Friends, I have been shooting a number of rolls w/ the M6 TTL + 35/2 asph, I go over the initial "chock" w/ the first b&w roll (poor printing quality as it turns out) and the next rolls have been amazingly sharp and true. I'm very happy.

However, I need to add a portrait lens and I hope that lightning don't strike me when I'm stating that I'm thinking non-Leica. What are my options in the $500 bracket. I've heard good things about the Voightlander 90/3.5 APO (can be had for around $350), also the Konica Hexanon 90/2.8 - any users of those lenses around here? In the used market - any suggestions on what I should look for?

Thanks in advance,

Pat

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), March 18, 2002

Answers

If you like lightweight you can look at the 90 Tele-Elmarit "thin". Should be in the 500-600 dollar range on ebay (just make sure you get an example above 3200000 serial number.

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), March 18, 2002.

Pat:

For $500 you can find an "old-style" 90 Elmarit, a "thin" 90 Tele- Elmarit of even an older version 90 Summicron with the telescoping lens shade. All of the above lenses will serve VERY well as portrait lenses, and you won't have to worry about getting struck by lightning for abandoning "the family"! My personal choice out of the above four lenses would be (1st) the 90TE or (2nd) the older 90 Summicron. Very different lenses, but both superb for portraits and general photography!

Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 18, 2002.

Sorry, by "four" I meant to imply I was including the VC in the equation!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 18, 2002.

Here's a vote for the 90 Summicron. I believe you can get one in your price range.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 18, 2002.

Pat, I would second Jack and suggest either the 90 Elmarit, produced from 1959-1974 or the 2nd version 90 Tele-Elmarit, produced from 1974- 1988. The older Elmarit outperforms the Tele-Elmarit somewhat, but is longer and not quite so handy as the TE. I have an Elmarit from '61, and it yields exceptional results. I use it quite a bit though I also use a 90 Summicron APO ASPH. You should feel confident with any of the Elmarits, although many of the early 2nd version TE examples have developed etching problems in the rear lens group, or so I have been told.

-- David (pagedt@chartertn.net), March 18, 2002.

Good point re the earlier TE's David -- I should have mentioned that I hae a later model German 90TE...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 18, 2002.

Gonna play devils advocate here a bit (sort of)

Everyone seems to be hooked on a 90 for portraiture... but I consider it too short, preferring a 135 instead.

The reason? I like to keep back at least 10 feet from my models, subjects, occasional customer... to make them feel more at lease. The 90 just seems to be to wide for that sort of working distance.

You may want to evalute your shooting preferences, and see the right focal length first, then decide on a lens.

-- Charles (cbarcellona@telocity.com), March 19, 2002.

How about the Nikkor LTM & Canon RF 85/2's, 100/3.5's, & 105/2.5's? All excellent lenses & should cost way below $500.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), March 19, 2002.

If you want a 90mm as a portrait lense I think the current Elmarit would be the one to go for. The Summicron is nice, but the DOF at f2 is IMHO unusable for portraits, so the Elmarit doesn't loose out and is much much cheaper second hand. But have you considered the Voigtlander 75mm?

-- Steve Barnett (barnet@globalnet.co.uk), March 19, 2002.

Pat, I would also advise trying the Voigtlander 75. It's a great focal length that matches fine with the 35mm. I find the 90 just too long, the 75 also gives a much larger image area in the viewfinder.

F2.5 wide open is plenty fast enough, probably F4 is better for portraits anyway, at 1.4 with Leica's huge expensive offering, depth of field is millimeters - as even Mr Dixon has shown, keeping the subject in focus is very difficult.

The voigtlander is a really compact size, beautifully made and handles very well. I picked one up virtually NIB for $250. I love my 35mm Summicron but for the good old 15mm and a compact, "fast enough" lightweight 75 - thank goodness for Voigtlander.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), March 19, 2002.

I second Chris Chen's suggestion about the Nikkor/Canon screw mount 85mms. I picked up a Nikkor 8.5cm and love it. For portraits, Ive grown to dislike the razor sharp approach as much as I dislike softness. The Nikkor is about perfect for my purposes, sharp without being harsh.

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), March 19, 2002.

As a portrait lens (is that the PC euphamism for a slightly-soft lens) the early-version 90TE is an excellent choice. It's usually cheaper because it's heavier but less sharp than the original Elmarit. And it doesn't have any self-destructing-element stigma attached to it. If you're lucky you might even find one with some slight internal fogging, which would make it a *great* portrait lens...or you could have it cleaned if you ever wanted to take really sharp images. Then there's the 90/4, in both M and LTM (with adaptor). Unless your idea of an ideal portrait is a blurred face with only sharp eyes, f/4 is where you'll be shooting anyway. The Voigtlander lenses are fine if a little delicate in construction. But then, if that doesn't bother you you can save even more my selling your M6 and buying a Bessa. The Konica 90 is a nice lens, but in my experience they pumped up the contrast to make it appear sharper than it is, so the images of people exhibit a trace of harshness not evident with the Leica Elmarit-M. If there's any way to swing it (they can be found in the $600 range with a little external cosmetic wear), the current Elmarit- M is IMO the way to go. And I agree that a 135 is also to be considered. They are cheap and sharp. If you want the soft look, put a Softar on it. The rest of the time you've got a sharp lens for general photography.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 19, 2002.

Hi Pat, I'm voting with Jay. The current Elmarit with a Softar at f2.8 or f4.0. It's a beautiful thing. And without the Softar, it's really sharp. Best of luck.

-- Ronald Wills (youngdeer@earthlink.net), March 19, 2002.

what about Erwin's VC 90/3.5 review? http://www.imx.nl/photosite/japan/voigt2890.html

-- pat (modlabs@yahoo.com), March 19, 2002.

I use an old 73/1.9 coated Hektor which is so soft at or near wide open that it would make the Wicked Witch of thw West look smooth- skinned!

-- adam g. lang (aglang@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

in practice i find i prefer the 135mm...i know the finder really small,but enjoy the real telephoto "look" and distance.Using it many years since my 90mm was stolen.I have the 135mm Tele-Elmar,but Hektors are easily available and very reasonable in price.Sure they are not as sharp,but kinda perfect for portraits. Try one out first and then decide!I do sometimes miss the 90mm,but reasonable cropping of 50mm images works out fine,that way have speed,f2.o!!

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

For around $100 you can get a M-Elmar 90mm f:4.0. For portraits it's as good or better than anything else mentioned so far.

-- Wilhelmn (bmitch@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

Sorry but I go against the trend of Leica bias here, I owned a 90 F4 C but found it not the equal of the 40mm F2 C on my CL/CLE's so I then tried a thin 90 F2.8 TE and apart from the extra speed it was no better. So I bought the Voigtlander 90 f3.5 and it is great! So I sold the thin TE it was no match for the Voigtlander. Construction complaints with this lens are unfounded its very well made although some say the black paint is soft on Voigtlander lenses but I have yet to notice any wear. Leica has reduced the number of aperture blades in its newer lenses but all the Voigtlanders have a respectable 10 blades like Leicas older stuff. The 90mm Voigtlander is one of their better lenses and superior to any 90 in your price range.

-- Joel Matherson (joel_2000@hotmail.com), March 20, 2002.