fotomeow
name under my name
I have the 9cm/f4 1950s 3 element design. I compared it side-by-side to my Summi 90/2 preAsph. Of course the latter was sharper, and it had nice contrast and color saturation. The Elmar, however, had less saturation, less sharpness, and less contrast.
For color, Summi is the winner. However, for B&W, on a sunny day, the Elmar was the one I preferred. Because of the lower contrast, it was able to give more detail in shadows and more detail in the upper zone highlights. Certainly an oft overlooked lens, especially for B&W.
For color, Summi is the winner. However, for B&W, on a sunny day, the Elmar was the one I preferred. Because of the lower contrast, it was able to give more detail in shadows and more detail in the upper zone highlights. Certainly an oft overlooked lens, especially for B&W.
DanBachmann
Newbie
While this is an old thread, it was the best I could find on the Internet about a 3rd party lens hood for the 9cm Elmar. I went to JackTheHat and found he now has a special hood and cap just for this lens!
http://www.jackthehat.co.uk/lens-hood-leitz-elmar-p-492.html
I've placed an order - it should arrive with in a week.
My Elmar is from 1935, thus pre-war/uncoated. I've just done a few wide open comparisons vs the CV Lanthar 90mm using an M9 and the Canon 85mm f/1.8 @ f/4 with a Canon 5D. The results are what you'd expect. The CV Lanthar wins on sharpness, the Canon is not far behind in sharpness and the old Elmar wins on bokeh due to the contrast which is very low.
http://www.jackthehat.co.uk/lens-hood-leitz-elmar-p-492.html
I've placed an order - it should arrive with in a week.
My Elmar is from 1935, thus pre-war/uncoated. I've just done a few wide open comparisons vs the CV Lanthar 90mm using an M9 and the Canon 85mm f/1.8 @ f/4 with a Canon 5D. The results are what you'd expect. The CV Lanthar wins on sharpness, the Canon is not far behind in sharpness and the old Elmar wins on bokeh due to the contrast which is very low.
Photo_Smith
Well-known
It's a great lens, under rated IMHO ƒ5,6-8 is as sharp as you could wish.
M4-p 90mm Elmar
You can count the bricks in the building behind, and see the writing on the beer can. I have printed this shot to 12x16 and it's sharp...
M4-p 90mm Elmar
You can count the bricks in the building behind, and see the writing on the beer can. I have printed this shot to 12x16 and it's sharp...
l.mar
Well-known
I've got a silver and black one from 1950, and it's a great lens --- an often overlooked treasure, as previously mentioned. Here's a close-up shot taken with the 90mm Elmar and an M3 (Tri-X in D-76) --- very nice o.o.f. rendition.
traveler_101
American abroad
I want one. I suppose coated is better than uncoated?
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
Edit: I just realised how ancient this thread is 
but I'll leave the below just in case it is of assistance.
As for size comparison, here are two images I made once fwiw. Left to right:
135/3.5 Canon (uncertain year)
Summitar coated 10-blade (1950)
9cm Elmar painted (1934)
8,5cm f2 Nikkor-P.C (uncertain year)
50 Summilux Asph
90 Elmarit-M
35 Summilux 35 Asph II
50 f1.4 Canon EF
but I'll leave the below just in case it is of assistance. As for size comparison, here are two images I made once fwiw. Left to right:
135/3.5 Canon (uncertain year)
Summitar coated 10-blade (1950)
9cm Elmar painted (1934)
8,5cm f2 Nikkor-P.C (uncertain year)
50 Summilux Asph
90 Elmarit-M
35 Summilux 35 Asph II
50 f1.4 Canon EF
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃı&
You can find them for very little almost everywhere. I am very pleased with my 1934 uncoated. For me as a film user it is a perfect daytime photography travel lens. Here's an example, warm classic rendering:
traveler_101
American abroad
Edit: I just realised how ancient this thread is
Thanks for taking the time. Actually, DanBachmann should get the credit for reviving the thread 2 days ago.
The Elmar 9cm is a pretty large lens, it seems. I think I might use it on my Bessa T which is a much larger camera than the IIIf. Anyone try using it on a III? Does it make holding the camera somewhat more difficult?
Red Robin
It Is What It Is
Len use
Len use
My 9cm/4 sees service on a Canon P and sometimes a Bessa R. My copy hails from 1938/9 era it's a bit front heavy to leave on so I let it take turns with a Jupiter 12 and a CZJ 5cm 1.5 .
Len use
My 9cm/4 sees service on a Canon P and sometimes a Bessa R. My copy hails from 1938/9 era it's a bit front heavy to leave on so I let it take turns with a Jupiter 12 and a CZJ 5cm 1.5 .
ottluuk
the indecisive eternity
Well, the LTM version looks downright small on an M body so it's all relative. It is quite long, but very thin. Mine is coated, from 1953, IIRC. The lens is a bit mushy wide open (good for portraits, I guess) but becomes sharp from f/5.6 and seems to improve somewhat all the way to f/11. OOF rendering is excellent, especially in combination with good center sharpness at the middle apertures. Contrast is good - it's only a 4-element lens after all.
The biggest problem with the 9cm Elmar seems to be its annoying tendency to flare. It's kind of unpredictable mix of heavy veiling and light blobs. Stopping down doesn't help much. Part of it is definitely because I don't have a decent hood for it - I should remedy that soon.
Due to cheap price, excellent pocketability and nice, if vintage, look - highly recommended!
The biggest problem with the 9cm Elmar seems to be its annoying tendency to flare. It's kind of unpredictable mix of heavy veiling and light blobs. Stopping down doesn't help much. Part of it is definitely because I don't have a decent hood for it - I should remedy that soon.
Due to cheap price, excellent pocketability and nice, if vintage, look - highly recommended!