Leica R 100/4 macro: what do i need to know?

[rbelyell]

i want to buy this R mount slr lens for normal use with a 4/3 mount camera i just bought (not m4/3). there seem to be many iterations (2 cam, 3 cam, 4 cam, ROM etc), some say they need bellows or some other attachment, others dont, some are expensive, some a few hundred dollars. ive been around cameras for many years, but i find this particular situation extremely confusing. can anyone help me sort it all out?

thanks,
tony

 

[Dralowid]

I am no expert but there are three versions:

11230 which was for use with bellows on SL and SL2 'Macro Elmar'
11270 which was for use with bellows an R cameras 'Macro Elmar'
11232 which was for use either by itself or with it's extension ring. 'Macro Elmar-R'

The cams do not matter if you are using it on a digital camera and you don't need the rom.

The point being that as I understand it 11230 and 11270 need bellows to work. They have no focussing mount.

11232 goes from infinity to 1:3 when attached directly to the camera and right up to 1:1.6 with its extension ring 14262. If you want a general purpose lens capable of close focus this is the one you want.

I use the 60mm f2.8 Macro Elmarit-R which is excellent

 

[rbelyell]

thank you michael, thats really helpful. i assume the 60mm doesnt have these other weird variations and issues? its more of a 'straight up' normal everyday lens?

 

[Dralowid]

I wouldn't describe them as weird variations or issues. 11230 and 11270 are truly excellent lenses designed for a specific use with a specific mount and 11232 was designed as an all purpose lens with a good close up ability.

The various versions of the 60mm 2.8 all have focussing mounts and therefore can be described as all purpose. 11205/11212 for L'flex, SL/SL2 and R. 11253 R only. 11347 ROM.

Search the net and you'll find descriptions of Leicaflex and R mount development but for your 4/3 camera it is, I think, irrelevant if you get the right adapter. 11205 ought to be the cheapest and often comes with the extension tube/ring. I think they are optically very similar.

 

[rbelyell]

thanks again.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

May I ask the obvious question?

That is; why not an Olympus Macro lens? They make/made some excellent ones in the "FourThirds" mount. I've the 50mm f/2 version and rate it as excellent...

Regards, David

 

[rbelyell]

sure david, its not that i want a macro lens in particular, though thats a nice bonus. its that i want a 100mm (200mm equiv) lens to complement the 14-50/2.8 (28-100mm equiv) leica kit lens. there arent any such 4/3 primes, and that mount doesnt accept many third party mounts. it does accept leica R mount, and it just happens ive for some reason been interested in this lens for a while. i think itd be a great telephoto and outdoor portrait lens.

 

[mfogiel]

Keep it in mind, that this is not the sharpest Leica lens, particularly at infinity. For that you would be better off with one of the M or R mount 90mm Elmarits, or even the cheap C Elmar 90/4 M, which will cost you less than the 100/4, will be much smaller, lighter and sharper at infinity.

 

[rbelyell]

thats great information, thanks. i have the elmar c and think it is incredibly underrated. but m mount lenses cannot be mounted on 4/3 cameras, which are essentially slr's with some kind of altered mirror. i will look into the R 90s as you suggest, because i may well want to use the lens at infinity. are there different models of this lens also?

 

[mfogiel]

There are 2 versions of Elmarit r 90 - both made by Mandler. I have the v1 and I like it. Those who compared extensively versions 1 and 2 of Mandler's R lenses claim, that versions 2 were typically sharper, but with worse bokeh. Given that you will use this lens on a cropped camera there won't be much difference between the two versions, so look for better condition and price.

 

[Dralowid]

I don't know the 100mm but I'd argue that the 60mm is excellent when it comes to sharpness.