90mm Elmarit f2.8, Tele-Elmarit, fat, thin, Post 'em Here

[presspass]

I have a thin tele elmarit and like it very much. I have a chance to buy the earlier fat version. Is there a difference other than the construction? I use it on film M mount cameras and only for black and white. Thanks.

 

[wosim]

In the Leica User Forum you can find a discussion of this question: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/46133-tele-elmarit-m-2890mm-fat-or-thin-which-one-is-betterdifferences/

Further information to a large variety of lenses for M- and LT-Mount you can find here: https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/leica-camera-lens-reviews/links-testberichte-reviews/testberichte-objektive-leica-lens-reviews-75mm-90mm

Best regards

 

[peterm1]

I have had the thin version for many years (since early to mid 1990's) and a year or two ago I had the chance to buy a "fat" tele elmarit at a good price and took it. (I now have both).

Optically I really have not noticed too many differences but I have to say I am not a discerning lens reviewer in the sense that I do not pixel peep. Pretty much any Leica glass, resolves better than I can make images - so why should I obsess.

I will say however that I prefer the feel of the "fat" version on the camera - its heavier and more "squat" and I prefer squat lenses to long skinny ones somehow. It just feels right in my hands. This is an extremely personal perspective though. I do find that both lenses seem prone to flaring though. Get the sun ahead of the lens just out of the image and you may experience this. Use a deep hood to help reduce it - you will not eliminate the risk entirely but I have to say its not such a big problem for most of my shooting.

By pure serendipity (i.e. coincidence) I was just a few moments ago reading an article linked below. The article is in Mandarin but if you view the page in Google Chrome browser it will give you the option to translate to English. (The resulting translation is a little quirky but its readable enough to make sense for the most part).

Under the paragraph headed "Slim Nine Comment" (I told you it was quirky) the author suggests the older lens has a reputation for fogging. I was unaware of this and mine does not seem fogged. I cannot comment on the rumour and others may know more about its veracity. In fact I too would like to know more.....I suspect fogging is more inclined to occur in damp climates where airborne moisture interacts with lubricant in the lens. This at least seems to be the occasional experience I have had buying lenses from Japan which seems to have a higher proportion of fogged lenses due, I believe, to its very humid warm summer climate.

https://i50mm.com/gear器材/徕卡tele-elmarit-m90-f2-8-瘦九/

 

[Doug]

I bought a new "fat" Tele-Elmarit ($196) in 1968 but have never used it a lot. That could be due to the small framelines in the M2 I got the year before, because I'm fond of 85mm on reflex cameras. It came with a metal reversible hood, pinch release, not threaded or bayonet. I don't see any haze or fogging in mine, while it is somewhat prone to flare as seen below.

Fat Tele-Elmarit at f/11 on M240 (second one at f/8)

 

[DwF]

I have had several versions of 90mm including a Pre-Asph Summicron. In addition to a couple "fat" teles, one of which is what I've held on to. I also had the 90mm Elmarit f2.8, the Thin-Tele and the 90mm Emarit M. My favorite is the Fat Tele.


Good luck, nice lens!
David

 

[Emile de Leon]

The thin is the tiny one..I like it a lot..always seems to perform well for me.

 

[peterm1]

I have a number of Tele Elmarit shots in my Flickr photostream. Here are a few - all with the fat version if my memory is correct. Most if not all have had some post processing so do not take them too literally as examples of the lenses worth but they give you an idea of sharpness, bokeh etc. (I have found these to be pretty good if have done my job properly).

A Scene from Chinatown by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Lunch Booth by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Cafe Study 42 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Déjeuner au Soleil by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I far prefer the construction of the 'fat' tele-elmarit. I shot decades of mountain landscape transparencies and had no complaints with the quality. Great weight and balance compared to the big 90 Summicrons

 

[DwF]

90mm Elmarit f2.8, Tele-Elmarit, fat, thin, Post 'em Here

Folks post threads looking for info about the various Leica 90mm f 2.8 lenses fairly regularly. While for many who shoot M rangefinders, the 90 is the far reach our kit, it is a versatile lens and hopefully the diversity of images that people post here will over time bear that out.




M10 90mm "fat" Tele-Elmarit
On the Nooksack River, Washington State

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

The fat version. M2 and Portra160

 

[peterm1]

Faces Along the Street by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Cafe Study 32 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Street Scene by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Chocolatier by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

 

[stausauser]

Sony A7 RII

 

[EarlJam]

M6 TTL, "thin" T-E, Tri-X

 

[MISH]

i have the fat version..... don't use it all that much but this picture is in the permanent collection of the Midwest Museum of American Art. Guess I should use it more

 

[DwF]

Sunrise in Skagit Valley, Washington

Sunrise in Skagit Valley, Washington

Cascades to the East

Snow Geese to the North

Olympic Mountains to the West

This wide-open valley is perfect for the 90 where extra reach is always welcome.

 

[Mudman]

90mm Elmarit f2.8, Tele-Elmarit, fat, thin, Post 'em Here

The original elmarit. F5.6? I think.

This shot is wide open irrc

 

[nickthetasmaniac]

Cathedral Mountain | Overland Track, Tasmania

M2, 90mm Tele Elmarit (fat) and Portra160