jaredangle
Photojournalist
Well, long story short, there's this camera store in a small beautiful town about 20 miles west of the city I live in that I had been meaning to visit ever since my friend and mentor at my photography program at school mentioned it. So the other day, I went inside and browsed around their generously large used camera section, and stumbled upon a mint Bessa L at a very appealing price, and I bought the camera in a heartbeat. I've been set on this camera for about two years now for the purpose of one day using it with the 15mm or 12mm LTM lenses, and I finally have it.
The owner of the camera store showed me the lens and finder that the previous owner sold to the shop along with the camera; a 50mm 1.5 Summarit in very nice condition, along with the Voigtlander 50mm finder. I respectfully declined the finder and the lens, as I couldn't spare any more money than I had already laid down.
The Bessa L has had me considering using it for astrophotography and landscapes however, in contrast to its wide-angle intentions. I reckon that it would also perform very well when left at infinity with a lens in the 90mm-135mm range, stopped down to the middle of its aperture range, with a matching viewfinder for when I see good landscapes that I can isolate with a long lens.
I did some research into some of the older screw mount lenses, mainly the 135mm Hektors and Elmars, as well as the 90mm Elmar, but I don't really think that they're what I'm looking for in a lens, especially with newer offerings available.
Would it be in my best interest to look into the 90mm 3.5 Lanthar/75mm 2.5 Heliar, or should I save my money and breathe new life into one of the classics?
The owner of the camera store showed me the lens and finder that the previous owner sold to the shop along with the camera; a 50mm 1.5 Summarit in very nice condition, along with the Voigtlander 50mm finder. I respectfully declined the finder and the lens, as I couldn't spare any more money than I had already laid down.
The Bessa L has had me considering using it for astrophotography and landscapes however, in contrast to its wide-angle intentions. I reckon that it would also perform very well when left at infinity with a lens in the 90mm-135mm range, stopped down to the middle of its aperture range, with a matching viewfinder for when I see good landscapes that I can isolate with a long lens.
I did some research into some of the older screw mount lenses, mainly the 135mm Hektors and Elmars, as well as the 90mm Elmar, but I don't really think that they're what I'm looking for in a lens, especially with newer offerings available.
Would it be in my best interest to look into the 90mm 3.5 Lanthar/75mm 2.5 Heliar, or should I save my money and breathe new life into one of the classics?
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I have both the CV lenses you mention. The 75 is 'barely' a tele lens but good for portraits, and I find the 90 is more often used. However, I'm curious as to your reasons for dismissing the Elmar 90? What is about that lens that you think would make the CV 90 a better choice?
Mephiloco
Well-known
I have an old elmar 90 that I picked up for pretty much nothing due to coating damage (fungus), performs amazingly. If you want something faster the canon 85/1.9 is pretty cheap, and the 100/3.5 too.
f16sunshine
Moderator
If I understand you correctly. Your plan is to use the lens stopped to f5.6-f16 and shoot it at or near infinity. In this case nearly any of the lenses mentioned will do a fine job delivering landscapes. IMHO the CV AL f3.5/90mm has the value advantage. True Apo performance and a common 2nd hand price bellow $300.