Opinion: CV 75, 90 lenses or Tele-elmarit?

[Todd.Hanz]

I have been entertaining the thought of getting a longer lens. I had a 90mm summicron a few years back and really liked it but that lens is freakin' huge!

I was leaning towards the tele-elmarit and have seen some nice photos taken with it but have also heard the horror stories of "etching" on the rear elements that occurs with some of them.

While searching the web, I keep running into comments on the excellent CV 90 and 75 Heliar lenses, everyone who has one seems to really like them, esp. the 75mm. I have an M4-P and it has the frame lines for 75mm and think it would be a good fit for my 28mm, 40mm lenses.

So, I was wondering if anyone here has any opinion on any of the above mentioned lenses, sample pics would be nice to see.

thanks,
Todd

 

[back alley]

i quite liked my cv 75 when i had one.

they are small, light, plenty sharp and easy to focus.
mine seemed well made and disappeared in a pocket or camera bag.
hard to go wrong and if you don't care for it, easy to sell.

but don't forget the canon 100/3.5 if speed is not an issue.
it shares many of the same attributes of the cv 75, of no frame lines for you i think.
joe

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I never heard of any problem with Elmarits, Todd... And the only objection I find to the CV long lenses is that they tend to be a bit on the slow side. An Elmarit, at f2.8, won't be that slow... and won't be as heavy as the 'cron you used to have. That particular 'cron is a defensive weapon as well as an excelent telephoto lens.

Bergen County camera has one for sale (a Tele-Elmarit, a bit slimmer) for $349. I had my eye on it a while ago and corresponded with Paul Brodek about it. Check it out and then let us know! 😀

 

[rover]

Todd, I had the 75 and some day will get another. It is a great lens, smooth, sharp, well constructed.

I sold it because I wanted something a 90 to go with the M3 framelines. I ended up with the CV 90, just as good as the CV 75 in all ways. I have not shot a lot with it (which is why I shouldn't re buy the 75) but I have been more than satisfied with it.

The TE is a very good lens too. Peter N loves his. There is a certain serial number, 2,900,000 I think, over which a lens should not suffer the etching problem. (confirm that serial number if interested)

 

[dcsang]

I haven't used mine much but my CV 90mm is small and handy. Even shooting wide open (at f3.5) I thought the bokeh was reasonable considering the price for the lens 🙂

I've considered the 75 but seeing as how I've already got the 90mm I can't see much more of a benefit for another "portrait" lens other than, maybe, it being a bit faster (f2.5 vs f3.5).

Cheers
Dave

 

[Nikon Bob]

Todd, I have a 90 fat tele elmarit that I like very much. I have read on the net the stories of etching but I believe that was for the thin version of the tele elmarit. The fat version is very compact and sharp. I think the CV may be a little more compact yet. This is the fat tele elmarit at F4 if it helps any.

Bob

 

[Fred]

I still have my 90 f3.5, quite frankly an absolute bargain in image terms. OK its' max aperture is 3.5 but thats only half a stop slower than the TE. It's also surprisingly good wide open and certainly very light.

A 75 would be good not only as a good (faster) lens in its own right but would work very well as part of a two lens setup (35, 75)

 

[Huck Finn]

Todd, I'm sorry that I don't have a scanner to post photos, so I hope others will. I'll just say that it is one very sharp lens. I like rangefinders for their compactness, & this lens fits the bill for me perfectly, although the hood makes it longer than the stated length & the lens cap only fits the hood, not the lens. so, you pretty much keep the hood on all the time. Still a compact lens for its focal length. I also use it with a 28/40/75 set-up.

When Pop Photo tested it, they measured it to be a little on the longish side for 75 mm - actually 77 mmm - which is a good thing for your long lens I would think. And it's a little on the slow side for a lens advertised as f/2.5 - actually f/2.7 - so it has no real advantage over a lens marked f/2.8.

Another lens worth considering is the superb M-Hexanon 90/2.8. It is based on an Ernostar design - the forerunner of the Sonnar - & as a result is more compact than most other 90 lenses including the Elmarit. There is currently one for sale at Adorama for $674 in demo condition & "in the box." You can find a review of this lens on www.davidde.com, which can be accessed through www.archive.org.

Happy hunting,
Huck

 

[Nick R.]

Todd,
Here's a link to some pic's I took recently with the CV90 on my M4-P: Photos

I find the lens is too large to walk around with comfortably but when you need it, it is quite sharp and effective.

