Which 90 to buy? Nikkor 85 f2 vs. Leica Tele-Elmarit

ornate_wrasse

ornate_wrasse

Moderator
Local time
11:15 AM
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
1,280
I don't currently own a 90mm lens for my M6. I've been looking at differrent lenses in that focal length and I have the opportunity to buy a Nikkor 85mm f2 as well as a Leica 90mm Tele-Elmarit. I like the idea of the Tele-Elmarit for it's small size and the fact that it's light in weight, i.e. a great travel lens. However, I've heard that the Nikkor 85mm f2 is an outstanding lens. The fact that it's quite heavy makes it less than desirable from a weight point of view.

I've thought about buying both lenses, trying them out and then selling the one I don't want but this is an expensive proposition from the standpoint of cash outlay. So, I thought I'd turn to RFF for opinions about both lenses, particularly from those who have experience using both of them.

Which lens would you buy?

Thanks.

Ellen
 
I've never had any of the two, but I got myself a 90mm Summicron and I end up not using it as much as I'd like to due to its big size and weight. Yes, it's a pretty good lens (1st version) but I'm really thinking about selling it and getting myself a more compact one. Less weight and less attention attracted. It does make a difference, at least for me. Having that in mind I'd go for the Tele-Elmarit.
 
The 90mm T-E is an amazing lens if you can snag a good copy. They are prone to T-E disease, that is, an "etching" to appear in the rear element(IIRC it's caused by a lubricant.)

The 90mm is not much longer than a 50mm Summicron, and thus far I'm impressed with it's value. Great for portraiture. I'm more of a 75mm type of guy though.
 
The 90mm tele-elmar fits the framelines on the M6. I have not had a problem there. It wieghs about as much as a Summicron 50mm which makes it very light. These are portrait lenses for which sharpness is not always desireable. The classical rule of thumb for portraits is a soft lens for women and a sharp lens for men. Since you already possess the Nikkor 105mm f2.5 Ai-S which is a very sharp portrait lens my recommendation would be skip the 85mm and go with the 90mm as it will provide you with a different image.
 
I've had a 90 mm T-E for nearly 20 years and it continues to amaze me. If I don't need the speed of the Summicron, it's just as sharp and much, much lighter. If you get the T-E, make sure it comes with the dedicated hood - it really makes a difference.
 
I use my T-E over my Canon 1.9 by a large margin.
They both render very differently but you just can't beat the size and weight advantage.
If you intend to go the m43 route in the future, a heavy lens is challenging at best.
 
I have had both and kept the 85 Nikkor. I think it is sharper, it flares less, and i need the extra stop since I use it to shoot bands. I really didn't like the Tele-Elmarit. It flared alot and putting a hood on that lens kind of defeated the "size" advantage. If I was looking for a light traveling lens, I would go with the CV Lanther 90 or better yet a Canon 100mm 3.5 which I am sorry I sold.
 
John Elder said:
I have had both and kept the 85 Nikkor. I think it is sharper, it flares less, and i need the extra stop since I use it to shoot bands. I really didn't like the Tele-Elmarit. It flared alot and putting a hood on that lens kind of defeated the "size" advantage. If I was looking for a light traveling lens, I would go with the CV Lanther 90 or better yet a Canon 100mm 3.5 which I am sorry I sold.
Click to expand...

That's one of my main concerns with buying the Tele-Elmarit - the fact that it flares a lot, according to what I've heard and you have now confirmed.

And, I admit, I do like faster lenses, they sure do make it a lot easier to use in low-light condtiions.

To be fair, I'm really leaning towards buying the 85mm Nikkor. The fact that a RFF member has offered to sell me his Tele-Elmarit but won't part with his 85mm Nikkor to me says a lot. It says, in a nutshell that, at least for him, the 85mm is a far better lens.

Interesting that most replies seem to lean towards buying the Tele-Elmarit and you're the first one that is recommending the 85mm.

Ellen
 
John Elder said:
I have had both and kept the 85 Nikkor.
Click to expand...

Did the weight of this lens ever bother you?

Not sure which version you own, but the verison of this lens I would be buying is Version 3, which is lighter than Version 2. The aperture on Version 3 stops down to f32. Version 2, which is heavier, stops down to only f22 I believe.

Ellen
 
IIRC only the black 85/2 is significantly lighter, I have the f32 chrome version and I can tell you it's heavy as hell lol. You will fell the heft on your hand and in the bag. On your hand it feels good, very firm, damp and reassuring. And oh yeah it's sharp.
 
The chrome nikkor 85 is a hefty lens. Heavy enough to make my neck sore after a day of shooting with it. The weight makes me think I can get away with a slower lens at a slower shutter speed.

The black and chrome nikkor 85 is lighter because of less chrome used. It was also made in fewer numbers than it's chrome counterpart and therefore commands a higher price. It also won't have trouble finding a buyer in case you don't like it.
 
Ellen- I see by your camera assortment that a Chrome Nikkor 8.5cm F2 on the M6 will be lighter than a lot of your other combos! That D300 with the 85/1.4 is heavier than the M6 with the Nikkor 85/2.

I've been using the Nikkor 8.5cm F2 on the M8 lately.

picture.php


Wide-Open, hand-held ~1/30th (panned).
 
Last edited:
If your worried about potential flare with the TE, get a 90/2.8 Hexanon M. Same price or less than a TE, no optical flaws, way sharper than everything except the latest 90 Elmarit-M.
 
I think it's safe to say the chrome nikkor is heavy as hell! Has anyone ever thought of de chroming it to shave off some weight?

It'll probably cost more than the lens is worth but it'll be great shooting lens.
 
It's the heavy brass material in the chrome lens- the Black version switched over to more aluminum. The Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5 used more aluminum, and does not seem any heavier than the 8.5cm/2. I've also been using the 10.5cm F2.5 on the M8 a lot lately. The 90mm framelines on the M8 are really for the 105.

Now, my earlier 8.5cm f2 that goes to F16- THICK brass, and heavier.

The Tele-Elmarit is well balanced on a Leica CL. It is no bigger or heavier (is seems) than my 1930s 9cm/4 Elmar.
 
Ellen- I see by your camera assortment that a Chrome Nikkor 8.5cm F2 on the M6 will be lighter than a lot of your other combos! That D300 with the 85/1.4 is heavier than the M6 with the Nikkor 85/2.
Click to expand...

You've made your point Brian :D

Actually, what is REALLY heavy is when I use my D300 with the 105mm VR underwater with the metal housing surrounding the camera/lens. Now THAT is a heavy monster!

Guess I can live with the 85mm on the M6. :)

I'm actually glad you jumped in to this thread as it is YOUR Tele-Elmarit I was thinking about buying!


BTW, that's a lovely image of your daughter taken with the 85. It appears to be a most useful lens, even though it is a bit heavy. Thanks for sharing.


Ellen

PS Congratulations on becoming a moderator!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom