Can someone tell me why there is such a significant difference in size and weight between the current 90/2.8 M Elmarit lens and the previous version, the "thin" 90/2.8 Tele - Elmarit - M? Is there a significant difference in sharpness and contrast between those two lenses and the current Summicron APO 90/2

-- Jack Belen (jbelen@aol.com), December 21, 2000

Answers

According to some books I have on optics, there are two designs for longer lenses... long focus and telephoto construction. The current Elmarit is a long focus design, and is over three inches long, while the previous model, annotated "tele" in the nomenclature is truly a telephoto design, and tiny.

One of the design parameters that differentiate SLRs and rangefinders is the mirror box, or lack of it. The "tele" design is harder to make for an SLR because the last element needs to be closer to the film plane than the mirror box allows. The current Elmarit M is based on the last 90mm f2.8 Elmarit from the Leica R series. While the optics are the same, the extra depth in the lens tube (the last element is fairly deeply recessed) puts the optics where the glass would be if it was on an SLR instead of the rangefinder. From my experience, this lens is simply outstanding optically. On the other hand, for me, it is too big for the petite camera body.

I have seen some good results from the 90mm f2.0 APO/ASPH, but when I look at the result from my Elmarit M, it is hard to imagine how much sharper a slide can look. If you don't need the speed, the f2.8 is one of the best lenses in the Leica line up when price is factored in. Spend the 800 Dollars you save on film. You will never feel slighted by the images from the Elmarit.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), December 21, 2000.

Jack, the 90mm f2.8 Elmarit is probably the best lens I have ever used. It it pushing the limit of optical perfection in my opinion, and this is bore out with the stellar MTF curve at Photodo. Mine is nearly flawless even wide open. I aimed it at a resolution chart and it easily separated the 80LPMM boxes at f2.8. I can pick out the images in my album shot with that lens. Yes, it is a bit on the long side for a 90mm. I originally had the tele Elmarit M, and the cement between some elements failed. I was told it eventually happens to every single one of them. I know 2 others who owned the lens and had the same trouble. Because of this, the contrast was lousy on mine. I'd never recommend one of them to anyone because of the inner element troubles. I'm sure someone here has one that didn't have any trouble with it, but it is a known promblem. Something to do with the type of cement used.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 21, 2000.

Jack,

Along with my current 50mm Summicron, the 90mm 2.8 Elmarit M is the sharpest lens I have. I am always astounded by the results, particularly with color transparency films. The images are so sharp and crisp, they look like they have been etched into the emulsion. Though, as Al already mentioned, I only wish it were as compact and handled as nicely as the 90mm 2.8 Tele-Elmarit.

I once tested a used example of the smaller Tele-Elmarit. I took my camera to the shop selling it and made a number of exposures at all apertures, both handheld and on a tripod; real world subjects...no test targets or lpm stuff. The last ten or twelve exposures on that same roll were made with my own Elmarit M. Well, I did not buy that tele-Elmarit. It just did not have that incredible sharpness I'd come to expect from the Elmarit M.

I've never used the Apo 90/2, but it seems like it would be a real handful on the M bodies.

Good luck, Sergio.

-- Sergio Ortega (s.ortega@worldnet.att.net), December 21, 2000.

As someone pointed out, the current 90/2.8-M is optically identical to the last R version, and so it had to be configured with the same back focus as on the SLR. Without the auto diaphragm, though, it is much thinner in diameter than the R lens (fortunately!). I own both the M and R versions and they are superb. The performance of the R version at normal distances is virtually indistinguishable from the 100 APO Macro. I have used the M version on a Visoflex as a macro lens and it isn't too shabby there, either. The Tele-Elmarit had 2 versions, "fat" and "skinny". I owned both but now just the "skinny", mine is from 1974. I've heard of internal hazing problems with these lenses but I have never actually seen one in bad condition other than many with front wipe marks from owners who chose to believe that Leica front coatings are un-scratchable. My sample, in comparison to the current version, has noticeably lower contrast at f2.8 which improves some at f4 and by f5.6 on down the two lenses are very hard to discern from one another. If you've got the room (and budget) for both lenses, the skinny Tele makes a great pocket lens whenever light weight is paramount and f5.6 is sufficient (hiking for landscapes, flash work at parties, etc.). If you are only going to own one lens, get the current 90/2.8. At around $800 used, it's the best bargain of all M's. The 90 APO Summicron is a personal choice. It's obviously better at f2; from f2.8 on I'd sure want to do a shoot-off for myself before I pull out my credit card. Also it's about the same size as the previous Summicron, and I found that too big and heavy for my taste on an M body.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), December 21, 2000.

