jja
Well-known
I'm not sure how to put it into words, but I think the 50mm Elmar-M has an incredible character. Modern-retro?
T-Max 400 (new), Xtol 1+1:
T-Max 400 (new), Xtol 1+1:
W/NW: What's so special about Elmar-M?
- Thread starter jja
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 25
- Views 3K
hlockwood
Well-known
jja
Well-known
Thanks Harry, that one looks good too. Here's one in color:
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
To: JJA
From: JJK
Love the shot of the kid.
From: JJK
Love the shot of the kid.
jja
Well-known
Thanks JJK! Here's my older kid, coming in close:
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
No Elmar user can complain that the lens ruined a picture. The museum(?) shot shows excellent timing.
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Are you talking about the old or new Elmar?
Best regards,
Uwe
Best regards,
Uwe
jja
Well-known
The first version Elmar (1958-74) is generally referred to as "Elmar," while the modern, second version (1994-2007?) is called "Elmar-M."
The lenses have a different look and different handling.
The lenses have a different look and different handling.
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
Damn it, people.
Stop reminding me how much i like Tessars. I don't want to buy another lens.
Stop reminding me how much i like Tessars. I don't want to buy another lens.
Dektol Dan
Well-known
sepiareverb
genius and moron
That bamboo is quite 3-dimensional- something I choose the Elmar-M for.
FPjohn
Well-known
Super!
yours
FPJ
yours
FPJ
Paul C. Perkins MD
Perk11350
OK . . . What's so special?
jja
Well-known
I wouldn't expect to convince everyone, but thanks for stopping by!
katgut@earthlink.net
Established
Well, the Dr. does ask a valid question. What is special about the Elmar?
One can't simply post a couple of photos and say how great a lens is (especially when a couple are out of focus). If you're going to make claims about a lens, you must post the subject taken with another lens as well.
The variables introduced in scanning and PS render the whole excercise futile.
I'm skeptical that it does any better than my Canon FD 50 1.8--a lens that can be had on Ebay for $5--, although I have yet to test the Canon side-by-side with my newly-acquired Elmar-M 50. When I do I'll post the results.
One can't simply post a couple of photos and say how great a lens is (especially when a couple are out of focus). If you're going to make claims about a lens, you must post the subject taken with another lens as well.
The variables introduced in scanning and PS render the whole excercise futile.
I'm skeptical that it does any better than my Canon FD 50 1.8--a lens that can be had on Ebay for $5--, although I have yet to test the Canon side-by-side with my newly-acquired Elmar-M 50. When I do I'll post the results.
jja
Well-known
katgut:
Thanks for reposting the question. I agree, it's a valid question, but in my experience people who ask clipped, confrontational questions are not really interested in having a discussion. If the doctor really was interested in dialogue, he might have made some observations about the photos posted.
Since I posted this as a W/NW thread, I am hoping that other Elmar-M users will post their own photos taken with this lens, and we can get a wide sampling. (And for the record, I only see one out of focus image so far (mine), which I think contributes something nonetheless.)
I disagree on your point that in order to make sustainable claims about a particular lens, one "must post the subject taken with another lens as well." Although from time to time I've taken controlled photos comparing various lenses, I don't find these tests very useful in judging a lens's feel or overall characteristics. (And if I'm out for a walk with my family, as in the first posted photo, I am not going to bring two cameras with me and take two exact shots. These are spontaneous moments, after all!)
There are, as you note, many variables in the image-making process (scanning, PS, etc.). In my personal experience, for instance, I have found film/developer combinations to have a strong impact on the final look of an image. But if you are going to take the perspective that innumerable variables make conclusions impossible, then there is no point in asking your question, or even participating in this forum, for that matter.
Lens characteristics are another variable, of course, and I have used several 50mm lenses over the years, and each had its own signature. About the Elmar-M: it is not as contrasty as a modern Summicron, but it seems to have a uniformly even sharpness across the image field that gives it good bite without being overpowering. Out of focus areas are not distracting at all, and they contribute to to overall scene. Color rendition is accurate, even a little subdued. One can probably say similar things about other lenses, but my experience tells me that the Elmar-M is unique enough among my 50mm lenses that I'm keeping it, especially when it makes photos that make me say Wow!
Now, let's see some photos taken w/ the Elmar-M!
