KEH- "Ugly" 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit (Canada). Any info?

[spicoli]

Forum,

I needed an inexpensive 90mm for a pending trip, and based on the feedback with the current KEH thread, went with them and bought the lens mentioned in the title. $215 shipped.

Now Ive queried the history and looked online, only I cant seem to find a lot of info about this lens. And whats a "fat" version and whats a "skinny"?

Hey, I needed a cheap 90mm. And while I understand its a good lens, what does all that T-E fat vs skinny mean? These questions are from a guy who shoots Ilford XP2 exclusively, has Sams Club do the developing (I have a certain person who I only use) and has the same person print me the occasional 16x24. So Im not a lens measurabator (I think thats the term), I only want to know what to expect from this lens, or how my money may have been better spent-

Scott

 

[martyryan]

Go to Cameraquest website and the classic camera profiles to find out about differences in the various lens. If the glass is good you will like the lens.

 

[ferider]

Here is a good summary, too:

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

The second one is the "fat" version, the third, the "thin" version. All good lenses.

Roland.

 

[DwF]

They are all really good lenses. The 2.8 Elmarit is purported to be better than the fat and maybe the thin as well, but it is a considerably larger lens. The fat tele does tend to flare wide-open. I had one and it did, even with hood attached but not horribly.

I once did a comparison of the fat tele and the Elmarit M (current version) shooting slides at f 2.8-f4. The Elmarit M exhibited higher contrast. No surprise there. I don't have a 90 now but will get one again and would be happy with any of these three.

At 215.00 you can't go wrong with the 90 2.8 Elmarit!

 

[FPjohn]

Note that the Tele-Elmarit is distinct from the 90 elmarit. The design of the Tele-Elmarit changed in 1974 from 5 to 4 elements with a reduction in weight. This is the "thin" version. 'Great lens but with a tendency to flare. The deep hood is a must.
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=16062
yours
FPJ

 

[corazon]

hey could you do us (the world at large and *I*) a favour and tell us the true condition of that lens once you get it. I missed a really good deal on a TE and am considering picking up one of KEH's UG's if the rating extends more cosmetically than optically.

If you find haze or any of that gooky stuff, I'll steer clear, but if not, it's not such a bad deal.

 

[spicoli]

Im returning it

Im returning it

When I bought this lens, I mistook the condition. I thought I was clicking on the "bgn" (bargain), but got the ugly one instead. Ugly ones have lens issues, and this one is hazy. Bargain ones have issues too, but none effecting the quality of the glass or later image. Thats what I thought I was buying, but its my fault for not being more careful. The lens is as advertised Ill give them that.

Scott