Elmar 50/2.8 M, Quality?

M

mike goldberg

The Peaceful Pacific
Local time
10:28 PM
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
1,148
Hi All,
I'm seeking info on the Elmar 50/2.8 in M-mount.

Yes, I know LTM lenses can be used with an Adapter. I'd like to have an original
Leitz Collapsible lens, and have been told that this design is just right.

Comments on sharpness, smoothness & bokeh in pictures ... is welcome.
Ciao,
 
I got one recently, but my first results are still in the can (and I've prohibited myself from developing anything more until I get my scanning up-to-date - hopefully that will be within the next week). But I have done a bit of digging around, and people generally seem to think that stopped down a bit it's a very sharp lens.
 
Are you talking the 1956 50 2.8 or the latest 50 2.8. These are two entirely different lenses.

The first is much like the DR/Rigids. The latest is like the current ultra sharp lenses.
 
Are you interested in the Elmar or the Elmar-M? The latter is apparently quite a bit better than the older version and well on par with the Summicron according to Tom Abrahamson.

I can't decide whether to keep my Summicron DR or sell it and buy an Elmar(-M) to save some weight. (But first, repeat to self: I do not need a M2...)
 
Great!
You guys have told me what I need to know...

The one I was looking at is from an Australian seller who bought the lens in 1967 and used it periodically. There is NO 'M' in the description, and it is already at $211.50 with 2-1/2 days to go. This option is now out.

Another option is an LTM lens with an adapter, and I'm considering Stephen's special on a black Color Skopar 50/2.5, 7 "highly corrected elements" in 6 groups ... $289- [new].

Thanks,
 
The earlier Elmar can be hard to use, in my opinion, because when you move the aperture ring the focus changes at the same time. Still, I love some of the pictures taken with it.
 
I had the original Elmar 50 f2.8, which is a great classic lens if you find one in good condition. Using the lens takes work because the focusing ring and aperture ring are adjacent to each other and rotate together as one, so focusing will change the aperture and visa versa. I focused and then held the lens barrel in place with a finger while I changed the aperture.
I now have the current Elmar-M, which is on par with the current summicron that I sold. The Elmar M is a great travel lens and doesn't have the same focusing/ aperture ring issue.
 
The classic Elmar 50/2.8 is special. While hunting for faster 50s, I bought the Elmar as a stopgap: now I can't let it go! It renders with character, has great build quality, is super compact when collapsed, and balances perfectly on an M body. The lens itself is gorgeous, with that chrome bezel. Compared to the modern Elmar, the classic has a broad DOF scale (my pet obsession), and nine more aperture blades. The drawbacks I can live with :)
 
ERV said:
I had the original Elmar 50 f2.8, which is a great classic lens if you find one in good condition. Using the lens takes work because the focusing ring and aperture ring are adjacent to each other and rotate together as one, so focusing will change the aperture and visa versa. I focused and then held the lens barrel in place with a finger while I changed the aperture.
I now have the current Elmar-M, which is on par with the current summicron that I sold. The Elmar M is a great travel lens and doesn't have the same focusing/ aperture ring issue.
Click to expand...

My original Elmar never did this. I think it was from '59 and was a M mount lens. The Aperture barrel moves when you change focus but the actual aperture doesn't change.
 
I have an M mount Elmar and I have compared it directly to my collapsable Summicron on my M8. The Summicron was noticably sharper at wider apertures but I liked the look of the Elmar better ... it had more warmth. The Summicron in comparison seemed a little harsh! :)
 
Hi,
I have used both the current and early editions of this lens and can confidently say that I could find only minor differences. The current displaying better contrast(more). I should add though that as regards definition I always feel the gaussian and sonnar designs are ahead.

Cheers,

normclarke
 
Hi... Norm, Keith... and anyone else:

The older Elmar 50/2.8's do NOT have the extra 'M' designation...
Are these not as good?

Thanks,
 
Good is what you want. If you want a more classic look, get an original. If you want something like the current extra sharp contrasty design, get a new one. If you want a really classic look, get a 3.5 red scale

I have all three and like all three. I just wish I could find a 2.8 screw mount.
 
Elmar-M (collapsible)

Elmar-M (collapsible)

F1000010_2.jpg
Elmar-M 2.8 1960 (collapsible) M7 Fuji Provia 100F

000024_2.jpg
Elmar-M 2.8 current 11823 (collapsible) M7 Kodak Portra 160 VC

Regards
Eelco
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom