stefka
Newbie
Hi everybody. I´m interested in experienced information about the optical performance of the Elmar- C 4.0/90. Has any body compared this lens to today´s 90s in the field ? I´m looking for a
90 that delivers the kind of quality of my 2.0/35asph. or at least be close to that. My dream lens would be the Macro- Elmar 90, if only I could afford it... Is the Elmar-C an alternative ?
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
I have the Minolta version (though made by Leitz). All I can tell you is that it performs like a sharp 50mm. It's bokeh is good, from what I can tell.
It's a small but solid heavy and its construction is something you don't find in many modern lenses, except perhaps with the newer M-mounts.
It's a small but solid heavy and its construction is something you don't find in many modern lenses, except perhaps with the newer M-mounts.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I've had an Elmar-C for several years now, and have no complaints about image quality. OOF areas are rendered in a pleasing way. I don't think I can compare it to the images I've seen from the newer ASPH lenses, though - it has the traditional Leica feel. I rather like it.
Yes, I'd like another 90 'Cron for the two stop increase, but the Elmar-C gets the job done just fine!
Yes, I'd like another 90 'Cron for the two stop increase, but the Elmar-C gets the job done just fine!
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
Hi,
I've used the Elmar C for some time and it is a really good lens. It is better than the former elmarits but not as good as the current Elmarit.
If you want the best perfomance for your 90 go with the Elmarit or even better the new 90AA.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
I've used the Elmar C for some time and it is a really good lens. It is better than the former elmarits but not as good as the current Elmarit.
If you want the best perfomance for your 90 go with the Elmarit or even better the new 90AA.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
sleepyhead
Well-known
I would second Michiel's comment - the current Elmarit is probably the best balance of quality and portability. I have the Minolta version of the Elmar C and it is very sharp and contrasty and MUCH smaller and lighter than the current Elmarit, so if weight reduction is very important to you, I would seriously consider this lens over the current Elmarit.
The black version of the Elmarit weighs 410g, the Rokkor 270g.
The black version of the Elmarit weighs 410g, the Rokkor 270g.
Ben Z
Veteran
The Elmar-C has a differently shaped rangefinder coupling cam than M lenses. Leica said they won't focus right on M bodies, many people who use them say they see no problem, in fact a conspiracy theory has arisen that Leica said that to scare people off from buying the less expensive C lenses instead of real M lenses. Kind of like the Konica RF "back focus" intrigue. That wouldn't have stopped me from trying one of these out . What stopped me was that the Elmar-C has 39mm filter threads but with a coarser pitch than standard E39 filters, so the filters grab a couple of threads and bind. That's not so bad since they will stay on, but there's no secure way to attach any other hood but the rubber one that came with the lens, and many of them the rubber is deteriorated and cracked. There is no ridge for a Leica clip-on shade to grab.
OTOH the M-Rokkor with "Made by Leitz" on the front ring is the identical lens except it takes standard 40.5mm filters and shades. You can get a generic rubber shade for a few bucks. They are also priced cheaper because of the Minolta name, making them IMHO a much better buy for all but those who insist on the Leica name only. In fact, Minolta improved on the performance and added multi-coating to come up with the 90/4 for the CLE. It was made in Japan and doesn't say "Leitz", so this improved lens sells for the least of all three. It was also made after 1980 and so is quite a bit newer than the other two.
There is also the Konica M-Hexanon 90mm which is a modern 2.8 lens, and the Voitlander APO-Lanthar 3.5 which has a very good reputation. Both are fairly light and compact compared to the current Elmarit-M. I had one of those and sold it when I got a last-generation pre-APO Summicron, which is only slightly larger and has equal performance from 2.8 down. I kept my "fat" tele-elmarit as my compact lens. It weighs about 3.5 oz more than the "thin" t-e but doesn't suffer from the rear-element etching problem. If size is an issue and the speed and cost of a current Elmarit is not, another lens to consider is the current 90/4 collapsible. The macro eyes are horrificly expensive and of questionable framing accuracy but the lens itself focuses 23cm closer than the other 90s and is said to be a great performer.
All said and done, except at the widest 2-3 apertures there is almost no perceptible difference between any of the 90s including the last coated ones for LTM, so if you shoot it at 5.6 for general photography you can't really make a false step no matter which one you buy.
OTOH the M-Rokkor with "Made by Leitz" on the front ring is the identical lens except it takes standard 40.5mm filters and shades. You can get a generic rubber shade for a few bucks. They are also priced cheaper because of the Minolta name, making them IMHO a much better buy for all but those who insist on the Leica name only. In fact, Minolta improved on the performance and added multi-coating to come up with the 90/4 for the CLE. It was made in Japan and doesn't say "Leitz", so this improved lens sells for the least of all three. It was also made after 1980 and so is quite a bit newer than the other two.
There is also the Konica M-Hexanon 90mm which is a modern 2.8 lens, and the Voitlander APO-Lanthar 3.5 which has a very good reputation. Both are fairly light and compact compared to the current Elmarit-M. I had one of those and sold it when I got a last-generation pre-APO Summicron, which is only slightly larger and has equal performance from 2.8 down. I kept my "fat" tele-elmarit as my compact lens. It weighs about 3.5 oz more than the "thin" t-e but doesn't suffer from the rear-element etching problem. If size is an issue and the speed and cost of a current Elmarit is not, another lens to consider is the current 90/4 collapsible. The macro eyes are horrificly expensive and of questionable framing accuracy but the lens itself focuses 23cm closer than the other 90s and is said to be a great performer.
All said and done, except at the widest 2-3 apertures there is almost no perceptible difference between any of the 90s including the last coated ones for LTM, so if you shoot it at 5.6 for general photography you can't really make a false step no matter which one you buy.