Can anyone give me a good reason why I should but a second 90mm lens, El Cheapo from the bland days of Minoltastan? I want one! But does it make any difference? I have a EVF2 for my digital M bodies so not much concerned about focus issues.
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Leica 90mm lens options
-
A
- Thread starter RezaLoghme
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Linhof 135mm Focusing Cam for Technika IV 4x5 45.00.
- Started by John Ackley
-
For Sale Darkroom Tool Set for Print or Sheet Film Handling
- Started by davela
-
For Sale Testrite CS-1 Copy Stand with Original Box
- Started by davela
-
For Sale Pentax branded camera straps (1 black w/ viewfinder cap, 1 grey)
- Started by Disconnekt
Forum statistics
Elmar-C 90/4 is very small. Smaller than https://classic.leica-camera.com/de/Leica-Elmarit-M-90mm-f-2.8-11807/11807SH-3648149
Sorry for bold font.So i found the support in this forum a bit disappointing.
But I bought one.
But I bought one.
Last November, during a quiet phase of transition, I went to Wetzlar and came back with a Leica M Monochrom (the M240 version). It wasn’t a planned purchase so much as a reaction. I just knew I needed something deliberate, simple, and stripped of distraction.
Along with it, I picked up an old Elmar-C 90mm f/4 — my first M lens. Nothing fancy, just the plain little lens that happened to be there. People online say it’s soft, or that it has rangefinder coupling quirks. Maybe it does. But it’s honest glass, and that felt right at the time.
It was a grey afternoon — fitting for a camera that only sees in black and white. I had dinner at the Leitz Park hotel afterward, didn’t take any pictures. It felt more like a quiet ceremony than a purchase.
Since then, I’ve used the Monochrom sparingly. Some days I think I’m still learning to deserve it.
Anyone else ever buy a camera not because they needed it, but because it marked a turning point — something you just had to do to move forward?
Along with it, I picked up an old Elmar-C 90mm f/4 — my first M lens. Nothing fancy, just the plain little lens that happened to be there. People online say it’s soft, or that it has rangefinder coupling quirks. Maybe it does. But it’s honest glass, and that felt right at the time.
It was a grey afternoon — fitting for a camera that only sees in black and white. I had dinner at the Leitz Park hotel afterward, didn’t take any pictures. It felt more like a quiet ceremony than a purchase.
Since then, I’ve used the Monochrom sparingly. Some days I think I’m still learning to deserve it.
Anyone else ever buy a camera not because they needed it, but because it marked a turning point — something you just had to do to move forward?
Not really, I think a turning point is choosing left or right at a crossroads, and we know what temptations there are at the crossroads (look up 'Crossroads Blues', Robert Johnson). Moving forward is going straight on with a destination in mind, so I wouldn't buy a camera (anymore) if I didn't have a use for it. And years ago I thought I needed a Leica Monochrom but sold both my MM and M246 because they reminded me why I like film for B&W better than digital.
As per today, I own 3(!) 90mm lenses for my M bodies
- a 1960s one
- one from early 1970s
- and one from the 1990s
just as they are cheap and cheerful, I am thinking about adding one of those:
What do you think about these "bairgain bin" lenses?
- a 1960s one
- one from early 1970s
- and one from the 1990s
just as they are cheap and cheerful, I am thinking about adding one of those:
What do you think about these "bairgain bin" lenses?
Last edited:
-
- MattKing
- Deleted
- Reason: wrong thread
I have a 90mm Summicron version 1. When I’m using it well, it takes amazing photos, both on my M3 and digitally on my Fujifilm X-T2. I wish it was a bit lighter. There are many times I wish I had it handy but I don’t because of its weight. But overall, I think it is magic
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 9,618
- Format
- 4x5 Format
That’s the funniest looking lens but sure looks practical
I think everyone should have a 90, at least so they can see the framelines
Yep, 1st generation Summicron made by E. Leitz Canada, absolutely beautiful in silver finish, collapsible lens hood, built in tripod mount and could be had for a few hundred.
I believe that every photographer should own one Elmar-C 90/4:
1. It works for potrait as well as landscape
3. Is one of the smallest if not the smallest 90mm (exlcuding the collapsible one which does not work properly on digital M b odies)
4. Is cheaps as chips - cheaper than an artisan made half case or silk rope strap
5. Can be easily replaced as so many are around
1. It works for potrait as well as landscape
3. Is one of the smallest if not the smallest 90mm (exlcuding the collapsible one which does not work properly on digital M b odies)
4. Is cheaps as chips - cheaper than an artisan made half case or silk rope strap
5. Can be easily replaced as so many are around
Last edited:
This thread is now the spiritual home of Leica M 90mm lenses.
I've had a few 90's go through my hands over many years. I've kept the Tele-Elmarit M ƒ2.8 as it's so compact and quite sharp. It also behaves well on my Fuji X gear which is not universal in my experience with heritage glass.
90mm is the ideal "only" lens.
You can use it for portraits, architecture, landscape.
just use your feet as a zoom.
You can use it for portraits, architecture, landscape.
just use your feet as a zoom.
Last edited:
I've had a least 6 over the years.... Summicron, Elmarit, Tele-Elmarit, Elmarit M,fat tele-elmarit, Elmar C .....
They're ideal when you need them. At the same time....it is the lens i've used the least & could live without.
As for architecture.... there are lots of places you just can't back up enough.....
It's the last lens i would choose as an "only" lens.
Last edited:
Yeah but at the same time often the whole building has been photgraphed many times already, so focussing on details is a much better option.
It depends on location and intent. If it hasn't been photographed by me...I'm looking at what i want to photograph. I'm generally more interested in the building than the details alone
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,505
- Format
- 35mm RF
I have two 90s. A Minolta-M 90 from the CLE days and a Jupiter 9 from the late 50s. The Jupiter has slight focus issues, but it does make a nice image for what it is. The Minolta leaves nothing to be desired aside from more speed. Great little lens. I'll probably get something modern and fast at some point. I used to have a Contax Sonnar and that was nice but adapting it was more pain than it was worth really. I do kind of miss it though.
I am mostly a 50 guy, but if you see with a 90 then go with it. No reason not to really. I use a 90 more than the 35 for example.
I am mostly a 50 guy, but if you see with a 90 then go with it. No reason not to really. I use a 90 more than the 35 for example.
Why and which?
I have both the Version 2 (chrome) and Version 3 (pre-ASPH) 90mm Summicrons. The V2 is a huge, heavy cannon, so I never used it very much (and it's up for sale, actually, at present). The V3 is more compact, but still chunky and heavy. It's not exactly super sharp at either f2.0 or 2.8 either.
I keep thinking I might one day trade it toward the 90mm/f2.8 Elmarit-M, which is probably as sharp or sharper at f2.8 as the Summicron is--and is a good bit lighter.
If you want to go really light, the thin 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit is probably your best bet--I owned one for a while with a slightly dodgy front element, and I loved the size and it was decently sharp despite its condition. I also once owned the early-60s 90mm/2.8 Elmarit, and it was actually a pretty good performer, too, and not terribly heavy--optically, it's probably at least 90% as good (no pun intended) as any modern lens and is built extremely well.
I've never owned the "fat" Tele-Elmarit, but I know people who have and they were also quite pleased with its performance. Maybe not the lightest of Leica's 90s, but possibly the most compact of the faster lenses. They, and the early Elmarit I just mentioned, are probably the cheapest options for 2.8 or faster lens if you go that way.
Another possibility, which I've been a bit intrigued by, are the Voigtlanders: the Apo-Lanthar and Apo-Skopar. