Hello,

At risk of reigniting WWI I post the following. It's the Canadians vs Germans again!

In my local camera store is a 90mm Tele Elmarit 2.8 lens made in Canada #2695542. It also comes with a Leitz screw in rubber hood. (Kinda cool--probably retail's for a million dollars)

They are selling it on consignment for $550. If I read their book correctly, this lens is from the 1970's. Glass is perfect, cosmetic's are good. Looks like a great user lens. Comes with 39mm filter size.

Now here's my considerations. I know the Canadians saved the free world from tyranny at Ypres. They also saved our US hostages. Plus, they blend a terrific Crown Royal. And finally, my great uncle Cale "went north" in 1916 and joined the Princess Pat division so he could get into the war early. Lucky for him it was as a replacement for the famed division that was shot nearly to extinction.

Yet in reviewing the postings, there are naysayers. Despite the aforementioned atributes of the Canadian's, many advocate the more current Elmarit 90 as a better lens.

Now I'd love to have all my Leica lenses with the same filter size. And the price of the 90 Canadian lens looks reasonable. What's the opinion out there of the current 90 2.8? And What's it's filter size? Delta International says they peddle the new 90 2.8 for around $950.

And just like 1914, use diplomacy as a last resort.

-- David S Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), July 08, 2001

Answers

You need have no worry about Canadian lenses. They've made some of the best Leica lenses around including the 90 SummicronR and the 180 APO Telyt. My Canadian lenses are as well made as Wetzlar lenses of the same period. Not so long ago I sold a Canadian 35 Summicron that must have been 40 years old and it was absolutely perfect in every way.

That Tele-Elmarit lens is apparently the second version of the Tele- Elmarits and was made in 1974 (the year they changed the lens from 5 elements to 4).

The Leica lens testing guru Erwin Puts ranks the current 90 Elmarit as the best of the 90 Elmarits followed by the original Elmarit, the second generation Tele-Elmarit followed by the first generation Tele- Elmarit.

Is the asking price in U.S. or Canadian dollars? I'd call around to verify if the price is reasonable.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), July 08, 2001.

The current Elmarit takes a 46mm filter.

Per se, there's nothing superior or inferior about Canadian lenses versus German lenses. Criticism about the Tele Elmarit is based only on its performance with respect to the current lens, not place of manufacture.

I never warmed up to the Tele Elmarit. One thing that put me off was the far-forward placement of the aperature ring. I was forever fumbling around to find it. I prefer the current Elmarit for that and its superior contrast. However, for compactness the Tele Elmarit can't be beat.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), July 08, 2001.

David, As I understand the main difference between the Canadian and German Tele-Elmarit is the German versions are the most recent and possibly have newer formulation coatings-less flare prone? Many people have found flare to be a problem in this lens. Also it's the Canadian versions that have the dreaded fungus problems common.

Check carefully at the rear element with a penlight or upagainst a bulblight and look around the periphery for fine haze/lines.

Cheers.

-- Simon Wong (drsimonwong@hotmail.com), July 08, 2001.

I don't think Leica has ever made a bad 90mm lens (not even the infamous 3 element job). If the lens is in good condition and the price is right, you can't go wrong.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), July 08, 2001.

Hello,

The price is in US dollars. I like the compactness and lightweight feel of the lens on camera.

Since there is no Leica dealer in the area, and only an occasional second lens in the shop it's difficult to get my hands on new products for heft, feel, etc. I very much appreciate the comments and advice.

What's the downside/upside of 4 vs 5 elements? I don't understand the relationship between number of elements and quality?

-- David S Smith (dssmith3@rmci.net), July 08, 2001.

dAVID:

I cannot speak to the current Elmarit, as I have never owned one, but I understand from those that do that it is a stellar performer. I owned a Canadian slim TE, and it was a superb performer. I then purchased a 90AA which is an outstanding performer, so I sold the TE - - A decision I have regretted since the minute I did it. The TE was small and compact, only one stop slower than my 90AA, and about half the weight. It would have made the perfect companion as a travel 90. I have since learned that the performance of these lenses was somewhat variable; some being superb, some being so-so, so if possible, you might want to test your sample before purchasing it.

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), July 08, 2001.

David, There isn't any relationship between the number of elements and quality. The first version of the Tele-Elmarit had five elements. The second version had four. It's generally accepted that the second version was an improvement optically over the first.

The current 90 Elmarit is a four element lens with a terrific reputation. Curiously, the current Elmarit is a variant of the 90mm lens made for the Leica CL more than 20 years ago. New glass types permit these kinds of improvements.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), July 08, 2001.

If you read some of the archives, you'll see a large number of those lenses suffered from element seperation, and this can not be repaired economically. The lens I had went bad on me. Check it out with a flash light very carefully before you buy it.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 08, 2001.

