Elmarit 28/2.8 - Versions, prices and performance

I haven't had any hands-on experience with the pre-Asph. versions of the 28 Elmarit; I've only owned the Elmarit-M 1:2.8/28 Asph. I adore that lens. The punch that lens delivers surely is second to none.

This lens has been criticized for delivering too much contrast and for having bad bokeh. In beg to differ with both criticisms. This was shot under full sunlight on 1) APX100 (Rodinal 1+50) and 2) HP5+ (Rodinal 1+50, apparantly the worst combination!) using Sunny 16 (i.e., not underexposed to control highlights). All desirable detail is present in the negatives. Nothing has been lost to excessive contrast:

3249600822_53ed589eef.jpg


3159086644_c020f10841.jpg


As for bokeh, nothing is wanting, as this image shows. The 28 Elmarit Asph.’s bokeh is smooth and pleasing:

3076950854_6ff91057c1.jpg
 
rbrooks said:
http://www.danielvalentephotography.com/post/323367207/leica-28mm-elmarit-f-2-8-m-lens-review

This guy has done a review of the version 3
I have one of the f1.9 Ultrons and I really liked it. But since I've bought a version 3 Elmarit and will probably end up selling the Ultron. The Elmarit will match the style of all my other pre-asph lenses better. It's off at Leica for coding now so more I cannot say.
Click to expand...

That review showed samples of photos with a huge amount of vignetting. I'd probably pass on the version 3 Elmarit but for one caveat; he was using an M8 and self coding the lens. Really, it is hard, therefore, to determine how much vignetting this lens really has.
 
Vignetting in the Elmarit 3rd version? Either I'm blind, or never saw it because it got caught in the slide frames.

BTW, I own one copy of the third version... I like it enough to keep it. In fact, it's parked on one of my M6TTL bodies. It's a very good lens, sharp throughout wide open, and the size is just right. The only problem is that the hood intrudes in the viewfinder, but then, there's always the 12536 hood with a cutout that reduces the blocking.

I have some images with this lens in my flicker albums, but I can offer this one here:

On Scala ISO 200, Berlin Reichstag dome.

attachment.php


On Agfa APX ISO 400, the water below a bridge off Postdammerstrasse

attachment.php


Another Agfa APX shot

attachment.php


Sorry about the small size. Proud about owning this lens. Cheers!
 

Attachments

  • GER-08-Reichstag-Dome-Nite.jpg
    GER-08-Reichstag-Dome-Nite.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 0
  • GER-08-Berlin-Potsdammerstr.jpg
    GER-08-Berlin-Potsdammerstr.jpg
    41.5 KB · Views: 0
  • GER-08-Haeckische-Hoeffe-Str.jpg
    GER-08-Haeckische-Hoeffe-Str.jpg
    29.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
martin s said:
Did it meet yours? Really?

martin
Click to expand...

The 28 Elmarit-M is what it is, a reworked design put out so the M5 would have a wide angle option. It has less than remarkable performance. For a family snapshot I can certainly enjoy the images made with this lens, it is on my M5 nearly all the time when there is Kodachrome loaded in it. While the 70s coatings give wonderful color with Kodachrome, this rendition has much less appeal on the M8, and for negatives that I'd want to print at 16x20" I would never consider the 28/2.8 V2. Does this mean that the lens is useless? That any image made with it should not be seen? I'm confused by your thinking that an image that shows a lens in a less than flattering light should not be posted into a thread where the OP specifically asked about the many versions of this lens.

For high quality digital image-making I don't think the Elmarit V2 is a very good choice, nor do I think the V4 is a good match with the other lenses I use regularly (the 75 & 35 Summicron ASPH, the 24/2.8 ASPH and the 50/1.4 ASPH). This is simply my opinion, but I have come to it after trying three of the five versions of the Elmarit 28. In the end I've kept the V2 for its signature, warts and all, because I really do like the nostalgic look it lends to Kodachrome slides, and the 28mm FOV is the one I find fits my eye the best.

The V2 can look like a great deal, but if Makten is considering it for the M8 I would suggest he avoid it.
 
I'm sorry, I got something wrong I think. I assumed the picture was taken by the v4 and just highly compressed, thus misrepresenting the lens. If it was the v2 and that lens simply isn't all that sharp it's obviously useful to have this image up here.

martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom