thomasw_
Well-known
Roland:
Are you planning to buy one of these ZM 85/2s to use on the extended base length of a M3? Do you do a lot of portrait shots, e.g., of your pets and people, etc?
Thomas
Are you planning to buy one of these ZM 85/2s to use on the extended base length of a M3? Do you do a lot of portrait shots, e.g., of your pets and people, etc?
Thomas
ferider
Veteran
thomasw_ said:
I'm fascinated by the M3 with short teles, Thomas. Whether the new
Sonnar is in the budget will require some negotiations at home ....
Roland.
thomasw_
Well-known
"negotiations." ah, i understand this.
Leicabug
Established
mfogiel said:
harmsr
M5 Nut
I'm just about to go read Sean's review now.
In my own shots from various 90 mm lenses, I decided on the current 90 / 2.8 Elmarit. I had the opportunity to shoot all three of Leica's current 90s and decided that the Elmarit is what worked for me.
The macro when extended is just not any real size savings compared to the Elmarit, and you also have to carry an add-on hood. The macro was also a little too contrasty for my tastes and limited by the f 4.0 aperture. Macro work really belongs on an SLR.
The 90 APO Summicron was too large and slower to snap into focus than the Elmarit, due to its different gearing on focus. The difference between a 2.0 and 2.8 in a 90 mm focal length was not a big deal to me, as the 2.0 DOF was just too narrow for my normal use.
The Elmarit is great handling and size. It was the easier of the group for me to focus and it has a very nice way of rendering that is very sharp, but with a great blend of contrast and transitions.
Just my $.02, but I really like the Elmarit.
Best,
Ray
In my own shots from various 90 mm lenses, I decided on the current 90 / 2.8 Elmarit. I had the opportunity to shoot all three of Leica's current 90s and decided that the Elmarit is what worked for me.
The macro when extended is just not any real size savings compared to the Elmarit, and you also have to carry an add-on hood. The macro was also a little too contrasty for my tastes and limited by the f 4.0 aperture. Macro work really belongs on an SLR.
The 90 APO Summicron was too large and slower to snap into focus than the Elmarit, due to its different gearing on focus. The difference between a 2.0 and 2.8 in a 90 mm focal length was not a big deal to me, as the 2.0 DOF was just too narrow for my normal use.
The Elmarit is great handling and size. It was the easier of the group for me to focus and it has a very nice way of rendering that is very sharp, but with a great blend of contrast and transitions.
Just my $.02, but I really like the Elmarit.
Best,
Ray
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
One area in which I'd suggest treading cautiously is Sean's endorsement of the old, gigantic, 90mm f/2 Summicron, the one with the built-in tripod socket. This is the only non-current lens he tests in the review, presumably because one of his sources made it available.
I had one of these and found it almost useless because when photographing bright objects against dark backgrounds, it produced a very pronounced double image of the highlight. Sean's subjective test scenarios don't include a situation that would provoke this, and maybe your photography doesn't, either, but beware if it does.
I eventually ditched my old-style Summicron in favor of an LTM 105/2.5 Nikkor, which was dramatically better in every way, and later replaced that with a 100/2 Canon, which delivers both quality and speed. But I guess none of those were available to Sean as loaners...
I had one of these and found it almost useless because when photographing bright objects against dark backgrounds, it produced a very pronounced double image of the highlight. Sean's subjective test scenarios don't include a situation that would provoke this, and maybe your photography doesn't, either, but beware if it does.
I eventually ditched my old-style Summicron in favor of an LTM 105/2.5 Nikkor, which was dramatically better in every way, and later replaced that with a 100/2 Canon, which delivers both quality and speed. But I guess none of those were available to Sean as loaners...
Gary Sandhu
Well-known
I have a 90 APO and Elmarit. I just listed my Elmarit but it didn't sell for the reserve, only going up to $500 USD. The only difference I note shooting hand held with both lenses is that the APO has an extra stop! I think I'd have to use my tripod to get at the extra quality of the APO. Can the M8 (which I have) even resolve the difference between the two? When I have time I guess I'll have to spend an afternoon testing the two on the M8 and with Velvia.
trittium
Well-known
I alway test MY lenses. You never know the diffences that may occure.
Ara Ghajanian
Established
ferider said:
Wow, his model is hot!
retow
Well-known
Ara Ghajanian said:
Puts always seems to get the hot models. Maybe we should start writing about Leica gear.......
FanMan
Established
Ara Ghajanian said:
and more pretty than the brick wall you see, when scrolling down further
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I'd be sceptical if I had an expensive lemon, too; how crappy is that!mfogiel said:
I'm often skeptical of lens tests; they often reveal sample variations and one alone is not sufficient to make a good value judgement; putting different people's lens tests together then the art of comparison begins.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
I dont get alot from Sean tests purely because he only shoots with the 2 Digital rangefinders that both have crop facters. If your a film user you really should look further afield for someone who has tested them full frame.
jtm
not a moose
thomasw_ said:
Roland already has that lovely black Nikkor. Why would he need a monstrous new ZM lens?
back alley
IMAGES
Palaeoboy said:
this is my complaint/concern as well.
each lens review comes with a mini m8 review as well.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
My chrome 90mm Elmarit-M latest is very consistent with my 50mm/1.4 Zeiss Planar. I’d call them spectacular based on my own testing of clarity, sharpness (yes), and bokeh.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Palaeoboy said:
I'd have to agree with your premise because as you well know crop factors only use the sweet part of the lens no matter what aperture setting. Its like saying the woman is very beautiful judged only by her eyes. Caution advised;-)
x-ray
Veteran
I don't know how Puts can evaluatye anything from the extremely poor scans he posted. Over sharpened to the point of artifactacts and double lines on the edges. I would hid my face in shame if I made a presentation like this.
This is one of my arguments about his tests. If he doesn't care any more than this about the quality of his presentation how do we know he's taking any care at all in the evaluation. I'm not bashing him but this only shows he doesn't care or he doesn't have the skill or knowledge to do things right.
This is one of my arguments about his tests. If he doesn't care any more than this about the quality of his presentation how do we know he's taking any care at all in the evaluation. I'm not bashing him but this only shows he doesn't care or he doesn't have the skill or knowledge to do things right.
Bavaricus
Established
Palaeoboy said:
Yes, maybe, but which RF has a FF Sensor?? Real life tests are sometimes more significant than MTFs which we can download from a manufacturers site.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
All my rangefinder cameras capture on full 35mm frames, because they all use 35mm film.Bavaricus said:
While I understand that "cropped" tests don't tell the full story for those using the lenses with film cameras, the part of the story they do tell is still useful input. You just have to be aware of the things that aren't covered if they're likely to matter a lot to you (vignetting being an obvious example).
...Mike