90/2.8 Tele Elmarit M

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

I'm looking at a late (ie thin) version of this lens, which seems to be highly rated in some quarters as a sharp and very compact lens. Do any of you have any experience/views on it?

-- Paul Hart (paulhart@blueyonder.co.uk), April 29, 2002

Answers

Many of these lenses developed fungus, as mine did. I had bought it new in 1988; and four years later the fungus developed. Acknowledging the problem, Leica USA gave me credit towards the latest version.

-- Mitch Alland (malland@mac.com), April 29, 2002.

I love mine - IMHO it is bettered only by the current Leica 90s - both of which are substantially larger/heavier. Some folks will argue the original 1960 Elmarit is better, but not by any comparison I've seen - IMHO that's a tie.

There are two 'problems' with the lens, though, to keep in mind.

1. Some TEMs develop a etching/coating problem with the rear elements - and it is very difficult/expensive to repair, if possible at all, because the rear elements are a sealed unit. You have to replace the whole thing - if you can find the part(s).

This problem is primarily with early versions of the lens, but inspect ANY 90TE carefully. Shine a flashlight through the lens and look for crazing near the edges or fine golden/white bright speckles on the glass surface. (Mine had speckles inside that turned out to be just a deposit of lubricant vapor that was easily wiped off - but it was still a scare!)

2. The lens has a great tendency to flare, esp. veiling flare (overall loss of contrast) when shooting into the sun. The metal 12575 lens hood is a must to have in your bag (I don't bother with it UNLESS I'm shooting backlit subjects, though).

This flare can also affect color balance slightly, as the whole picture can pick up a faint cast from any brightly colored area in/near the frame. i.e. a blue cast shooting under bright blue skies or a faint overall redness shooting something against/near a brick wall.

The flare comes from glancing reflections of the inside of the rear lens barrel, which is narrowed substantially in order to maintain the tiny size.

All that being said, my 90 TE will be with me forever unless Leica comes out with something new that's as small and light in the 75/90 range.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 29, 2002.


The idea of a small 90 is very appealing but I've never actually held a tele-elmarit. Anyone know how it compares, size wise, to the current Voigtlander 90/3.5

-- Jim Wong (jkdub@hotmail.com), May 01, 2002.

Nice SMALL lens...would never sell mine. Not stellar at close range but good enough....in comparison to my DR summicron that is.

-- Emile de Leon (Knightpeople@msn.com), May 01, 2002.

A lens not much bigger than a summicron 50. I love mine. Sharp and contrasty photos.

-- Doug Landrum (dflandrum@earthlink.net), May 01, 2002.


Many thanks to you all for your helpful replies. Sadly the one I was after has gone, but I have picked up an unused Voigtlander APO Lanthar 90mm for a less than half the price. Erwin Puts seems to rate this as almost the equal of the current 90mm Elmarit M, so I'll give it a try.

Thanks once again.

-- Paul Hart (paulhart@blueyonder.co.uk), May 02, 2002.


I’m curious, is there a fungus or de-lamination problem with the lens elements of the 90/2.8 Elmarit-M? Or, have I confused this thread with the 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit? I have the 90/2.8 Elmarit-M and have noticed no problems or issues with the lens. Is this common knowledge?

J.

-- J.L.Kuhn (james.kuhn-1@kmail.ksc.nasa.gov), May 02, 2002.


just a different option to consider: i have several 90's. the thin te included, but my current favourite for compactness, weight balance and solidness is the 90 FAT. i love the knurled ring and it is actually shorter than the te, but just a little heavier, but i prefer this as it gives better balance on the m. just my 2 cents worth

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), May 02, 2002.

J.L.: Confusion reigns. The 90 TELE-Elmarit-M has occasional glass problems and flare - NOT the current ELMARIT-M (no 'Tele') or the previous Tele-Elmarit (no "M") that Sparkie mentions.

Sparkie: I'd like to see some posts from the 'fat' TE. I had one about 20 years ago during a previous brief fling with Leicas and though it was HORRIBLE (enuff so that I went back to Nikon for two decades(!)) - but now that I'm more attuned to how finicky Leicas can be when focusing a 90 I wonder if it wasn't just me, and/or an unhappy lens/ body combination.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 03, 2002.


nNNerf!

That should read "THOUGHT it was horrible.."

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), May 03, 2002.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