Leica 90mm F2.8 Elmarit-M lens - Sample Images?

[dave lackey]

It occurs to me that I have not seen, or at least I do not remember seeing any example images made with the 90 mm Elmarit lens. While I am waiting on the M3 to become reality, I am looking over lens options but this one escapes me.

Can anyone post some representative images?

Thanks in advance,:angel:

 

[FrankS]

Dave, for other options, consider the 90 f4 Elmar (slow but light) or the 85 f2 Canon. (fast but heavy) Either one would be cheaper than the 90 Elmarit.

 

[Thardy]

Here are a couple.

View attachment 65453

View attachment 65454

 

[Al Kaplan]

The lens head unscrews. The head is interchangeable with the 65/3.5 Elmar and 135/4 Tele-Elmar on the Visoflex II or III short focusing mount, or on the bellows unit. If you want an 85/2 the Nikkor is usually considered a better lens. Canon also made an 85/1.9 and finally an 85/1.8, but the Nikkor can hold its own against anything but the latest model 90 'cron.

The final incarnation of the 90 Elmar is a three element design, but a big improverment in sharpness and contrast over the older models. It also features a removeable head but requires a special short mount for Visoflex use, and that mount is hard to locate.

 

[David Murphy]

There are hundreds of example shots posted over on Flickr - it's sharp, colorful, and nice (like most Leica)

 

[dave lackey]

The lens head unscrews. The head is interchangeable with the 65/3.5 Elmar and 135/4 Tele-Elmar on the Visoflex II or III short focusing mount, or on the bellows unit. If you want an 85/2 the Nikkor is usually considered a better lens. Canon also made an 85/1.9 and finally an 85/1.8, but the Nikkor can hold its own against anything but the latest model 90 'cron.

The final incarnation of the 90 Elmar is a three element design, but a big improverment in sharpness and contrast over the older models. It also features a removeable head but requires a special short mount for Visoflex use, and that mount is hard to locate.

Hey, Al...

Is the 85 Nikkor easy to mount to an M3? Is there an adaptor that has to be purchased to go with it?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

M2 + 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit (1st version)

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

M8 + 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit (1st version)

 

[nksyoon]

Current version with M8:

With R-D1:

 

[ferider]

There are multiple incarnations of the Leica 90/2.8:

1) v1 Elmarit

Example photos: http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/LeicaElmarit90mmf2.8I

2) v1 ("fat") Tele Elmarit

Example photos: http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/LeicaTele-Elmarit90mmf2.8II

3) v2 ("thin") Tele Elmarit

Example photos: http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/LeicaTele-Elmarit90mmf2.8III

4) modern (E46) Elmarit

Example photos: http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/LeicaElmarit90mmf2.8IV


They are all great. 4) is reputed to be one of the best RF teles ever built. 1) has probably the nicest classic signature. I am currently owning 3) for travel since it's so small.

Note that for the price of 4) you can also get a nice sample of the Summicron 90/2 v3, not too big of a lens and phantastic value.

Best,

Roland.

 

[deepwhite]

The current version (Elmarit M 90/2.8).

Film:

Digital (R-D1s)

I love the image taken by this lens, but it's really hard to focus and compose with a 90mm on a RF camera. On the other hand, if you simply need a 90mm (or 135mm on the R-D1s) with f2.8, but don't want to carry a big cannon, the Leica 90mms are all very good choices, if not the only ones.

 

[nksyoon]

Current version on M8:

 

[dave lackey]

These are great images!🙂

Can anyone come up with the length and weight of the chrome lens?

 

[George S.]

Dave, if you mean the chrome version that I posted in the classifieds, ( V1, 1959-1974), It weighs 320g and is a hair under 3 and 5/8 inches long when mounted on the camera body.
HTH,
George

 

[dave lackey]

Dave, if you mean the chrome version that I posted in the classifieds, ( V1, 1959-1974), It weighs 320g and is a hair under 3 and 5/8 inches long when mounted on the camera body.
HTH,
George

That's it! Cool...did not know the lenses were so much smaller than my Nikon lenses....😎

thanks, George.

 

[xayraa33]

here is a Tele Elmarit shot from Feb 1981 of the great late Roy Buchanan, taken at f2.8 on Tri X film.

 

[ferider]

Here is the weight of all 4 versions:

1. 90mm F2.8 Elmarit 1959-1974
   • SN#1,645,300-2,730,000
   • 5 Elements in 3 Groups
   • Filter size: 39mm
   • Weight: 320g
2. 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit ("Fat") 1964-1974
   • SN#2,000,000-2,730,000
   • 5 Elements in 5 Groups
   • Filter size: 39mm
   • Weight: 355g
3. 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit ("Thin") 1973-1989
   • SN#2,585,001-3,500,000
   • 4 Elements in 4 Groups
   • Filter size: 39mm
   • Weight: 225g
4. 90mm F2.8 Elmarit 1989-Current
   • SN#3,480,000 to Current
   • 4 Elements in 4 Groups
   • Filter size: 46mm
   • Weight: Black 410g, Chrome 560g

Best,

Roland.

 

[Ken Ford]

Roland - thank you for that, I find all the different Leica 90/2.8 versions hard to keep straight.

 

[WoolenMammoth]

If you are familiar with the tessar look, the thin tele elmarit for me, delivers that with a ton of character. The transistion to black is very steep and the black you get with that lens is absolute. Love it, and its super tiny and intensely sharp, even at 2.8 its kinda sharp for female portraits. Sharp, but with a thickness.

 

[dave lackey]

If you are familiar with the tessar look, the thin tele elmarit for me, delivers that with a ton of character. The transistion to black is very steep and the black you get with that lens is absolute. Love it, and its super tiny and intensely sharp, even at 2.8 its kinda sharp for female portraits. Sharp, but with a thickness.

Really? I would love to see an image or two for an example!😀