Elmarit and Tele-Elmarit

[thawkins]

KEH has for sale 90mm F2.8 Elmarit lens and 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit. What is the difference between Elmarit and Tele-elmarit and Elmar and Tele-Elmar? Also what is the proper pronunciation of Elmarit? Eagerly awaiting responses.

Tom

 

[ferider]

Pronounciation is L-Mah-Ryt.

These are the versions, AFAIK:

1 - Elmarit v1, E39, removable lens barrel
2 - "Fat" Tele Elmarit, E39
3 - "Thin" Tele Elmarit, E39, removable lens barrel
4 - New Elmarit, E46

4 is arguably one of the best RF teles ever built, but quite expensive.
1-3 are all very good, where 3 is the most compact one. If you buy 3,
make sure that you get a recent one, with the yellow 90 on the focus barrel.

Here are more details:

http://www.leicagallery.com/elmarit90mm.htm

Roland.

 

[sebastel]

i own a thin tele-elmarit (canada, without the 90)... but the barrel cannot separate from the lens group.

when i bought it, it was quite unexpensive. decent quality, very compact. i like it.

cheers,
sebastian

 

[Austerby]

i own a thin tele-elmarit (canada, without the 90)... but the barrel cannot separate from the lens group.

when i bought it, it was quite unexpensive. decent quality, very compact. i like it.

Me too - actually the least expensive Leica lens I bought, though I did treat it to a professional clean and service. It's a lovely lens and the compact size makes it invaluable despite looking a little incongruous when fitted to an M...

 

[pfoto]

Me three and no the front of the lens does not disassemble. The "thin" TE is a great little lens. Perfect for travel.

 

[35mmdelux]

While all have their strengths I prefer the 90 Elmarit-M latest. It comes closest to the quality produced by the 90 Cron ASPH but far less expensive. I have owned two Elmarit-Ms, two Tele-elmarits and a Rokker 90 as well. The teles and the Rokker are compact and great for travel. The Elmarits are a bit heavier and deliver a crispier rendition of the image.
The Leica 90s are interesting because they are not as expensive as other Leica stalwarts but are great lenses if used! I was lucky to buy one here on RFF, a truly mint chrome copy, with the box and the whole shebang leather case included. The only caveat here is that one has to live with the f/2.8 speed. If you can do this, then you have a killer lens.

 

[35mmdelux]

pronounced: El-mar-it.

EL -- as in El Dorado

Mar -- as in marvelous

it -- as in, well you know.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I have a 90 fat tele elmarit, my only 90 M mount, and see no reason to get a different one. Works just great as a travel lens for me where size a weight are my priorities, and the image quality is more than enough for what I do.

Bob

 

[Doug]

I too have only a fat TE for the M mount, and like Nikon Bob said, mine has been entirely satisfactory. I bought it new at a camera store in downtown Seattle 40 years plus two months ago, $196 retail. About 2 weeks take-home pay at the time, as a new Boeing employee. I admit I haven't used it much, as the focal length is long for my purposes. So I seldom carry it around; I did take it on a European trip 7 years ago and only used it once.

I admit to a 90mm Sonnar-G also, which is at least as good optically, and easier to use because of the Contax G camera's zooming viewfinder. But the Sonnar too mostly sits on the shelf.

 

[awilder]

From a performance standpoint, the first three 90/2.8's perform similarly although they each have advantages depending on your needs. Sherry Krauter prefers the original 90 Elmarit as it's imaging has the classic Leitz signature.