hi,

If I dont need the extra speed of the 90mm f2.8 Elmarit will the 90mm Elmar C f4 give me equal qality results? I also read a lot of problems with the 90mm F2.8 with lens separation and fogging which I have never seen with the Elmar C. So this may also affect my decision.

thanks in advance

James

-- James Cooke (james.c@mis.net.au), July 10, 2001

Answers

Optically, quite similar. See a few threads down for a discussion of the rangefinder camming, which was different in the CL for which this lens was made, and could be a problem. The 90 Rokkor for the CLE (made by Leitz)does not have the camming problem.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), July 10, 2001.

Which version of the 90 Elmarit are you talking about (original based on modified Hektor) or current version which looks very much like a modified Elmar-C?

I've never heard of any problems with either of the Elmarits. Perhaps you mean one of the Tele-Elmarits.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), July 10, 2001.

The current Elmarit does not have any problems with fogging, seperation, etc. The Elmar C is a decent performing 90, but does not compare well with the current Elmarit. I had both for a while hoping to be satisfied by the optics on the much smaller Elmar C. I wasn't. If you don't need the 2.8, you may want to check out the new Voigtlander APO 90 f3.5, another small 90 that shows promise of being a superb performer.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 10, 2001.

I was referring to the Elmarit 90 f2.8 that looks similar in size and shape to the Elamr C. There is definately an Elmarit which has fogging problems and is unrepairable, could someone possibly clarify which Elmarit this one is? Was it made prior or after the Elmar C?

-- James Cooke (james.c@mis.net.au), July 11, 2001.

There are two 90 M lenses named Elmarit and there are several 90 M lenses named Tele-Elmarit. I have never heard of any problems with either the old Elmarit or the current Elmarit. I believe the question about seperation and fogging is related to Tele-Elmarits.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), July 11, 2001.

It may well be a tele elmarit thats has the lens separation problem, thats what im trying to determine? There is definately one 90mm out there that sounds like a worry.

-- James Cooke (james.c@mis.net.au), July 11, 2001.

Neither the four element nor the five element Tele-Elmarit has cemented elements. The current Elmarit is too new to have a problem and the first version Elmarit has never had a reputation of having any kind of problem.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), July 11, 2001.

James: The 90 2.8 that is roughly the size and shape of the Elmar-C is the TELE-ELMARIT (2nd design - so-called 'thin' version) It does have a history of glass ailments (separation, etching, etc.) It is a different lens from the current Elmarit-M f/2.8 (note: no 'Tele' in the name).

There have been 4 versions of the 90 2.8 (experts forgive me if the years are off a bit):

90mm f/2.8 Elmarit - late 50's to mid- (late?) sixties - longish lens with tube partially covered with band of leatherette. Occasional fogging problems (?) but not element separation or etching, I believe.

90 f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit (first - so-called 'fat' version) - no particular ailments - just not very sharp compared to others - scalloped focusing ring. 1964-74, approx. German manufacture only (?)

90 f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M (second - 'thin' version) very close in size to Elmar-C/Rokkor-M. Sharp but has problem with veiling flare pinted into sun - also the lens subject to the worst glass ailments (but on a case-by-case basis - several posters here have samples with no problems) 1974-1989 approx. Fine-knurled focusing ring. Both Canadian and (late) German versions.

90 f/2.8 Elmarit-M (current) Sharpest and contrastiest of the 4...no ailments (yet) 1989 - present.

The last lens is clearly superior to the Elmar-C - the earlier lenses, especially those with Tele in the name, are not necessarily a lot better. Some people believe that both ELMARITS are better than either TELE-ELMARIT - the reasoning being that Leica just gave up too much optical performance in order to reduce the size and weight of the "Tele" lenses.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), July 12, 2001.

One other point - even 'thin' Tele-Elmarits with etching CAN be repaired - mine appears to have some etching in the coating on one of the front elements, but The Focal Point says it should be possible to re-polish and re-coat the element.

The rear elements of the the Thin TE are supposedly a sealed unit that cannot be opened for servicing and are not replaceable - which gives rise to the "unrepairable" reputation. However I saw at least one post here by someone who sent a TE with rear-element corrosion to Leica and they DID replace the entire rear-element module - so some spare parts must still be available, maybe only through Leica, not third-party repairpeople.

Finally, Bud is probably correct. It is NOT a separation problem, but a corroding/etching of the coating on the glass, which shows up as a constellation of silver/white/gold speckles when backlit. It is caused (according to John Van ???? at The Focal Point) by heavy metals in the optical glass reacting with water in the pores of the coating and eating away the coating around the pores - lens acne, if you will. There is also a theory that is comes from reactions with lubricant vapor settling on the glass from the aperture blades. Maybe both thing occur.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), July 12, 2001.