Leica LTM Opinion re. 90mm Elmar & Haze

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Coldkennels

Coldkennels

Barnack-toting Brit.
Local time
11:44 AM
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
1,728
Location
Tunbridge Wells, England.
View My Gallery
I recently made the jump from Soviet to Leica - something which, in hindsight, I wish I'd done earlier. I got a IIIf in beautiful condition with a feint RF patch (plus an OKARO thrown in which makes it useable), and a Summaron 35/3.5 as a first lens (scratch-free, mild haze).

Today, I added a post-war 90mm Elmar to the set - an ebay purchase, listed as "a good user". Like the Summaron, it has no visible scratches but a nice dosing of haze.

However, I'm not sure what to do. I don't mind keeping the Summaron because I'm not sure I could get another scratch-free one for the price I paid (£170) and I'm planning on sending it off somewhere with the IIIf for an overhaul in a few weeks' time. But I'm unsure on the Elmar. I only paid £92 for it, and mechanically it's in fine condition, but the focusing scale seems off (it focuses past infinity on the scale) and I've yet to test it to see whether it focuses okay or whether this is a symptom of incorrect calibration/collimation. Also, its haze seems somewhat worse.

All that aside, I am quite smitten with how it looks on the camera. I can't believe how elegant it is. Considering my only previous experience with a 90mm-ish lens was the comparatively gargantuan Jupiter 9, this seems svelte in comparison.

Anyway, I guess my question is two-fold:

1) Providing it actually works, do you think it's worth me keeping the Elmar and having it serviced considering the price I paid and
2) Is haze generally an easy thing to clean off? I don't want to be lumped with a lens that can't be cleaned up.

Any recommendations for British-based Leica repairmen capable of the job would be nice, too. I would send it to Youxin Ye or someone similar, but transatlantic shipping is not really something I enjoy dealing with!
 
Hi Tony,

The Elmar 90 is a fine lens, perhaps its only drawback is the relatively slow speed ( f:4,5 ) compared to later versions (which are quite pricey).

The haze is usually the result of off-gassing of lubricants used on the focusing helicals, and can usually be greatly improved be careful cleaning in the hands of an expert. Leica glass is notoriously "soft" and prone to scratching, so if you have determined your Elmar just has haze, it is probably worth having cleaned, especially if it is a coated lens.

If you invest in cleaning, you should probably consider investing in a quality UV filter to go over the front of the lens for mechanical protection.


I know there are some quality Leica shops there in England, one of the chaps will drop some names, I'm sure.

Good luck with your new kit... I've had a blast with my screw-mount Leicae over the last several years !

Regards,

Luddite Frank
 
I had just the same problem with an Elmar. It was cleaned by Malcolm Taylor. He usually advertises in AP, but Google will find him - he comes from Leominster. He is Leica trained and does a very good job.

Ray
 
I can recommend Will van Manen, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands. He delivers excellent work with a short turn-around time and at modest prices. Your equipment's trip across the North Sea won't cost you much more than travel in the UK.
 
I avoid hazy lenses because:

Some haze cannot be cleaned
Some haze damages coating
Some cleaning scratches lenses
Hazy lenses have crap resale value

If I'm not mistaken, the 90 Elmar is one of those lenses where the haze really bites through the coating.
 
I have a 90 elmar in M mount that I bought when I was first starting down the Leica road that had a incredible amount of haze. I sent it to DAG and it not only cleaned up very nicely but no haze has returned in the 20 years I have owned it.
 
Hi,

I had this problem years ago. Talking to the technician I was told that it is easily done and fully justified on old uncoated lenses.

And obviously, the other points mentioned could be sorted out at the same time and postage wouldn't be such a large item if all were done at once.

Malcolm Taylor and Newton Ellis and Co would be my contribution to the list.

Regards, David
 
Thanks to all for the advice. Looks like a call to Malcolm Taylor's in my immediate future, and I'll probably be keeping this lens, by the look of things.

As an aside, I also got a 50mm Elmar through the post today. It was advertised as "clean and clear" and all the usual gumph, and it's in a terrible state. Needless to say, that one's going back, leaving me with a 50mm hole in the set. I only bring this up because this makes me three-for-three with Leitz lenses with some sort of problem... can't say I ever had this problem with Russian glass, amusingly.

Now where's the trollface emoticon? 😀
 
Jockos said:
... If I'm not mistaken, the 90 Elmar is one of those lenses where the haze really bites through the coating.
Click to expand...

I think that was the "thin TE" - the 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit (thin version). I have seen estimates that about 5% of those suffered from the condition you describe. I had a very good one at one stage - another lens I regret having sold.
 
hipsterdufus said:
In my experience, it's worth paying a bit extra to buy through RFF or an established dealer. Ebay will screw you quite often (buying and selling).
Click to expand...

eBay sellers will "screw you" only if you let them. With both eBay's and paypal's buyer protection you will get your money back if there is an issue with the buy..

With over 800 transactions I have yet to lose money..
 
Hi,

What I'm always fascinated by is that we blame the Communist Party that was for duff FED's and Zorkis and rant on about quality control but I've never read a rant about other makes and political systems.

As I see it, buying very old second-hand stuff is a bit risky and has nothing to do with how it left the factory. I've had duff Leitz, Leica and FED/Zorki stuff. It's easily repaired and worth getting repaired, imo.

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