 

[GeneW]

Of all the lenses I've had remorse about selling, the CV 90 ranks highest. That's why I just now bought another one from Peter! 😀

I've owned both the 75 and the 90 and the 75 is more compact and faster, but I like the 90 for its extra reach. Both are great performers.

Gene

 

[FPjohn]

Tele-Elmarit

Tele-Elmarit

Hello:

My Tele-Elmarit on a M6 seems one of those perfect combinations. The lens is crisp , compact and balances well. The only caveat IMHO is a hood is essential to avoid flare.

yours
Frank

 

[nksyoon]

I have a Tele-Elmarit as well, and it flares easily even if the sun isn't in the frame. This is with the original rubber hood. No etching problem.

I've since bought a 2nd hand current series Elmarit M as I couldn't stand the flare. If you're interested I can send you some pics of the lens.

 

[richard_l]

I have the skinny T-E. No problem with etching or flare. I use the metal 12575 hood. I've never known anyone to have that etching problem mentioned at the CameraQuest site. It's a beautiful lens. Good portrait lens wide open. Razor sharp by f/5.6. Smooth creamy OOF.

 

[djon]

Which is more capable of filling the frame with a man's head?

Does one even tighter, for face only?

How about the Canon 100 for that purpose?

(close focus/portrait question)

 

[richard_l]

Here are a couple T-E images. The rose was taken wide open at minimum focus. The background blur is natural (i.e., from the lens, not Gaussian blur in PS). The church was at about f/8.

http://pw2.netcom.com/~ridseard/rose_hr.jpg
http://pw2.netcom.com/~ridseard/church_hr.jpg

 

[nksyoon]

Here's a sample from the thin Tele Elmarit 90...sorry for the crappy scan. Shot at 2.8 or 4 on a Bessa R2. Not at closest focusing distance.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I have been entertaining the thought of getting a longer lens. I had a 90mm summicron a few years back and really liked it but that lens is freakin' huge!

I think you pretty much made your decision there. I would have said to get the 90 Elmarit-M, but it looks like you may be better off with the 90mm Tele-Elmarit. You'll get the same tones and "creaminess", although there's no beating the 'cron. The T-E is very light and compact; sometimes I am tempted by it, but I like the weight of the Elmarit-M; it aids to counter any excessive camera shake, and you have enough barrel to support and steady it with the cusp/side of your palm while taking the shot.

I wish I used it more often.

 

[Paul Connet]

I have the skinny T-E. No problem with etching or flare. I use the metal 12575 hood. I've never known anyone to have that etching problem mentioned at the CameraQuest site. It's a beautiful lens. Good portrait lens wide open. Razor sharp by f/5.6. Smooth creamy OOF.

I have one of the dreaded etched TE's. Paid a goodly sum for it used and was completely unaware of the etching problem till about a year ago when reading that it could be seen by shining a light thru it from the front. You have to see it to believe it. It looks horrible, but other than a propensity to flare easily with bright light coming to the lens from the front or side it takes nice pics. I still carry it in my M6 kit bag along with a 70's Summicron 50, which also flares easily in the same circumstances.

I feel badly that I was probably duped by the seller, and mad as hell at Leica for not issuing a re-call on these lenses. It is definitely a design or manufacturing flaw. But, as I mentioned, it is not noticeable on the usual 4x6 prints and I have not done any large blowups or comparison tests with other 90/100mm lenses.

My lens serial no. is on the high side of 2,940,xxx if anyone cares.

Regards, Paul C.

(P.S. if you want to buy it you will have to pay a premium as I'm sure the etching would be considered an extra cost enhancement by the folks at Leica)

 

[pab]

Here's some pics taken with the CV90 on a Bessa R3A

http://per-pics.smugmug.com/gallery/266247/1/10515718/Large

http://per-pics.smugmug.com/gallery/266247/1/40698903/Large

http://per-pics.smugmug.com/gallery/266247/1/40698882/Large

http://per-pics.smugmug.com/gallery/266247/2/40698894/Large

http://per-pics.smugmug.com/gallery/266247/2/40698905/Large

It's an outstanding lens for hiking- light, compact and well built.

I also have the 75 which is just as good but I tend to use that on my Epson R-D1 (equivalent to 110 mm on 35 mm). I find that 75 mm doesn't have quite enough reach on 35mm for landscapes but is excellent for candid portraits indoors- it's faster and easier to focus than the 90.

 

[pab]

I should also say both lens are very sharp and contrasty.