Thanks for reposting the question. I agree, it's a valid question, but in my experience people who ask clipped, confrontational questions are not really interested in having a discussion. If the doctor really was interested in dialogue, he might have made some observations about the photos posted.
Since I posted this as a W/NW thread, I am hoping that other Elmar-M users will post their own photos taken with this lens, and we can get a wide sampling. (And for the record, I only see one out of focus image so far (mine), which I think contributes something nonetheless.)
I disagree on your point that in order to make sustainable claims about a particular lens, one "must post the subject taken with another lens as well." Although from time to time I've taken controlled photos comparing various lenses, I don't find these tests very useful in judging a lens's feel or overall characteristics. (And if I'm out for a walk with my family, as in the first posted photo, I am not going to bring two cameras with me and take two exact shots. These are spontaneous moments, after all!)
There are, as you note, many variables in the image-making process (scanning, PS, etc.). In my personal experience, for instance, I have found film/developer combinations to have a strong impact on the final look of an image. But if you are going to take the perspective that innumerable variables make conclusions impossible, then there is no point in asking your question, or even participating in this forum, for that matter.
Lens characteristics are another variable, of course, and I have used several 50mm lenses over the years, and each had its own signature. About the Elmar-M: it is not as contrasty as a modern Summicron, but it seems to have a uniformly even sharpness across the image field that gives it good bite without being overpowering. Out of focus areas are not distracting at all, and they contribute to to overall scene. Color rendition is accurate, even a little subdued. One can probably say similar things about other lenses, but my experience tells me that the Elmar-M is unique enough among my 50mm lenses that I'm keeping it, especially when it makes photos that make me say Wow!
Now, let's see some photos taken w/ the Elmar-M!
Last edited:
Justin Low
J for Justin
I was going to post a new series of Elmar-M pictures soon, but it looks like you've beat me to the punch, and here are a few from that series (rest to follow later).
I really like this lens for low-light use, as it gives a very nice black, and is surprisingly flare-resistant (or maybe not, given it's austere design, no pun intended). I have posted a number of threads with pictures previously, and I believe this may be my 'oldest' lens in terms of period of time owned.
These were taken with a R-D1, and I'm beginning to think that the reflective sensor surface is the cause (at least in part) of the secondary reflections I've been seeing in my night-shots from various lenses.
I really like this lens for low-light use, as it gives a very nice black, and is surprisingly flare-resistant (or maybe not, given it's austere design, no pun intended). I have posted a number of threads with pictures previously, and I believe this may be my 'oldest' lens in terms of period of time owned.
These were taken with a R-D1, and I'm beginning to think that the reflective sensor surface is the cause (at least in part) of the secondary reflections I've been seeing in my night-shots from various lenses.
Ghiom
Established
I am not really sure to understand what is the polemic around the Elmar-M...
I do own one, but somehow I can't feel satisfied with it for some reasons beyond anything I can explain... used mostly with color negs films until now, I have always had a feeling that the image gets a bit harsh ... or too contrasty, nothing like what I could read about it before to get it... and somehow again, I feel I am not gonna keep it... (I am looking for 50mm to match a summicron 35 type IV)...
But as I look at the images above, I do not recognize this specific aspect that mine is providing... ???
Any comments are welcome (I guess I am just not really sure what I am looking for...), any "light" would be helpfull!
I do own one, but somehow I can't feel satisfied with it for some reasons beyond anything I can explain... used mostly with color negs films until now, I have always had a feeling that the image gets a bit harsh ... or too contrasty, nothing like what I could read about it before to get it... and somehow again, I feel I am not gonna keep it... (I am looking for 50mm to match a summicron 35 type IV)...
But as I look at the images above, I do not recognize this specific aspect that mine is providing... ???
Any comments are welcome (I guess I am just not really sure what I am looking for...), any "light" would be helpfull!
Last edited:
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
I can only speak for the OLD Elmars
I have a 1938 uncoated 35/3.5
and
a 1934 uncoated 50/3.5.....
ADORE them both
beautiful contrast and blacks soooo black...😎
Would LOVE to try the Elamr-M
I have a 1938 uncoated 35/3.5
and
a 1934 uncoated 50/3.5.....
ADORE them both
beautiful contrast and blacks soooo black...😎
Would LOVE to try the Elamr-M
jja
Well-known
Hi Helen, I'd like to see photos from your '34 Elmar. I had a '60 that made some great images.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
