Got a 90!

[aad]

A 90/4 Elmar, off the Eb*y, of all things. Glass is perfect, chrome body has a little dirt- and as for pictures-

Well, I was going to write how getting a new lens messed made me waste film, because I had to walk around fiddling with new gear so I would know how to use it properly for a "real" picture.

But this lens is REALLY cool. And the "test" shots were surprisingly nice.

Now that I have mine, it is safe to let the world know what a bargain they are.

Picture taken indoors, 60 watt light bulb, at night-just because I HAD to take a picture.

[JoeFriday]

it certainly does a good job.. congrats!

[back alley]

i love new toys!

my mailbox was empty today and i was very sad...

joe

[rich815]

One of my all time favorite lenses! Enjoy!

[doubs43]

Congrats on the new lens!

The 90mm f/4 Elmar is a fine lens but may lack contrast. You'll want to get a lens shade and that will help a lot. The lens itself is capable of very sharp images and bokeh that I think you'll like.

Walker

[aad]

It is a really nice lens-I may use a shot for my pic of the week tomorrow.

When I looked inside the back of the lens, I thought I'd outsmarted myself-there was so much empty space I was afraid parts were missing!

It's a great lens! How much did you pay for it? I paid about $300 Canadian for mine, though it's the Minolta version.

[Justin Viiret]

I got the collapsible Elmar in M-mount with my M3 when I bought it as part of a whole bunch of gear; the previous owner said it'd been his favourite lens, and it's certainly had a beating over the years. Scratched front element, very much a user lens... but it still produces lovely shots, and it's really, really compact when collapsed.

Took some test shots (tripod mounted, same film) trying it out against the 90/2.8 "thin" tele-elmarit, and I don't see a whole lot of difference... plus the elmar has visibly warmer colours (which I quite like).

[ChrisN]

I've got an early uncoated black version - amazing little lens and incredibly light and compact for what it does.