Andrew:

I'm sure someone here has one that didn't have any trouble with it, but it is a known promblem.

I plead guilty to that.

Art

-- Art (AKarr90975@aol.com), December 21, 2000.

Art, have you shined a flash light into yours recently? Just kidding- -I'm glad yours hasn't atrophied like mine and several others I knew did. The repair work is very costly if it does start seperating. When I looked into the repair costs is when I found out it was a very common problem. One of the big used Leica sellers told me he really scrutinizes that particular lens if someone is trying to sell one to him because he's seen quite a few bad ones come in. Something organic in the cement was supposed to be the culprit, and whatever it was, Leica altered the way they put the next generation Elmarit together and its has not happened to those lenses.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 21, 2000.

One other comment on the 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M is that it is prone to flare. Backlight or even bright white tones will cause it flare. Buy the Elmarit-M, it is a much better performer, especially wide open. I switched and I have no regrets at all. It is bigger than than the Tele-Elmarit but stil very small by SLR standards.

Cheers

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), December 21, 2000.

The Elmarit M has simply astounding performance. A real winner. It may be large and bulky compared to the thin Elmarit, but it is on par with my 50 Summicron for performance. Can't imagine it getting any better. And the sliding lens hood is first rate for controlling flare. Extending it makes the ergonomics of the lens much better.

My only gripe is the stiff focusing relative to the short focal lengths-perhaps an intentional feature to allow for more precise rangefinder focusing with the Leica M teles? It certainly makes follow focus in portraiture difficult...

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), December 21, 2000.

Yes, the focusing is stiff, and I thoughty at first something was wrong with mine. I found out they are all that way. Here's another oddity with that lens: When mine is set at f2.8, the aperture does not open 100% fully, plus the aperture ring turns past 2.8 a tiny bit on the barrel. I contacted Leica and they said the lenses are individually calibrated for f2.8, so mine is actually an f2.6 or something wide open (past the 2.8 stop click), but Leica goes ahead and puts the f2.8 click stop where f2.8 is exactly. I thought that was pretty cool.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), December 21, 2000.

Jack, I have the original 90mm Elmarit for the M series. It is the one with the removable lens head so that it can be used in a separate focusing mount on the Visoflex. With this lens on my M2, and the M2 on a tripod and loaded with Kodachrome 25, I took a picture of barges on the Mississippi river that has edges so sharp they look like they were sliced in with an Xacto knife. It's one sharp lens.

Regards,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), December 21, 2000.

Like many, I am disappointed with the size of the current Elmarit-M, but it is a superb lens, no question. I am not enjoying the R version nearly as much for some reason. I am not sure I have really seen any practical difference between it and the Summicron-R and it is a stop slower. At one time I owned a chrome "fat" Tele-Elmarit and found it to be superb - beautiful images. Perhaps lower contrast and maybe not as razor sharp wide open, but I had absolutely no complaints. I think the Tele-Elmarit is a much better size fit with a Leica M I have to say, but no one doubts the high quality of the Elmarit-M. By the way, a superb lens is the original Elmar 90mm f4 (another long focus lens). Slow but excellent quality and much thinner and lighter than the Elmarit. The later 4 element variety is particularly good and tends to command a high price. Both the fat tele-ELmarit and a click stopped Elmar have, to my eyes, a much more beautiful finish than any modern black Leica lens - not that this helps you to take photos....

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), December 22, 2000.

I used to use the late version of the Tele-Elmarit. The images were ok - not spectacular. And the handling really bothered me. If you look closely, the focusing and aperature rings are placed far forward on the lens - this drove me nuts. Focusing stiffness was about the same as the current Elmarit, and the small diameter of the focusing ring all combined to make the lens handling very distracting for me. I was forever groping for the rings. The whole hood arrangement was also unstisfactory for me.

I'm happy with the current Elmarit redesign. It solves the problems of the Tele for me, and gives me great images, too. I wouldn't go back to the Tele.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), December 22, 2000.

I appreciate all of the excellent input. So it seems to me that the consensus is that, despite the factors of cost and size, the current version of the 90/2.8 is the choice

-- Jack Belen (jbelen@aol.com), December 22, 2000.