First of all, bring a small penlight/maglight to the store and shine it through the front and rear elements while looking from the opposite end. View at about a 45-degree angle to the lens axis and play the light around a bit. A few specks of dust inside are ok, but if you see any hazing or mottling in the rear or internal elements, pass on the lens. Second, you can get the current version 90/2.8 with perfect glass but a little outer wear for around US$600 and I'd surely go that route unless weight/compactness are your main considerations. Last, the "thin" T-E was made in 3 versions. The first (Canadian)has a focus ring travel of about 180 degrees. The second (Canadian) has a focus travel of only 90 degrees and a "90" engraved in orange on the outside of the mount at the rear. The third version is identical to the second, except it was made in Germany between the time the Midland factory was sold, and the lens discontinued in 1989. Optically all these are the same. I prefer the second version as it is quicker to focus, yet less expensive than the German version due only to collector prejudice.

Final note: the rubber hood is "cool", but not as effective as the reversible metal 12575, tends to tear after plenty of folding/unfolding, and must be unscrewed each time to change filters.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), July 08, 2001.

The key is not 'Where?" but "When?" The current German lens is modestly better than the Canadian lens, which is modestly better than the German Tele-Elmarit that preceded it.

I own the Canadian 90 Tele-Elmarit. I have tested it against the current Elmarit (NO 'Tele').

I can see zero difference in resolution, even with a 2700 dpi scan (equivalent to a 37" x 57" blowup). Both lenses resolved a 1-pixel- wide line (about 105 l/mm) wide open near the center of the image.

I CAN see more contrast with the current lens, as well as a VERY slightly rosier color rendition. The new lens also may be slightly better in the corners.

The Tele-Elmarit tends to vary somewhat in color rendition because of its slight flare - it kicks bright colors into other parts of the picture, so if there's a blue sky or blue wall in or near the frame the whole picture runs a tad blue; if there's a sunset sky the whole picture picks up a yellow or orange or red or pink tinge. It can be a very nice effect, but only if you're expecting it.

My lens has slightly corrosion speckles, fortunately on an inside front element, so they will be (eventually) repairable. They can only be seen with a strong backlight through the lens, so definitely perform the flash-light test!

Jay, I must have found a fourth version, because my TE has the 180° focusing ring AND a yellow '90' beside the aperture scale.

I got the 12575 shade (which is the same one used for the 135 f/4). managed to find on new in box for $71 - about what people are asking used. In a pinch (because of the common filter size) the rectangular hood for the 35 Summicron pre-ASPH will fit, but doesn't give as much flare protection (but better than nothing).

The Tele-Elmarit is very pocketable. The current Elmarit isn't bad, but may lead to Mae West jokes: "Hiya Honey. Is that an Elmarit in your pocket, or are ya just happy to see me?"

Bottom line: The filter compatability is nice. The image quality (absent contrast) is not a factor. The TE is more compact and lighter. But it has a history of ailments, and the new lens is crisper and not that much more money. At the moment I wouldn't trade my TE for the new lens, but if I were buying from scratch I might pick the new lens over the old.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), July 08, 2001.

I've owned all 4 versions of the Elmarit, one at a time. These are compared in in controlled tests at Erwin Puts' site. My own 90mm testimonial is as follows, based on my black & white results:

original Elmarit-- beautiful gradation, crisp edge to edge, but lens always felt too big on a Leica

fat TE--just never got the same crisp photos, seemed so-so to me. Flare was a problem with mine.

thin TE--wonderfully light, great under most conditions, but mine flared like crazy if illumination was near the subject, even with the 12575 hood. It did not have the dreaded element hazing.

current Elmarit--heavier but still compact. Stunning--I love to use it wide open. I use a 90 much more since I got this one, and the weight seems an advantage for this focal length--it is easier for me to hold steady.

I think that the larger size and weight of the original and the current Elmarits helps me take sharper hand-held photos, while the smaller, lighter ones were more susceptible to camera shake. This wouldn't show up on tripod comparisons. Of course, I never compared them with same subject at same time, so it's just my suspicion. I like the greater mass/inertia of the current 90--it feels good to use. There are lots of these on the used market now, since the new Summicron 90 appeared. I rarely use filters, so it doesn't bother me that the Elmarit 90 doesn't take the same as my 35 & 50.

-- Tim Nelson (timothy.nelson@yale.edu), July 09, 2001.

The new Leica Viewfinder, published bt the LHSA, has a featured article about this excellent lens. I have one of the last prouction runs, a German made one, and it is tack sharp. No fungus, no separations, just a quality lens. Find a later production run and buy it. You can always sell it for the purchase price

-- C.W. Satterfield (cwsat@istate.net), July 09, 2001.

I have a 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit ("thin") of about the same vintage as the one you're looking at in the store. Paid about that price for it a year ago on eBay -- it was pristine -- plus a little more for the 12575 hood. I use it on both an M4 and an M3. It's small and light and, apropos of some other comments, sometimes feels a little too light. That said, I've made some lovely images with it and would never quibble about the sharpness or color rendition.

I have also used some older, larger Canon screwmount teles (100/2.0, 85/1.8) on these same cameras and the balance is better for handholding. Maybe that's why the Leitz 90/2.0 Summis were such heavy beasts. But hauling the heavier lenses around is tiring.

-- Ryck Lent (rycklent@compuserve.com), July 09, 2001.