A More Compact 90mm

[Al Kaplan]

Those 85/2 Nikkors are Leica screw mount. You'll need an M adapter. Most people use the 90mm adapter. The 90mm frame line is "close enough". Should you run into a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor in Leica mount grab it. Both lenses were better than anything Leitz was making at the time. The 35mm f/1.8 Nikkor, though, wasn't quite up to the standards of the first version 35mm Summicron or the 35mm f/1.8 Canon.

 

[ampguy]

M-Hexanon 90/2.8

M-Hexanon 90/2.8

You can find them on ebay reasonably, or I have one in the classifieds.

The mid '70s TE's are nice and compact, and sometimes found for reasonable prices, but should be checked for haze and fungus.

I have the Ver I 90mm Summicron. Hefty large lens. Beautifully manufactured--just a chunk of metal and glass. But since I don't use the teles as much as I thought I would I'm thinking about replacing the 90 'cron for a more compact 90mm. Tell me about the affordable ones. How do they compare in build quality, size and sharpness to my DR 'cron? F4 is fine if that will make the lens more compact. I'd maybe consider the 85's by Nikon or Canon if they are sharp lenses, and again affordable and compact.

Thanx, as usual, for the help and suggestions.

 

[ampguy]

I do

I do

Best 90mm ever.

Nobody likes Hexanon 90mm? It's small and not so expensive. And I like the results...

 

[peter_n]

For <=$300 I think the 85/2.0 Nikkor in silver + adapter is your best bet. The black ones are more expensive.

 

[Quinn Porter]

I'm very happy with the 90/2.5 Summarit. It's an excellent compromise between size/weight and speed. They can be picked up used in excellent condition for about $850-900 which is reasonable for a modern Lecia lens.

 

[peter_n]

Someone mentioned affordable. Less than $500--close to $300.

Please note the OP is looking for a lens <=$300-500.

 

[sahe69]

one more vote for the 90/2.8 Hex.

If it needs to be more affordable than that, why not to consider an LTM Jupiter 9 w/ M-adapter?

Best 90mm ever.

 

[benkelley]

Look for a thin tele-elmarit. Lower contrast but still good quality-I think you'll be happy with the size & price. It's got a 39 filter, so you'll be able to get a nice metal hood cheaply from heavystar on ebay. Size/price wise it's great, though I don't know about the lanthar.

 

[Rob-F]

Look for a thin tele-elmarit. Lower contrast but still good quality-I think you'll be happy with the size & price. It's got a 39 filter, so you'll be able to get a nice metal hood cheaply from heavystar on ebay. Size/price wise it's great, though I don't know about the lanthar.

I'll second that, especially if you want a compact travel 90. I have the Tele-Elmarit; the original chrome Elmarit; and the 90 ASPH. On a trip, when I want to take a 90, the Tele-Elmarit goes, and the others usually stay home. I use the 12575 hood to control for contrast & flare.

The ASPH, on a direct comparison, is a little crisper at the wider apertures. Otherwise, unless photographing USAF resolution charts, it's pretty hard to tell the difference.

One of these days I'll swap the 90A-A for a 75 A-A. The latter, being lighter and more compact, would be more useful to me.

 

[HenningW]

I'll second that, especially if you want a compact travel 90. I have the Tele-Elmarit; the original chrome Elmarit; and the 90 ASPH. On a trip, when I want to take a 90, the Tele-Elmarit goes, and the others usually stay home. I use the 12575 hood to control for contrast & flare.

The ASPH, on a direct comparison, is a little crisper at the wider apertures. Otherwise, unless photographing USAF resolution charts, it's pretty hard to tell the difference.

One of these days I'll swap the 90A-A for a 75 A-A. The latter, being lighter and more compact, would be more useful to me.

I'll go along with that. I've had pretty much every version of Leica 90's except the 3 element Elmarit. I sold the AA because it just wasn't getting any use.

For my 90 needs, I now use the thin T-E. I have a good one with no haze and quite good performance overall, and it's almost a stop faster than the CV 90 or the early f/4. For sharp sharp photos I have the 75 AA and for really low light the 75 lux, and on the other side a couple of 135's.

But if I want to go light and versatile, I take the 90 T-E, the non-asph 35/2 and the 21/4 CV. A good spread and some speed, and the 90 end is certainly not let down by the T-E.

Henning