twopointeight
Well-known
Is the older tele-elmarit 90mm (fat) a good match with the sensor in the M9? I currently have an M8.2, but will likely get an M9 in 2012. I can buy this lens at at a fair price, but wondering how it will render with the M9 sensor/ Anybody use this combo?
Ben Z
Veteran
I have one of those, as well as a later "thin" T-E and a pre-ASPH Summicron. All of them do great on my M9. Fortunately these happen to be within the more stringent focus-adjustment tolerance the digital sensor requires. That's probably the main issue as to why any lens will or won't perform to its full potential on an M9. So my advice is to get the M9 first, make sure the rangefinder is adjusted correctly (mine was way off from the factory), and then test the lens before you buy or within the grace period for returns. Having a lens readjusted is possible, but costs around $100.
ayewing
Member
I have a "thin" Tele- Elmarit and find that it works well with the M-9. Ben Z makes a good point about the importance of the adjustment of the rangefinder and/or the lens being spot on. I bought my T-E fairly cheaply second hand and it was only after it had been serviced that it showed what a good lens it is.
1joel1
Well-known
I've had the lens as well. I can tell you from experience that the early chrome version is quite a bit sharper and contrastier (sp) than the black version. The chrome one used a different element (lanthanum, I believe) than the later black ones. They only made the chrome ones for the first year and it is difficult and pricier to get the rarer and better chrome version.
Hope this helps,
Joel
Hope this helps,
Joel
luuca
Well-known
Last edited:
JMQ
Well-known
I have the T-E "fat" version (5 elements) in black, and use it w/ the M9. There are no issues whatsoever in metering or focus. Check the elements for fungus or haze before you buy.
hendriphile
Well-known
Great work, Luuca, I especially like the surf shot for its atmosphere. Almost looks like it was made with MF.
twopointeight
Well-known
Thanks for your responses and posting photos. I'll see the lens tomorrow and try it out. I don't mind if its not super sharp. In fact, hoping that it renders more like 1968 than 2012.
Nick De Marco
Well-known
I had the fat elmarit. It was nice, and I liked it for size. At f4 and smaller I think it is fine, but I wanted something faster. Traded it yesterday for a used Summicron-M (last pre-asph version). Meant I had to part with the Fat-Elmarit and pay about £560, but I am very pleased. Seems much sharper and nice (but not overly sharp) at f2. It's not that much bigger either, and has the advantage of a built in hood. Used it was half the price of a used ash lens, which is clearly better for f2, but not so much to bother me.
As I intend to use it as a portrait lens, and as you need faster speeds on a tele lens, I found the extra stop very, very useful.
As I intend to use it as a portrait lens, and as you need faster speeds on a tele lens, I found the extra stop very, very useful.
sleepyhead
Well-known
I'm reviving this old thread to say that I am really loving my "fat" Tele-Elmarit, which I used for a long time with my film Leicas and more recently on an M9 body. I think I have a very good example of the lens, because mine is very sharp, even at f/2.8.
Here is a recent picture taken at f/4 (if I remember correctly):
Here is a recent picture taken at f/4 (if I remember correctly):
sleepyhead
Well-known
A. making pizza dough (90mm Tele-Elmarit "fat" on Leica M9)
Ben Z
Veteran
The chief reason for the thin version was to cut down on weight, which makes it my preferred travel lens, but my fatty is equally sharp and less flare-prone.
sleepyhead
Well-known
andriirad
Member
Hello to everyone! Have a question about very first version of Elmarit-M 90mm 2.8. I found one offer of this lens on used market, but it have some weird issue: lots of small scratches and spots on the INSIDE part of the front glass coating (please refer to the attached picture). It doesn't look like a fungus or so, but still looks kind of strange. All the rest is in pretty good shape for it's age. The price for this lens is very relable - arround 120 usd, so I'm on the way to get it. Anyway, just want to ask your oppineon: what do you think about this kind of issue? Is it gonna bother picture quality big time? Should I worried about it at all?
Attachments
Shac
Well-known
andriirad - considering you went to buy it the easiest answer to your query is - try it. If there's a problem I believe none of the elements are cemented so a competent repair person could clean the optics for you. I have one and it's a fine portrait lens.
andriirad
Member
Shac, thanx for you answer first of all! I already got this lens for test and will do it tommorow. Just want to ask few more oppineons about this inner scratches, cause I never seen this kind of issue before. From common sense I could immagine, that this coating damage could produce overall contrasr falloff. If this only one issue, that could exist - it's not a problem at all, cause I'm gonna use it on M9, so I could adjust contrast with post processing.
x-ray
Veteran
It's hard to say if it will be a problem. Only testing will tell.
Two of the elements are cemented.
I've owned several of these and is my favorite 90mm. It's very classic in rendering being sharp even at 2.8 and very smooth in tone. Flare isn't bad but I'd use a hood.
I've owned quite a few 90's including 2 of the 60's version in black and chrome, the Apo asph., 2 Elmars, thin Tele Elmarit and 3 chrome and one black 1st version Elmarits. After all these 90's the v1 Elmarit remains my favorite.
I feel it outperforms the Tele Elmarit at wide apertures and isn't that much longer. I've never understood why it hasn't been more popular. At the time I bought my first one in 1968 it was the most popular and remained so even after the Tele version came out. Flare at wide apertures was the issue with the Tele version plus being a touch soft.
Two of the elements are cemented.
I've owned several of these and is my favorite 90mm. It's very classic in rendering being sharp even at 2.8 and very smooth in tone. Flare isn't bad but I'd use a hood.
I've owned quite a few 90's including 2 of the 60's version in black and chrome, the Apo asph., 2 Elmars, thin Tele Elmarit and 3 chrome and one black 1st version Elmarits. After all these 90's the v1 Elmarit remains my favorite.
I feel it outperforms the Tele Elmarit at wide apertures and isn't that much longer. I've never understood why it hasn't been more popular. At the time I bought my first one in 1968 it was the most popular and remained so even after the Tele version came out. Flare at wide apertures was the issue with the Tele version plus being a touch soft.
andriirad
Member
Thanx to everyone for posted replies! Just came back from nice test shooting with my very first version of Elmarit-M 90mm 2.8. What can I say...the lens is simply AMAZING! It's sharp enough from wide open - to show all needed details, but not clinically sharp - to show some skin defects (for example), when you're making a portrait pictures. The rendering is also very pleasant to my eye.
Here is few samples from the test:
Lesia by Andrii Radevych, on Flickr
Wisdom of the eyes by Andrii Radevych, on Flickr
Here is few samples from the test:
Lesia by Andrii Radevych, on FlickrWisdom of the eyes by Andrii Radevych, on Flickr
Pioneer
Veteran
Based on the online renderings I would certainly keep that lens, regardless of the odd scratches.
Some lenses which have had fungus, then cleaned later on, will show some evidence of what appears to be scratches. This can be caused by the fungus etching the glass if not removed soon enough.
Some lenses which have had fungus, then cleaned later on, will show some evidence of what appears to be scratches. This can be caused by the fungus etching the glass if not removed soon enough.
