90mm f4 portraiture pics please

[dazedgonebye]

Hi all,
I'm deciding on an inexpensive (always) mid-telephoto lens. The 90mm f4 elmar lenses are attractive in size and price, but can they be used for decent portraiture?
I'd love to see some wide open shots for sharpness and dof. Portraits would be best, but anything at all would be instructive.

Thanks,

 

[jpbob100]

I'd like to see that myself. I recently got a 9cm elmar F4 that came with a FED 3b and some other stuff from eB*y. I haven't had the time to test it out on my new Bessa R yet though.🙁


Bob

 

[jkelly]

Here are a couple shots of my son I took with an Elmar f4/9cm coated LTM lens. I used my IIIa for these. They aren't the sharpest, because of my poor focusing skills, but they display a shallow DOF and are of the "portraiture" variety you seek.

 

[ZorkiKat]

The Elmar 9cm is probably one of the best lenses ever made for portraiture. It's light and compact. This lens is also one of the reasons (like the Elmar 5cm)
for Leica's success.

This lens is more than 'decent for portraiture'. It does superb work.

Enclosed is an old (not that old 🙂, dates from around 1994, but done in retro style) portrait shot with an Elmar 90mm. The lens used was the LTM version, attached through an adapter to a Leica M3.

 

[payasam]

You'll find that in the 35mm full frame format, "portrait" lenses range from 85mm to 105mm. The added length over a normal gives both greater magnification -- shallower depth of field -- and next to no distortion caused by perspective owing to the greater working distance. The 9cm Elmar was perhaps the earliest of the group. It is useful for other work also: and many good portraits have been taken with normal and even wide lenses. For a full face, it is just right.

 

[payasam]

Here's one with an Elmar, aperture forgotten. Subject distance makes it similar to the first picture of the young man, and the hexagonal out of focus highlights are the same if larger. The highlights in Roland's picture are more like pure circles.

Roland, how do we explain the vertical bands at the top of the first picture?

 

[Matthew Runkel]

Here are a few portraits from a coated LTM version (with proper hood). I'm pretty sure the first two were shot wide open. Film was Fuji Pro 400H @320. The third was likely wide open or f/5.6. Film was Kodak Portra 160NC @125.

I think it's a great portrait lens.

 

[dazedgonebye]

I think I'm looking for a little more dramatic drop off to the focus than what I'm seeing here. F4 may not be the way to go for me.
Perhaps f2, so I can shoot sharp at f2.8....

 

[payasam]

Roland, it was the peculiar regularity of the fence that was the problem. With an irregular, random background like trees or bushes, you'd have been all right. I think a different regular background like a brick wall would also have been OK.

I don't know if I agree that an aperture larger than f/4 is essential rather than just preferable. With careful choice of background and of two distances -- camera to subject and subject to background -- a wide open Elmar can work wonders. With a fast lens there is a tendency to rely only on shallow depth of field and ignore other considerations.

 

[cary]

If you are interested I have a silver, screw mount 90mm f4 Elmar for sale. Contact me if interested.

Cary Chin

 

[Ronald M]

ferider

You are getting streaks in the sky at high shutter speeds. The curtains need replacing if this is not a film processing error.

Been there with a 111f and 111c.