Let's say I have the chance to buy a used "last-version" Tele-Elmarit 90 or a used current-version Elmarit. Skip the 1959-1974 Elmarit. The way I see it, a TE 90 came out in 1964 in chrome and 1966 in black and both had 5 elements. In 1974 the "last-version" TE 90 came out -- apparently with the same code number -- only in black, but now had 4 elements and was thinner and lighter. Just a few questions (although there really is lots to read here in the forum on M 90s)...

• Is this "last version" (I guess 1974-1988) really the "last-version" TE 90?
• Got any experience you can share re comparison of a 1964-1974 TE with a 1974-1988 TE?
• How much fatter and heavier was the 1964-1974 TE?
• Is the thin version any lighter and/or heavier than today's Elmarit?
• Do any of these have a removable hood (unlike today's Elmarit)?
• It's clear why the limited issue samples containing the imprinting "1913-1983" (I guess around 1983) are the most expensive, but are all other 1974-1988 TE samples without that imprinting just as good?
• If I really want M 2/90 quality (especially concerning sharpness) -- which, yes, might cost me a buck or two more -- should I just forget the TE history and any collector's value, and instead get a used (or even new) current Elmarit? For me, the 90'cron is too big and heavy and stiff.

Thanks for your help here. Mike

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 10, 2001

Answers

I had the 1974-1988 thin TE 90 2.8, which I sold. I recently bought a used example of todays newer Elamrit-M. As far as I can tell about your questions:

* last version of TE is the last veriosn * the thin is smaller (39 filter) than today's (46 filter), lighter, but about the same in length. I think it is marginally less sharp, but both are great lenses. * the thin TE has removable hood (although you can use a removable hood on the new one) * the newer Elmarit M is supposedly about as sharp as the Summicron (especially after f 5.6), but I think both the older Tele-elmarits were sharper than contemporary Summicron 90's. The only realy reason to get the f2 is if you need f2.

Hope that is helpful

-- Michael Waldron (michael@cadogan.net), December 10, 2001.

The latest version of the "thin" TE has an orange "90" engraved on the side of the barrel like modern Lieca lenses. Most were made in Canada, but the very, very latest were made in Germany.

The TE isa 11mm shorter and 183 grams lighter than the current Elmarit M (black). The TE uses 39mm filters, the EM uses 46mm filters.

I wanted a late TE when I got a 90mm, but, to get a nice, clean, late TE cost more than I mint EM. Bottom line, I got the EM used on Ebay, mint condition, and cheaper than an E+ TE. I just have to deal with the size and weight difference.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), December 10, 2001.

Michael, I have both the older 90 Elmarit (11129) and the New 90 Summicron APO ASPH lenses, so perhaps I can give you some information. The 11129 lens is a very good performer; it is lighter than the new Elmarit and uses an auxilliary lens hood (12575). Many consider this lens optically superior to the smaller Tele-Elmarit. I like both of these 90s. I bought the SAA because I wanted the extra stop. The newer Leica lenses have somewhat improved contrast at the wider apertures, although I have never objected to the image quality of the older Elmarit. Bargains can be found on this lens. I frequently carry an M6 with either a 35 ASPH Summicron or a 50 Summicron along with the 90 Elmarit in a small camera bag. It makes for a light, versatile outfit. FWIW

-- David (pagedt@chartertn.net), December 10, 2001.

Michael,

First off -- I do not have any experience comparing the vintage 90 TE with the contemporary 90E, so this is a quick few words on the current version 90 E only. As you might recall, I was wavering about a week ago between purchasing a new 50 cron vs. new 90 E and I ended up buying the 90 E. I just returned from a weekend away where I first used the 90 E extensively at a National fencing Tournament. I thought the lens was simply beautiful. The size and weight are extremely well-balanced. It was a pleasure to use for action and crowd/coach reaction shots. I also used a borrowed 75 and it's size (like the 90 cron) and length of focus throw are a real drag. I know you're not considering the cron, so the extra stop isn't a consideration, but let me tell you that between the size of the frame lines and the desire to shoot handheld, it's hard to imagine that the one's rate of return of perfect focus shots would be very good at F2.0. I read every review and post I could find on these lenses and the overwhelming consensus is that the current model is superior in everyway to the prior versions of the 2.8s. It seems to also rival the 2.0 in most user's opinions - except that many here have stated that the 2.0 is a bit too sharp for portraits (which would concern me for a lens which is a well-suited for portraits as the 90...). Again, I can't speak for the collector values since I'm a user only (at this point!). But if you're going to use the lens and not collect, I would just point out that the current pricing (between the rebate and a "Leica Day" discount which you should be able to find before year's end) + the Passport Warranty program, make a new 90E a pretty good value in comparison to most used versions of any kind. Thanks for your advice when I bought this lens! Good luck in your decision. ER

-- Eric Reid (eric_reid@lkshore.com), December 10, 2001.

Michael: Here's the bottom line. The current Elmarit is the one to get if best performance at f/2.8 is critical to you. If you can stand a little less contrast at f/2.8, or shoot mainly at f/4 or slower, and weight and size are a deciding factor, then get the thin T-E. I would look for a later sample with the orange "90" engraved but made in Canada. You will get the benefit of a 50% shorter throw in the focus ring but not pay the collector premium for the very-last samples which were assembled in Solms.

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

1. Yes

2. IMHO the post-74 beats the pre-74 for raw sharpness - can'r speak to color, bokeh. Love my post-74 - the one time I tried a pre-74 it put me off Leica-M for 6 years.

3. A little of each - they both take 39mm filters - the early TE has scalloped knurling on the focusing ring - the late has fine knurling like current lenses.

4. Thin TE is MUCH smaller/lighter than today's Elmarit-M - like a 50 summicron plus rear cap and 225g vs. 410g - 6-7 oz. difference.

5. They ALL have removeable hoods - except the current lens.

6. There is no optical difference among the 'thin' TEs - but apparently the earlier the lens, the more likely it is to get glass diseases (see multiple posts re) The imprinting is the ONLY reason for the price difference.

7. ANY Leica 90 f/2.8 of any kind beats ANY 90 Summicron at most apertures faster than f/8 - except for the 90 f/2 APO-ASPH, which trumps everything else. The current lens is closer to the APO than either TE in image contrast and sharpness - but we're talking A vs. A+ vs. A++.

Bottom line - the 90 TE is ultra-compact and very good, and shares filters with the 35 and 50 'crons. It occasionally gets glass diseases, some of which are incurable - and it has a tendency to flare pointed near the sun. I will never be without one again.

The 90 EM (today's) is a little sharper, a lot contrastier, nearly twice as heavy, and shares filters with the 50 1.4, 28s, 135. To my taste it has a hair too much contrast (I shoot a lot of slides) and I found it more difficult to focus accurately than the TE (maybe the longer focusing throw - maybe just me).

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), December 10, 2001.

Michael, You can consult quite a few threads on comparisons of the 90 TE and other 90's in the archives of this and other Leica forums. I've used all 4 of the 90/2.8-M versions over the years, and I'd add a couple things to the above responses: (1) if you choose the thin TE, make sure to get the bigger metal hood--the small rubber hood is inadequate for the flare-prone TE. (2) My personal experience is that the thin TE is too small and light for a 90. I find the heavier and slightly larger current 90/2.8 easier to handle and to hold steady at slow shutter speeds. A tele magnifies camera shake, and a light lens does little to counter this. IMHO, the real advantage of the TE is in the pocket or camera bag, not on the camera. It can make great photos--no argument-- but given a choice, I'd pick the current 90/2.8.

-- Tim Nelson (timothy.nelson@yale.edu), December 11, 2001.

Thanks, everybody. Now I know what to pick. I had already tried out today's Elmarit and 'cron AA, but not the thin TE. As long as I don't need it's "pocket size" including the good filter size, the current Elmarit seems to be the perfect common denominator having all advantages and lacking all disadvantages of the thin TE and the 'cron AA. Not too heavy, not too light, no diseases. Anybody got an e-mail address of Santa Claus?

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), December 12, 2001.