Recommend a 90 mm lens for my M3

I am going to say Elmar or Rokkor as well. To me, its pretty simple because working close with a 90 mm, I like to stop down anyway to increase depth of field to capture detail beyond one eye ball.

Oh yeah and the Rokkor is sooo small and light. Its sharp wide open and has just enough depth of field for great portraits either close or further away. I love it.
 
I frequently use the 90mm f3.5 Apo Lanthar as my 90 mm carry along. It is not a focal length that I use often - but the Apo Lanthar is about as good as it gets. Not superfast, but light and compact. I have Summicron 90f2, Elmarit 90f2.8 and the collapsible Elmar 90f4 - but the 90 apo Lanthar gets the most use on M's and LTM cameras - and the 85f3.5 on Nikon Rf's.
The Summicron 90f2 (vII - mid 70's) is big and gets heavy after a while. It is a nice portrait lens - and landscape. The Elmarit 90f2.8 is good, a bit prone to flare without a hood. The collapsible 90f4 (same formula as the rigid 90f4) I keep because it is a mechanical wonder. Love that distinct "clunk" when you collapse it and the whole mechanics of the inter-lock system. Decent performer - but not exceptional.
 
I also own the Voigtlander 90/3.5 Apo-Lanthar and it is a wonderful little lens. Actually, I liked it so much I also picked one up for my K1000.

The ZM 85/4 tele tessar is also a great option. Neither are particularly fast...but that is what ISO 3200 is for. :)
 
2369924476_6b58a19b76_z.jpg


M2 and Apo Lanthar 90mm f3.5. Acros 100 in Pyrocat developer.
remember when cars has these nice ivory colored buttons and dials? BMW 507 roadster.
 
I have the type 1 Elmarit, and I like it for what it is: a good compromise.

The Elmars are sharper but slower, and I find that I can't go slower than 2.8 if I want to use it indoors.
The 'Crons are to heavy to carry, and I can imagine they obscure the finder.
The newer Elmarits are more expensive.

If you plan on using it a lot, it'd probably be worth to go up one step in price and get something that's sharper at f 2.8.


 
I have the Summicron 90mm (1960) and two Elmars (1938 and 1978). I always reach for the C 90mm elmar because of portability....

the one from 1938 is used mostly in combination with the Visoflex for macro although one could also use the head of the Summicron for this (I even have 3 adapters for the Summi but hardly ever use the Summi for macro)

taken with the 1960 Summicron:

4917909388_a1f6be6b8b_b.jpg



elmar macro shot:
5794397621_535a99f94e_b.jpg
 
I replaced a Canon 135mm with a Voigtlander 90mm 3.5 to save size and weight. No regrets as I rarely use the lens. Its great to have something small enough that I'd carry it around but that good enough that the quality isn't an issue.

Both the VC 90mm and the Canon 100mm 3.5 works well for me based on these needs.
 
Technically not a 90 but the Zeiss 85mm Tele Tessar f4 should be considered as well. Nice bokeh and has a good, solid feel.
 
I don't know if price matters, but the good news about 90 mm is that there are many "cheap" options that are great both in terms of size and quality.
 
You must first decide if you need a F2, 2.8, 4.0 lens . There are Leica ones, Canon, and Nikon, and CV 3.5 APO.

Leica Tele designs go soft in the close range so if this bothers you , you need a long focus like the Elmar, or 90 2.8 Elmarit or any lens made with removable head for viso flex work. No tele elmarits 2.8 or the last two summicron one of which is the current APO.
The tele lenses work fine at 6 feet and further.
 
The only 90mm I've ever used is the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar. I found it to be basically perfect, but I have nothing to compare it to. I think if I was to buy another 90mm though, I'd try one of the cheaper Leicas or maybe a Canon Serenar.
 
For the OP: often people refer to the Summicron as big and soft, but they really mean v1 or v2. v3 is about half the size and a completely different design. more like the 90/2.8 Hexanon or G-Sonnar, just twice the speed.
 
I've got an ancient (roughly 1960) Elmarit. I found an amazing deal on a Tele-Elmarit and snagged it, too. I eventually decided to keep only one 90, as that's my least-used focal length, and had a shootout between the two. I found the Elmarit ever so slightly sharper. Plus, it looked nice on my M3 and I was able to swap the Tele-Elmarit for a bit more than I could have gotten for the Elmarit. So I kept the older lens.

They're both great lenses, though. If you can afford it, and want a compact 90, the T-E is definitely a winner and will produce brilliant results (as amply demonstrated by some folks in this thread). But don't rule out the first version of the Elmarit, if you're on a budget. Used properly, it's pretty darned good and is high in the bang-for-buck sweepstakes among Leica lenses, although they seem to have climbed steeply in price since I picked one up in Bargain condition from KEH about four years back for less than $250.
 
If you don't care about the speed and can afford it, the Elmar 4.0 collapsible macro with or without the additional finder is a wonderfully sharp lens and does very well at close range. Even without the additional finder, it focuses close enough to do a head and shoulder shot of a cat. I know that's not a scientific measure, but it's how I judge close focus.
 
Another vote for the Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8. I use one on my M4-P for the reasons mentioned by rolfe. Terrific portrait lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom