably - as in 4cm - at Min. Focus. Matters don't get much better until f8.0 by which time D-o-F helps just about enough to make any images shot useable.

Similar story at both 2m and 3m distances but by f5.6 and f4.0 respectively the images are easily sharp enough to pass all but 100% pixel-peeping purposes.

At any distances beyond 3m there are no issues whatsoever.

It might well be the case, of course, that my lens could do with having a recalibration undertaken - it is after all 45 years old - but as the subject-matter of my 90mm snapping is typically WAY beyond the 3m mark the front-focus thing isn't even remotely an issue.

Lastly; having read about the haze encountered by Mr. Martyr (and by several other photographers here) I have just conducted a really careful inspection of the elements in my example and, happily, found them to be crystal clear.

Philip.

* I also carried out tests of nine other lenses in the 35mm / 40mm and 50mm f/l ranges and results confirm that the body's RF is calibrated accurately.

[Kl@usW.]

Am 23.8.2024 um 16:21 schrieb pippy:

Thanks very much, Klaus, for taking the trouble to locate and post the link to the thread; it made for interesting reading.

As it happens just this morning I decided to carry out a studio-test of my own T-E-M and the results I obtained confirmed what I thought I had remembered from when I executed a similar test (yet not as carefully controlled nor as in-depth) when the lens first came into my possession.

The test today(*) involved shooting test-frames at 1m, 2m and 3m distances and at f2.8 / 4 / 5.6 / 8 and 11. As with the review of the lens in Johnny Martyr's link my copy also front-focusses quite noticeably - as in 4cm - at Min. Focus. Matters don't get much better until f8.0 by which time D-o-F helps just about enough to make any images shot useable.

Similar story at both 2m and 3m distances but by f5.6 and f4.0 respectively the images are easily sharp enough to pass all but 100% pixel-peeping purposes.

At any distances beyond 3m there are no issues whatsoever.

It might well be the case, of course, that my lens could do with having a recalibration undertaken - it is after all 45 years old - but as the subject-matter of my 90mm snapping is typically WAY beyond the 3m mark the front-focus thing isn't even remotely an issue.

Lastly; having read about the haze encountered by Mr. Martyr (and by several other photographers here) I have just conducted a really careful inspection of the elements in my example and, happily, found them to be crystal clear.

Philip.

* I also carried out tests of nine other lenses in the 35mm / 40mm and 50mm f/l ranges and results confirm that the body's RF is calibrated accurately.

Thank you, Philip, for this information. Just like you, I use the TEM mainly for distances beyond the front-focus range and have no issues with it. Over the many years with my first copy—mainly on an M7 and an MP back then—I didn’t notice the front-focus problem at all. After the TEM, I bought an APO-Summicron-M 90mm brand new (I was young and had the money) and tried to use it for portraits. A very frustrating experience. I initially had the lens adjusted in Solms because I thought it was defective (I wasn’t familiar with the term ‘front focus’ at the time), avoided it more and more, and eventually sold it.

Since I no longer have a digital M, I can't easily test "front focus" with my current TEM. However, I currently have an SL2-S on loan (as a replacement for my MP, which has been in Wetzlar for more than 8 months—but that's another story), and I will try mounting the TEM and then report back. When I think about it, though: On the SL2, I can only determine the focus difference in relation to different apertures at a given distance, or am I missing something?

Klaus 

[BWColor]

Konica produced a small range of lenses for their short lived Hexar-RF in the very early digital/film transition days.   I no longer use my M-Hexanon 90mm f/2.8 since I mainly use 75mm and when I want a longer focal length, I have a Leica 90mm APO Asp.  The 90mm M-Hexanon is readily available in the sub $500 price range and punches way above what the price indicates.  Take a look at images from this lens via Flickr.  I will say that I used mine with the M3, or Zeiss Ikon with a viewfinder magnifier and found it pretty easy to master focusing the lens.  Perhaps, I should give it a go with my M11M rather than ignoring, or selling the lens.

Edited August 25 by BWColor
Corrected tense

[burchyk]

On 8/23/2024 at 2:27 PM, fotografr said:

That's a 50mm f1.4, is it not?

 

On 8/23/2024 at 2:43 PM, pippy said:

My understanding - which might well be incorrect! - is that the photograph was taken using the lens...but it did confuse the hell out of me when I first read the post!

😸

Philip.

Sorry about the confusion! Yes, that picture was taken with Voigtlander 90mm APO-Skopar.

[Quarterpounder]

https://gear.vogelius.se/-reviews/leica-elmar-c-90/index.html

 

A well written review of the 4/90 Elmar C.