squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I have been searching for a really good, not-too-slow 90mm or thereabouts for more than a year. I believe I've gone through the 90mm uncoated Elmar (a good one, but slow), the Canon 100/2 and 85/1.9 (both excellent but huge and heavy), and another T-E that turned out to have rear element damage, which I returned. Then I almost bought a thin Elmarit at Adorama, but it had focusing problems.
Finally I got a good, a really good, Midland T-E on eBay and took it out today for a walk around the Cornell campus, on the M8. It is perfect. Amazingly light, comfortable, and incredibly, bitingly sharp--yet with really nice creamy out of focus areas. Colors render beautifully; all I needed was a bit of contrast adjustment on these. I even like the rubber hood that everybody seems to hate--I'm not sure why, it works great and is easy to extend and retract. Plus mine came in the original box--it was like buying it new, back in the day!
Thanks to everyone who recommended it.
Finally I got a good, a really good, Midland T-E on eBay and took it out today for a walk around the Cornell campus, on the M8. It is perfect. Amazingly light, comfortable, and incredibly, bitingly sharp--yet with really nice creamy out of focus areas. Colors render beautifully; all I needed was a bit of contrast adjustment on these. I even like the rubber hood that everybody seems to hate--I'm not sure why, it works great and is easy to extend and retract. Plus mine came in the original box--it was like buying it new, back in the day!
Thanks to everyone who recommended it.
Last edited:
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Looks like a winner for sure. Your making me want to try the 90mm focal length.
maggieo
More Deadly
I may have to bust my T-E out this afternoon! Congrats!
Oh, and yours has a rubber hood? Mine came with a metal one.
Oh, and yours has a rubber hood? Mine came with a metal one.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Yeah, apparently the standard hood was rubber? And it has a weird front cap that flares way out...I suppose it's intended to go along with the collapsed hood. Together they are rather odd looking.
ampguy
Veteran
nice photos John. I've been on the lookout for a clean used TE for years, but got spoiled once when I found a minty one (very clean glass, orange "90") for mid $300s, and before I left he offered it for high $200s, but I just didn't know if I needed it.
Anyways, now they are always double that or likely to need a cleaning, so I just haven't grabbed one yet. I wonder if I'd use it more than the 15 and 21s I have. I use the 21 a lot, but the 15 much less because of the need for putting the finder on.
Anyways, now they are always double that or likely to need a cleaning, so I just haven't grabbed one yet. I wonder if I'd use it more than the 15 and 21s I have. I use the 21 a lot, but the 15 much less because of the need for putting the finder on.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Is that the fat or thin version of the T-E?
Bob
Bob
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
maggieo
More Deadly
That looks like mine. So, yeah, thin. Here's mine with the metal hood mounted:
That is the Thin Tele-Elmarit. Very nice, Leitz's answer to the Steinheil Culminar.
fbf
Well-known
I have one that was made in germany. I haven't seen any difference from the canadian copies. It is a great lens
Richard G
Veteran
This is also a great advertisement for the M8. Thanks. The Leica 90s like this and the Elmarit M produce really lovely images.
peter_n
Veteran
Yes it's the "thin" one. A little soft wide open and susceptible to flare, so I would use the hood. If you fancy the metal hood the Leica product number is 12575. I got my hood with a 135/4 Tele-Elmar, as it happily fits both lenses.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I guess it's the thin one? It's this one, photo stolen from Admiral Rockwell.
Thanks, I have the fat version and there does not look to be a lot of difference between the two. I am happy enough with it not to go looking for another 90. I can see why you are happy with yours.
Bob