Which LEICA 90mm lens for travel?

Which LEICA 90mm lens for travel?

  • Elmar

    Votes: 60 24.6%

  • Elmarit

    Votes: 46 18.9%

  • Tele-Elmarit

    Votes: 88 36.1%

  • Summicron

    Votes: 50 20.5%
  • Total voters
    244
Yeah, I heard those collapsable Elmars were magnificently engineered. Too bad they didn't have the better optical cell of the later 3 element Elmar, optically excellent even by today's standards.
 
awilder said:
Yeah, I heard those collapsable Elmars were magnificently engineered. Too bad they didn't have the better optical cell of the later 3 element Elmar, optically excellent even by today's standards.
Click to expand...
I have Elmars collapsible and 3-element. There are tradeoffs galore, so I keep them both. :) First off, the collapsible barrel is foolproof in design, and well enough built to prop up your car while changing tires. Downside is the weight which makes it a poor choice for travel. The DOF scale is super. The 3E barrel is much lighter, DOF scale less readable, and the aperture ring rotates with focus. Optically, the 3E is sharper, but has relatively poor bokeh. The 4E is really the better portrait lens.
 
My only experience is with my Tele-Elmarit I've had for 40 years, it is compact, light, and quite a performer. I find that on the M2 I can focus it at closest distance and wide-open quite easily. All in all very happy with it.
 
QUOTE=Brian Sweeney;1055458]I could certainly shed the equivalent of a Nikon F2AS with MD2/MB1 and 300/4.5.

Brian thank the Gods you never had to carry 3 of the bleedin things 1 with a300 .2.8 the others with a 180mm and a short zoom plus flashes and a couple of quantum turbo's and an M4P or M6 with a 35 just in case it rained and all the rest 'packed up'... all day. Oh and I forgot the dev kit and the Muirhead wire machine in the boot of your car.:bang::bang:
Then the memo from the NPA to all NUJ members:- 'will all photographers get together and establish exactly how far it is from Fleet Street to London Airport (Heathrow) as it seems to be 'moving' further towards Manchester'.... on your expense forms !:bang::bang:
 
Okay- I have never had to lug that much camera equipment....

BUT, I did have to lug a computer for processing Data from one of the early Digital Imagers we made in the early 1980s. The computer was a VAX 11/725, weighed about 200 pounds and was the size of a small refrigerator. Getting it onto the P3 Orion was no fun!
 
In the end you get the pictures with whatever 90mm you are using. I tend to dismiss the discussion about the 25 gram differences between the lightweight champion and the next. The difference between my T-E and v.2 Summincron is 270 gram vs 638 gram when both are equipped with filters (somewhat heavy original filters). The sheer bulk of the Summicron is enhanced by the smallness of the TE. Ehum.. I forgot the pouch weight difference of 20g :)
But, the actual decision is not based on weight in my case. I am all emotional. If I spend big money on a trip and bring the lenses I need, weight of the 90mm is not the prime consideration. Its all in context of the decision about bringing the SA, Summilux 35mm and the extra camera body. I often end up with either big or small outfit. Conclusion; I have too many toys and enjoy myself with this masochist decisions.
 
I've had a number of lenses in this focal length, including a black (i.e.light) Nikkor 85/2 and two Hexanon 90/2.8 :eek: and I've finally settled down with my thin T-E 90/2.8 that I've had for many years and an E55 pre-ASPH 90.

I use the thin T-E traveling and it does have a propensity to flare but I've not experienced it that much, I guess I just stay away from shooting against the sun when using it. Also I use the metal 12575 shade with it, that came with a 135/4. Great lens for travel IMO.
 
Thanks to all of you for this discussion. All those months ago, I was the OP. KEH has three M-Rokkors listed, one says Leitz Germany, one says Leitz Japan, and one says Minolta Japan. can anyone shed any light on this? Will these focus OK on my M3?
 
it, of course, depends on style of shooting, money, size, and strength of back. having played with a cron 90mm asph, i'm hooked and want it (despite the expense and size). but that's just me. a perfect travel kit for me would be my elmarit 28 and 50 lux, along with a cron 90mm (all snuggled in a smallish domke bag). i just love the painterly effect of the cron 90mm when wide open. others, of course, may prefer something smaller, lighter, less expensive, and with a different "signature."
 
I have had the late model thin black tele elmarit for years and cannot say a bad word about it. I know some experience fogging but (touch wood) this has never happened to mine and it peforms flawlessly. It is relatively inexpensive, small in size and light in weight with excellent image quality. A very nice little piece of glass.
 
I vote for the Rokkor 90/4 but, it is the only Leica 90 I have ever used. Sounds odd but I understand the Elmar-C was built in japan while the Rokkor was made in Germany. The f/4 is not an issue for me as I generally shoot at f/8 - 11 anyway. I suspect all things considered none of the Leica lenses are so poor that they are not worth the bag space. I'd think it comes down to rigid vs collapsable. I think if I had an M rather than a CL, I'd opt for it as it would then be more pocketable. Considering how light a Leica kit is I'd think the weight differences whould not be that much but, then again I am at an age and health where it is becoming an issue.

One consideration I would add is the filter thread. I'd opt for a lens that an existing filter collection is already on hand. Duplicating filter collections is neither inexpensive or weight saving. I have a Summicron-C and the Rokkor and it is a pain to have to have 2 filter kits.
 
mabelsound said:
Is there an optical reason that there aren't any rangefinder lenses at this focal length that are actually compact; ie., don't stick out very far from the camera? Thickness/weight are less important to me on a trip than the amount the camera, with lens attached, takes up in my bag.
Click to expand...

Yes. For (very) basic lens designs, the lens is located a distance equal to its focal length from the film plane. You can get around this. This is what 'telephoto' lenses are; lenses whose physical length is shorter than their focal lengths. Longer lenses in which this isn't true I think are called 'long focus' lenses.

If size in the bag is what bothers you, I'd recommend one of the collapsible options. My 90 Macro is one of my smaller lenses when collapsed. It's also probably one of the most flexible 90's out there if you ignore the slower speed. It's good close up, far away, and wide open, it's compact, and if you have the adapter, has a decent reproduction ratio.
 
Hi, i have an elmar 90mm Ltm, almost unnoticeable, so lightwieght.
On my last trip i used only my biogon 28 and this elmar.
Perhaps a newer version would have better resolution!

Bye
 
My vote would be for the late 90mm Elmarit-M. Fantastic sharpness, and tiny compared to any of the 90mm Summicrons. The only downside, obviously, is the extra stop with the summicron.
 
Which 90mm Leica?

Which 90mm Leica?

For size and weight, the 90mm Tele-Elmarit M can't be beat. It also has excellent IQ and performance.
Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom