nikonosguy
Well-known
I'm looking for a good 90 for the m8....
Have thought about the following
If I get a 90 ltm, I can also use it on my iid ... However very squint for my old eyes.
The lenses I'm looking at in no particular order are as follows
90 elmar, black , uncoated
90 elmar collapsible
90 elmarit ( yeah, faster lens and close on the price point)
90 rokkor-m
85 nikkor 2.0 (even faster, but heavy)
85 canon 1.5 (pricey)
90 summicron (pricey and big)
Any other thoughts? Is there a must try lens? Would love a thrambar or mountain elmar, but those are way expensive
Have thought about the following
If I get a 90 ltm, I can also use it on my iid ... However very squint for my old eyes.
The lenses I'm looking at in no particular order are as follows
90 elmar, black , uncoated
90 elmar collapsible
90 elmarit ( yeah, faster lens and close on the price point)
90 rokkor-m
85 nikkor 2.0 (even faster, but heavy)
85 canon 1.5 (pricey)
90 summicron (pricey and big)
Any other thoughts? Is there a must try lens? Would love a thrambar or mountain elmar, but those are way expensive
85/1.8 Canon
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Konica M Hex 90/2.8. Excellent ergonomics, unbeatable price.
CV 90/3.5, sharp!
ZM 85/4 sharp, contrasty, big... only reason to get this would be to match other ZMs
My favorite: Contax G 90/2.8 conversion
CV 90/3.5, sharp!
ZM 85/4 sharp, contrasty, big... only reason to get this would be to match other ZMs
My favorite: Contax G 90/2.8 conversion
WJJ3
Well-known
M-ROKKOR for CLE, for it's size, price, performance, and size.
No good for your IId though...
No good for your IId though...
maddoc
... likes film again.
Hard to beat the 90/4 Elmar, given it`s size and performance. Not so well suited for low-light so ....
k__43
Registered Film User
I owned those three
Elmarit 90/2.8 (that long thing)
Elmar 90/4
Tele-Elmarit-M (well it was damaged, couldn't use it)
the first is the best bang for the buck but very long compared to the others. The Tele-Elmarit-M and the Elmar-C are same size almost. The Elmar C is one stop slower but much cheaper.
I don't know why I keep buying 90ies since I don't like the focal length longer than 50.
Elmarit 90/2.8 (that long thing)
Elmar 90/4
Tele-Elmarit-M (well it was damaged, couldn't use it)
the first is the best bang for the buck but very long compared to the others. The Tele-Elmarit-M and the Elmar-C are same size almost. The Elmar C is one stop slower but much cheaper.
I don't know why I keep buying 90ies since I don't like the focal length longer than 50.
pete hogan
Well-known
+1 on the Elmar 90/4 ltm. I got a nice 1952 lens from an RFf member for very reasonable cost, and I have been satisfied with the performance on a Barnack.
Robert Lai
Well-known
I've tried:
90 2.8 Elmarit M - first class lens, cost is about $1.5K
90 1.9 Canon in LTM - inexpensive, excellent lens in all chrome, but rather big and heavy. No tripod mount.
90 3.5 CV - small, slim, and sharp
90 f/4 Elmar in LTM - traditional uncoated optic. You can pick up one of these for around $100. It will probably need to have the haze cleaned out of it. Yet, it is sharp with lower contrast. Opened up it has just the right qualities that make it a superb portrait lens. This would be your bargain bet to try first before you commit more money into this focal length.
90 2.8 Elmarit M - first class lens, cost is about $1.5K
90 1.9 Canon in LTM - inexpensive, excellent lens in all chrome, but rather big and heavy. No tripod mount.
90 3.5 CV - small, slim, and sharp
90 f/4 Elmar in LTM - traditional uncoated optic. You can pick up one of these for around $100. It will probably need to have the haze cleaned out of it. Yet, it is sharp with lower contrast. Opened up it has just the right qualities that make it a superb portrait lens. This would be your bargain bet to try first before you commit more money into this focal length.
nikonosguy
Well-known
I'm seeing the elmarit in the 250-400 range -- elmar is 100-200, rokkor-m 90 is 200-300 --
so, it looks like i'm looking for an elmarit or a nikkor 85/2 or canon 85/1.5 -- hell, I'd love a crom, but not in the position to spend $800-2000 --- seems i could do as well with the nikkor 85/2
so, it looks like i'm looking for an elmarit or a nikkor 85/2 or canon 85/1.5 -- hell, I'd love a crom, but not in the position to spend $800-2000 --- seems i could do as well with the nikkor 85/2
nikonosguy
Well-known
yeah, ned ---- way out of my range --- although i did see some ltm summicrons that were nice --- could also use them on my iid
ferider
Veteran
Couple of notes:
I love short teles on RFs (M3 in particular), so I have tried a few ....
Currently I own 90/4 CLE Rokkor, 90/2.8 Tele Elmarit, 90/2 Summicron v3, 85/2 Nikkor, 105/2.5 Nikkor, 75/1.4 Summilux, Komura 80/1.8 and 75/2.5 Heliar. You can tell, they've been addictive to me ...
- I don't think you can use the collapsible Elmar on a digital Leica
- v1 and v2 Summicrons, and 85/1.5 Canon are huge and quite soft. I tried the early Summicrons and didn't really like them. Optically the Nikkor 85/2 is much better, and half the size to boot.
- the v3 (last pre-asph, E55) Summicron is small. It's also an Ernostar, in contrast to the earlier double Gauss lenses. This lens is really great for both landscapes and portraits. North of US 800, usually and M-mount only.
- the classic Elmarit is a great lens, a little on the long side and in M-mount around US 350. You can also have it in LTM mount, but that will cost you (north of US 500).
- I see you are using a Canon 28/3.5 and early Summicron. Don't forget the Canon 100/3.5, should be a good match (as well as the early LTM Elmar).
- The Nikkor 85/2 will also fit your other lenses. Nikon made them lighter over time and changed to black around serial 400x. My black one is very light, much lighter than the earlier chrome ones I tried.
- if you go for the M-mount Elmar or Rokkor, I recommend to get a late CLE Rokkor with its straight CAM. Contrasty and _very_ sharp.
- if you go for the 4 element ("thin") Tele Elmarit, get one with yellow 90 on the barrel (no problem with haze). If you decide to get the 5 element ("fat") Tele Elmarit, you will definitely need a hood (flares easily).
- the M-Hexanon 90/2.8 (also an Ernostar) is very good as well, but quite expensive these days. I don't own it anymore since I feel the v3 Summicron is similar or better at all f-stops, and the Tele Elmarit is half the size of the M-Hex.
- and lastly, since your camera crops, dont forget 75mm. The CV Heliar 75/2.5 is tiny and an outstanding lens !
BTW, since I got my Tele Elmarit recently, I don't need my Rokkor anymore, so you can make me an offer if you like.
Enjoy your new lens, whatever you pick !
Roland.
I love short teles on RFs (M3 in particular), so I have tried a few ....
Currently I own 90/4 CLE Rokkor, 90/2.8 Tele Elmarit, 90/2 Summicron v3, 85/2 Nikkor, 105/2.5 Nikkor, 75/1.4 Summilux, Komura 80/1.8 and 75/2.5 Heliar. You can tell, they've been addictive to me ...
- I don't think you can use the collapsible Elmar on a digital Leica
- v1 and v2 Summicrons, and 85/1.5 Canon are huge and quite soft. I tried the early Summicrons and didn't really like them. Optically the Nikkor 85/2 is much better, and half the size to boot.
- the v3 (last pre-asph, E55) Summicron is small. It's also an Ernostar, in contrast to the earlier double Gauss lenses. This lens is really great for both landscapes and portraits. North of US 800, usually and M-mount only.
- the classic Elmarit is a great lens, a little on the long side and in M-mount around US 350. You can also have it in LTM mount, but that will cost you (north of US 500).
- I see you are using a Canon 28/3.5 and early Summicron. Don't forget the Canon 100/3.5, should be a good match (as well as the early LTM Elmar).
- The Nikkor 85/2 will also fit your other lenses. Nikon made them lighter over time and changed to black around serial 400x. My black one is very light, much lighter than the earlier chrome ones I tried.
- if you go for the M-mount Elmar or Rokkor, I recommend to get a late CLE Rokkor with its straight CAM. Contrasty and _very_ sharp.
- if you go for the 4 element ("thin") Tele Elmarit, get one with yellow 90 on the barrel (no problem with haze). If you decide to get the 5 element ("fat") Tele Elmarit, you will definitely need a hood (flares easily).
- the M-Hexanon 90/2.8 (also an Ernostar) is very good as well, but quite expensive these days. I don't own it anymore since I feel the v3 Summicron is similar or better at all f-stops, and the Tele Elmarit is half the size of the M-Hex.
- and lastly, since your camera crops, dont forget 75mm. The CV Heliar 75/2.5 is tiny and an outstanding lens !
BTW, since I got my Tele Elmarit recently, I don't need my Rokkor anymore, so you can make me an offer if you like.
Enjoy your new lens, whatever you pick !
Roland.
ottluuk
the indecisive eternity
Of this list, I have the 9cm LTM Elmar (silver & coated, though) and Canon 85/1.5. This is basically what I recommend: get one cheap, small, sharp lens (9cm Elmar - NB! rigid versions are lighter, M-Rokkor/Elmar-C, Canon 100/3.5) for everyday carry and a big heavy fast one for when you need the speed.
My 1950's Elmar is reasonably sharp and contrasty but flares quite easily. It's light & tiny so there are few excuses for not taking it along, which is great. The 85/1.5 is a monster. I needed to lightly modify the lens release button on my M4 so it would mount properly. There's a thread about that somewhere here. The M4+85/1.5 combo weighs in at about 1.3kg so it's really practical for special occasions only. Some claim it's not that sharp but mine seems to have good deal of 'bite' from f/2 down. It's easy to miss focus at f/1.5 but when you hit, it's beautiful. A poor man's substitute for the 75mm Summilux, I'd like to think
.
TennesseJones
Well-known
Like the Hexanon 2.8 a lot.
Never wild about the tele-elmarit, but it is small. Sold it for the Hex.
Never wild about the tele-elmarit, but it is small. Sold it for the Hex.
Mudman
Well-known
I have to question the fellow that said the v1 summicron is soft; my copy is the sharpest lens I own. Of course, YMMV with a lens that is used and abused. Mine was CLA by Sherry before I bought it.
ferider
Veteran
Which f-stop, center vs. field, what distance, what film/medium ? YMMV
I had two copies, both were clean and well collimated, one came back fresh from DAG before I used it. Just to make sure we are talking about the same lens: removable head, tripod socket, pull-out hood, E48.
They were softer and lower contrast (center, wide open, at closer distances and at infinity), when compared to - say - the Nikkor 85/2 as a contemporary lens, on a low ISO film such as Rollei Retro 100.
You might want to try a good Nikkor to have an even "sharper" lens
Roland (the fellow that said)
Mcary
Well-known
Bought the black version of the Nikkor P 8.5cm F2 a little over a month ago for use on my M8 and really like how it renders. I really don't find it that big/heavy being as its 15.2 oz with hood vs my 28mm Elmarit with hood which weights 12 ozs.
MCTuomey
Veteran
What Roland said re the 75 FL. My fav short tele on my M8 was the 75AA, followed by the CV 75/2.5. The latter is so much lens for the money ... in a small package. Beautiful bokeh, sharp and gentle at the same time.
Otherwise, if it has to be a 90, my vote goes to the Elmarit-M or the Cron v3 (the AA is very good but very expensive). I prefer the Elmarit-M to the Hex 90 because, though they image similarly, the Hex flares more easily.
Because you haven't tried a 75?
Otherwise, if it has to be a 90, my vote goes to the Elmarit-M or the Cron v3 (the AA is very good but very expensive). I prefer the Elmarit-M to the Hex 90 because, though they image similarly, the Hex flares more easily.
Because you haven't tried a 75?
Mudman
Well-known
Which f-stop, center vs. field, what distance, what film/medium ? YMMV
I had two copies, both were clean and well collimated, one came back fresh from DAG before I used it. Just to make sure we are talking about the same lens: removable head, tripod socket, pull-out hood, E48.
They were softer and lower contrast (center, wide open, at closer distances and at infinity), when compared to - say - the Nikkor 85/2 as a contemporary lens, on a low ISO film such as Rollei Retro 100.
You might want to try a good Nikkor to have an even "sharper" lens
Roland (the fellow that said)
Hi Roland,
Film and Digital (m3, M6 ttl .85, M8) Yes same lens.
Mine is super sharp wide open or stopped down at any distance. I find it to be a difficult lens to focus wide open on the M8, but great on the M3 and the M6 .85. When focus is achieved on the M8 though, it looks great. Contrast isn't super low (my collapsible summicron is much lower) but I'd agree it's mid to low contrast which I like. That allows me to control it in post. Easier to add contrast than to take it away.
Digital (wide open)
Film (wide open)
ferider
Veteran
Very nice and smooth, MM, thanks for sharing.
have to admit I like the over-corrected Sonnar look with harsher background rendering, so I'm probably biased towards higher contrast when I test.
Roland.
rybolt
Well-known
Has anyone shot anything with this version? I just picked it up and haven't had time to try it.
