90mm Lenses

W

waynec

Established
Local time
1:25 AM
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
104
Location
Georgia
View My Gallery
Unfortunetly i was not able to search this forum as theres a glich with the android software closing the search box when the keyboard pops up on my tablet?

Anyways, I'm shooting an M3 and am searching for a 90mm to shoot cloudscapes and landscapes. Something light and less then max $750 is desired. Any suggestions regardless of brand, even if needing a lens adapter?

Btw is there a magnifier that could be used for the smaller framelines? Thx
 
For "cloudscapes" and landscapes almost any modern 85-90mm lens will be good enough at f5.6. The cheapest option is Elmar C 90/4. If you want something flare resistant and very sharp, there is the Zeiss Tele Tessar 85/4. For searches use Google ans type "rangefinderforum" at the end.
 
Take your pick of the various 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit versions. At the apertures at which you'll be shooting they'll all be pin-sharp, and while the earlier versions are rather long, they're all reasonably light.
 
90mm Elmarit 2.8

90mm Elmarit 2.8

There are many versions of Leica 90 at f2.8. The 90 Elmarit 2.8 is my favorite after having used the others. They can be found in good shape for $350-500 Many samples of the lens will have some haze which reduces contrast but also may not be an issue. Cleaning is not expensive. I find this lens more usable wide-open (less flare prone is my experience) than the more common "fat" or "thin" Tele-Elmarit. And it is similar vintage to your camera!

David
 
I'll throw in the CV 90/3.5 LTM for sharp, high contrast images. Some vignetting wide open, so you'll need to stop down. IMHO, the best price-performance for 90mm lenses, i.e., value.
 
I'll mention a non-Leica lens that meets your cost requirement, although it is not light. I've used it before on the M3. It's the Nikkor 8.5cm 2.0, an older lens that is remarkably good. It will cost you about $300 to $400.

Here is an image shot with this lens on the M9:

original.jpg
 
for that price point you can find a nice "thin" tele-elmarit. Small, light and fast enough to even use when the light is not so great.

The bigger 90s will be better at 2.8, but they are really heavy. The TE is like 220 grams.

Now for about 900USD you might find a Summarit 90/2.5, which is not huge or heavy, and is a great, sharp, rich modern lens. That was Erwin Puts' walk about 90 for quite some time.

It's true the CV 90/3.5 is good, though not as good as the summarit (i have them both), it is better than the TE, though much slower. Very hard to find one though, but about 350USD when you do. Then you have to see how the calibration is. 🙂
 
The original Elmarit (not the Tele) is very fine and my favorite even after owning most of the other Leica 90's including the Apo Asph.

As mentioned the Thin version Tele Elmarit is very flare prone at wide apertures. Also I've never been knocked out with its sharpness st wide apertures.

The one that I own in addition to the V1 Elmarit is the Minolta version of the 90 Elmar designed for the CL / CLE. It's timy, light and extremely sharp with very good coating. Wide open resolution is excellent and flare controll and contrast are equally as good. Construction is superb. I bought my mint copy In the $250 range.

Some people suggest based on Leica comments that the CL lenses may not focus on M bodies correctly due to a steeper cam but in practical use I've never experienced this nor have I read anyone else has had that problem.

Leica made a version also. It's my understanding the Leica and 1st version Minolta are the same but the second version minolta is a different design. Unfortunately I can't confirm this.

The advantage of the Minolta is it takes common size filters wher the leica takes series 5.5 which are hard to find and expensive.
 
Take a look at the Konica M-Hexanon 90mm f2.8, it weighs about 330g
and I find it pretty good on my Leica MP.

Sure there are well known back-focus issues, but this hasn't been a factor for me at all. It might be more common with those who use digital M cameras.

I have no idea the prices now - but it would be useful not to rule out this len.
 
I've looked at the 90mm Minolta versions and it seems a majority have haze problems, and those that don't mention it I don't necessairly trust. I'm wondering what a cla would cost and where to go.
 
The list would be shorter if you asked what not to buy. Good 90`s abound.

I would avoid any except Leica and the CV 90 3.5. Not that they are bad, but you might run into coupling/focusing issues.

My personal favorite is 90 macro Elmar, but above your price. I will never sell my 90 2.8 Elmarit visoflex lens. Sumicrons nice , but heavy and no better.
 
x-ray said:
the Minolta version of the 90 Elmar designed for the CL / CLE. It's timy, light and extremely sharp with very good coating. Wide open resolution is excellent and flare controll and contrast are equally as good. Construction is superb. I bought my mint copy In the $250 range.

Some people suggest based on Leica comments that the CL lenses may not focus on M bodies correctly due to a steeper cam but in practical use I've never experienced this nor have I read anyone else has had that problem.

Leica made a version also. It's my understanding the Leica and 1st version Minolta are the same but the second version minolta is a different design. Unfortunately I can't confirm this.

The advantage of the Minolta is it takes common size filters wher the leica takes series 5.5 which are hard to find and expensive.
Click to expand...

I second this recommendation for the M-ROKKOR 90MM. Im a regular user of the CLE version. Works great on my M3, and I dont feel the need for a finder magnifier
 
It seems that you have many options for a good 90mm lens.
I use an old version Summicron and an Elmarit 90/2.8, Both are very sharp lenses.
I also use the sharp Nikkor 105/2.5 ltm. Have you tried one out?
The Canon 85/1.8 ltm is a great lens, I have been told. I tried one out once for a lens comparison project.
A cheap alternative is the Steinheil 85/2.8 ltm.
 
It all depends what weight you will tolerate, if you want something easy to carry and light on the camera, the list is not long. 700 or below, it's shorter yet.

In that category, the TE will be the most likely to arrive in calibration, but still needs to be checked for "white spots." No, it will not "knock your eyes out" at 2.8, but it's not bad as you stop down further.

The 90/2.8 Hex is gorgeous, but famous for bad calibration. I bought one once but sent it back for that reason. The M-Rokkor 90s are more likely to be well calibrated, and I think that's a good suggestion, but again, be prepared to exam the lens closely and return if needed.

If you don't mind a larger lens, the various Canon 85 LTMs are easy to find (except the 1.8 which is hard to find, but the best), good, but calibration is all over the place. Harder and more expensive to find a Nikkor in LTM.

A few weeks ago somebody had a 90/2.8 Elmarit-M for only 800USD in the ads here, unheard of, and that is the late version, not too light, not very short, but a great great lens, better than all the earlier 90s.
 
I like buying lenses so I own a few 90/85mm lenses that work on my Leica M cameras.

I know intellectually that my 90/2.8 and my 90/2 are excellent lenses. For the price, they should be.

But, in my heart my old Elmar 90/4 LTM lens is awesome. Oh, I know that if I take my magnifying glass and look into the corners, I'll see that it isn't as sharp as what I see when I look in the center. I also know this is true even when I stop down to about f/8. But I also know that is true about my Elmar 50/3.5.

But, for some strange reason I just love the photographs I get with that old lens. I realize that I have to pack around a tripod to use it but that doesn't bother me much. I guess that mine must just be one of those extra special copies you hear about once in awhile because the photos just look right.

Don't misunderstand me, I do use my other 90s. They do make great night time sports lenses.
 
The 2.8 TE was my 1st 90..bought new in 1989..and really should be my last..still looks brand new..
But I got a 90 F4 Elmar LTM for free a couple of years ago.....and it is a fun lens to use..but not as good color as the TE..but it needs a cla for sure..but it has great bokeh..
I think I'll get the 3 element someday..had a chance to get one back in the day for peanuts from Tamarkin..but didn't snap it up then..
Was looking for a nice 135 too recently..as I only have the Hector f4.5...
Just ordered a good condition 135 Elmar F4...its supposed to be pretty nice as well...and good in the closeup range too..
I'll find out this week how good it is when usps delivers the box...this Sat..definitely looking forward to this one..
There are so many beautiful Leica sleepers out there..and the older ones go soft wide open..which is exactly what I'm looking for..esp for video..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom