ryee3 Posted August 21, 2009 Share #1 Posted August 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am considering purchasing a used Leica macro lens. Any thoughts on the 100 mm vs 60mm macro elmarit R? The cost is quite different and I am wanting to do more closeup photography. Are there advantages of one over the other? Thanks for everyones comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 21, 2009 Posted August 21, 2009 Hi ryee3, Take a look here 100mm vs 60mm macro elmarit R. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Sandokan Posted August 21, 2009 Share #2 Posted August 21, 2009 I got the 60 as it is smaller and lighter and my 50 Summicron was dissapointing. I have been happy with my choice but cant give a comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikau Posted August 21, 2009 Share #3 Posted August 21, 2009 Having owned both, I found the longer lens/subject distance of the 100mm much easier to work with. The image quality of the 100mm Apo Macro is way ahead of the 60, in my view. On the other hand, the 60 is a good all-rounder. I still have the 100 Apo Macro Elmarit, the 60 went years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted August 21, 2009 Share #4 Posted August 21, 2009 The 100mm Macro-Elmar R is a very good lens too and underestimated by many. For the cost of a 60mm and for very much less than the cost of the 100mm Apo Macro Elmarit R you could buy the bellows version of the 100mm Macro Elmar and the R bellows eg Secondhand 30.9.08 James Lager used the 100mm macro Elmar for most of the illustrations in his Leica books. Here's two examples I took using the 100mm f4 Macro Elmar and the tiny shark tooth in second picture is with the bellows and greater than life size Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pecole Posted August 21, 2009 Share #5 Posted August 21, 2009 Not a comparison, just an experience : I used (and still have) the macro 60/first version/3-cammed and its 1:1 extension for 25 years, and took more than 4,000 pixes of my collection with it mounted on SL2, R3, R4 and R8 (including all pictures published in the Fontenelle Collection Newsletter, Viewfinder, Lager and Laney books). Never had a problem, always high definition and even lighting/quality on all parts of the frames. Definitely my "Leica-user-for-60-year" 's favourite. And a real bargain these days... By the way, the shade #12514 (I used it only when a filter was needed)) is the same as the one for the 35mm PA-Curtagon-R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bscott Posted August 21, 2009 Share #6 Posted August 21, 2009 I have both the 60mm and 100 macro and use the 60 as my all around lens but for macro work I use the 100mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
storybrown Posted August 21, 2009 Share #7 Posted August 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just flip or get them both. You won't lose either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted August 21, 2009 Share #8 Posted August 21, 2009 The Elmar-R 100 + macro ring & R8/DMR have made a lot of good results for me you can check some in the LFI Gallery, link is included here a sample : Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_g_wolf ✝ Posted August 25, 2009 Share #9 Posted August 25, 2009 >> JC Pictures say more than million words ... This is a wonderful photograph. Thx for sharing. Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 25, 2009 Share #10 Posted August 25, 2009 Consider perspective. If you want to photograph 3-dimensional objects, 100 mm might be preferable over 60. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted August 25, 2009 Share #11 Posted August 25, 2009 Consider perspective. If you want to photograph 3-dimensional objects, 100 mm might be preferable over 60. Alternatively: the added working distance that the 100mm lens gives you is almost always a help (for lighting, perspective, handling, etc.) But sometimes - e.g. photographing models - the perspective from a shorter working distance is preferable and this needs a shorter focal length ... often much shorter than 60mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rona!d Posted August 25, 2009 Share #12 Posted August 25, 2009 The 60 paints wonderful while the 100 Apo just documents in absolute perfection. (I have the 100 Apo:D) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew748 Posted September 27, 2009 Share #13 Posted September 27, 2009 late to the party as always The 60 2.8 is gorgeous and versatile the 100 4 is very specific. The 60 2.8 can be a walk around lens depending on your style of photography, it can also be used very effectively for hand held macro. The 100 4 needs the bellows to make any sense 60mm 100mm both cropped and resized. for me the best advice is the 60 2.8 due to it's fantastic versatility but you know what you want it for. ftr, i love both and would not be separated from either. just remember the bellows;) oooh look at that bottom right hand corner mmmmmm i'm in love all over again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryee3 Posted September 27, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted September 27, 2009 Thanks for your comments. What about the bellows? In what situations will I need this for macro work. Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew748 Posted September 27, 2009 Share #15 Posted September 27, 2009 Thanks for your comments. What about the bellows? In what situations will I need this for macro work. Thanks! i found that the 100 4 needed bellows for every situation, that lens is a nightmare on my canon40D and my Leicaflexes. i think it just doesn't function without it but when it works it is a stupendously good lens. i'm sure there's a reason for this and one of the experts will tell you why strangely the 60mm works with ease on the bellows or without:confused: sorry i can't help more:( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 27, 2009 Share #16 Posted September 27, 2009 The 100 alows greater working distance and less background at same reproduction ratio. The 60 works at infinity to 1:1. The 100 F4, bellows or focus mount, requires F8 at distance to be sharp. The 100 APO 2.8 is way better than the 100 F4 which is still a "decent" lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted September 27, 2009 Share #17 Posted September 27, 2009 ryee-- As you've probably figured out from the responses, there were two different 100 macros. Your question doesn't say which you're interested in. The earlier 100 required the bellows because it didn't have a focusing mount. The apo 100 is a much later design and doesn't require the bellows. The 60/2.8 Macro Elmarit is a first-choice, general, all-round normal lens that allows focusing into the macro range. The 100/2.8 Apo Macro Elmarit is a stellar performer in any situation with its apochromatic correction. Its greater focal length gives you a greater working distance than the 60. The 100/4 Macro Elmar required a bellows and a lot of time to work with. It's for the person hot to trot in macro photography with double cable release, bellows, tripod and subjects either very patient or dead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted September 27, 2009 Share #18 Posted September 27, 2009 Some confusion exists here. There are THREE Leitz/Leica 100mm macro R lenses although two have the same lens elements: 1) 100mm f4 Macro Elmar R in short non-focusing mount ... this always needs the bellows. 2) 100mm F4 Macro Elmar R in normal focusing mount ... focuses to approx 1/3 life size at 60 cm distance ... can also be used with bellows or Macro Adaptor R for closer focusing and greater magnification. Excellent general purpose lens but focusing not quite so bright because of the f4 max aperture. Both the 100mm Macro Elmar f4 lenses are excellent performers within their optimum aperture ranges ie f8 to f11. Both have the same lens elements. When used at f11 for macro photography results are better than "excellent" in my experience. Beware of thinking that the set aperture is the actual aperture when working at high magnification with tubes or bellows. If the magnification at a set aperture of f11 is 1:1 then the actual aperture, f', is f22 using formula f' = f(m + 1) where f = set aperture and m = magnification. Both lenses are capable of very good results beyond 1:1 magnification with tubes and bellows. Best not to use f22 at the highest magnifications because of diffraction degrading the image but this same precaution applies to any 35mm format lens. 3) 100mm f2.8 Apo Macro Elmarit R ... One of the finest lenses ever designed by any manufacturer. Not only an excellent macro lens within its limitations but also a superb general purpose lens usable at all apertures. As a high magnification macro lens it is probably not as versatile as other lenses (eg the 100mm f4 Macro Elmar) because it is not really designed for bellows use. The rear element of the lens is designed to be at a constant distance from the film plane for optimum performance and does not move during focusing. The lens focuses to 1:2 ie half life size in its focusing mount. It needs the supplementary dedicated ELPRO attachment to focus to 1.1:1 ie just over life size. The 1.1 magnification was designed for slide copying because mounted slides are slightly "cropped". The Elpro screws onto the front of the lens thus the rear lens element always stays at the optimum fixed film plane distance. If bellows or tubes are used the rear element is not at the optimum distance. Regarding the 60mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit lens - this is also a superb general purpose lens and can be used as a standard lens as well as a macro lens. Early version takes Series VIII filters which can be difficult to source and require the separate lens hood or series 8 ring to secure them ... but 60mm screw in filters can also be used. I have used the 60mm f2.8 lens reversed on a bellows at magnifications up to 4 x with good results. I reversed the lens because the front element is too recessed in the mount ie too far from the subject for work at beyond 2:1 magnification especially if using flash. For excellent examples of images taken with both the 60mm Macro Elmarit and the 100mm Macro Elmar f4 lenses see James Lager's illustrations in his definitive Leica Illustrated History Vols. I, II, and III history books. Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted September 28, 2009 Share #19 Posted September 28, 2009 Thanks for straightening me out, dunk! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted September 29, 2009 Share #20 Posted September 29, 2009 I have used the 60mm f2.8 lens reversed on a bellows at magnifications up to 4 x with good results. I reversed the lens because the front element is too recessed in the mount ie too far from the subject for work at beyond 2:1 magnification especially if using flash. dunk Dunk: Where did you get a reversing ring for the Macro-Elmarit 60??? Are they available for the "series" mount, or for the "60mm filter" mount, or both? Thanks. Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.