90mm M advice

shodoman · 10-05-2006

I'm sure the advice questions get annoying after a while but I need RFF's expertise. I recently bought a new R3M with Heliar and love it, only problem is I really want a 90mm lens to go with that 1:1 viewfinder. I've read through Gandy's Leica M page and am overwhelmed. I don't wan't to spend more tha $500 but would like to jump into leica glass unless there is a better option. So what is my best bet?
Thanks,
Zak
-

JohnM · 10-05-2006

The various Leica 90s are all good choices and some of the older ones are available for much less than $500. (I have a 1960-ish Elmarit and it's quite nice...cost $165.) The Voigtlander 90 is one of my favorite lenses and I regret selling it - really a sharp lens...with an M-adapter, it wouldn't run you much more than $350, I think.

35mmdelux · 10-05-2006

used tele-elmarit should cost $350 or so. Nice one on bay for $258 the other day. Or get a VC 90/3.5. Reports have it as excellent performer.

venchka · 10-05-2006

Last spring when I was 90 shopping this endorsement and samples convinced me to buy a 1965 vintage 90/2.8 Elmarit. I am very pleased.

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-ray

I still favor my 90 2.8 elmarit after thirty eight years. I own an ltm elmar uncoated and have had both coated an non. It's a nice lens but prone to flare in both cases and not nearly as sharp as the 2.8 untill uou stop down a couple of stops. It has size in it's favor but not actual lens performance. I've owned a couple of 90 summicrons too and currently have the asph 90. The asph is a wonderful lens but I still like the look of the 2.8 1st version elmarit. The early 90 summicrons are OK but not great and rather large and heavy for the performance factor. They were OK when that was all there was but by todays standards they are rather lack luster. I porobably have owned three 2.8 elmarits over the years and have shot with a number of tele-elmarits. While the tele-elmarit is a fine lens I don't feel it stacks up with the regular elmarit and don't feel there is a bif enough gain in compactness to warrent the loss of performance with the tele. My vote is keep the 2.8 elmarit.

There are a number of elmarit examples in my gallery.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...y.php?cat=5045

Good luck!

Andrew Touchon · 10-05-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by shodoman

I'm sure the advice questions get annoying after a while but I need RFF's expertise. I recently bought a new R3M with Heliar and love it, only problem is I really want a 90mm lens to go with that 1:1 viewfinder. I've read through Gandy's Leica M page and am overwhelmed. I don't wan't to spend more tha $500 but would like to jump into leica glass unless there is a better option. So what is my best bet?
Thanks,
Zak
-

You might want to investigate the 90mm F4 Minolta Rokkor lens. There are two different versions. The first version was made for the Leitz-Minolta CL and is single coated. The second version was made for the Minolta CLE and is multi-coated. Both take 40.5 filters. You should be able to find one of these lens in mint condition in the $250-$350 price range. The Rokkor lens that was made for The Leitz-Minolta CL is a Leica design. The Minolta Rokkor CLE lens is a slightly improved version. Either lens will provide excellent results.

Rich Silfver · 10-05-2006

Another vote for the 90/2.8 Elmarit (mine is from 1964).

Sample shots:

The lens:

nikon_junkie · 10-05-2006

If you are interested I have a beaut 90 f/2 Cron I would sell for $500. I'm trying to raise money for a Noctilux.

rover · 10-05-2006

How much are the Konica KM 90/2.8 lenses selling for now a days?

back alley · 10-05-2006

i got my 90/2.8 hex for about 400 cdn.

peter_n · 10-05-2006

I like the "thin" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, especially if you plan on travelling with a 90. Can flare a little but a good hood fixes that and they cost around $450. This is an old one from my gallery here, either wide-open or very close to it:

shodoman · 10-05-2006

thanks guys. It seems like an elmarit might be the way to go without spending as much (always a good thing). Are there any other options other than ebay or keh? Ebay scares me and Keh has rediculous prices. Other than RFF ofcourse.

monochromejrnl · 10-05-2006

shot wide open... recently acquired and enjoying it... it's the Collapsible elmar-M - one of the least expensive, if not THE least expensive 90s available...

monochromejrnl · 10-05-2006

elmar-M collapsible 90/4 @ f4... TriX@1600 Diafine

10-06-2006

Post deleted by posters request

vol72 · 10-06-2006

I agree with those that recommend the Elmarit Version 1; it is difficult to best it for the money spent. For some things the Apo ASPH is unbeatable, but I really like the rendition of the Elmarit 1 for people pictures.

ChrisN · 10-06-2006

Another sample from the thin Tele-Elmarit, at f/2.8. I'd normally prefer to use my early Summicron 90 for this, but had not planned for the opportunity and just happened to have the 90/2.8 in the bag with me at the time.

jkelly · 10-06-2006

I dunno, but I kinda like my 1946 90/4 Elmar. I paid $100 for it including the adaptor.

Kim Coxon · 10-06-2006

If you are not in a desparate hurry, I will soon be listing my Type II Elamarit Serial no 3462xxx in the classifieds as it is not getting a lot of use. I can't really justify a Tele-Elmarit and an Elmarit for the use they are getting.

Kim

merciful · 10-06-2006

If the limitations of the smaller maximum aperture aren't a concern, I strongly favour the original Elmar. Of course, I don't give a damn about flare, sharpness, or any of that jazz: I just want an old look.

TX at 800.

vrgard · 10-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferider

The Tele Elmarit is a great lens as well, and really small, just about the size
of your Heliar, maybe a bit thinner. In my experience, it is harder though
(more expensive) to find a good Tele Elmarit than a good Elmarit (I). The TE
tends to haze easily, see also Stephen's website. This was done with
the TE:

A bit off topic, but I love this shot Roland. So many possible captions keep coming to mind!

-Randy

like2fiddle · 10-06-2006

I love my 1961 90 Elmarit. It's the only 90 I've ever owned, so I can't compare it to any other lens, but since I like the results, I've never even considered looking for a different 90. Paid around $160.

peter_n · 10-06-2006

If you end up considering a "thin" Tele-Elmarit (TE) make sure the serial nr. begins with a 3. Some earlier versions of that lens suffered from what became known as TE disease, an unexplained etching on the rear elements. See below for a PN thread comparing the Elmarit and TE:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-...?msg_id=002lwh

vrgard · 10-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by peter_n

If you end up considering a "thin" Tele-Elmarit (TE) make sure the serial nr. begins with a 3. Some earlier versions of that lens suffered from what became known as TE disease, an unexplained etching on the rear elements. See below for a PN thread comparing the Elmarit and TE:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-...?msg_id=002lwh

Just to add a point of clarification, not all thin Tele-Elmarit lenses with serial numbers beginning with a 2 have this problem.

peter_n · 10-06-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by vrgard

Just to add a point of clarification, not all thin Tele-Elmarit lenses with serial numbers beginning with a 2 have this problem.

That's correct. I did say "some" but maybe I should have been a bit more explicit. I've seen several estimates bandied about on the internet, the range is that 5% to 10% of TEs sufferered from the malady.

shodoman · 10-06-2006

kim-I can wait, and would be intersted. I'll keep an eye out in the classifieds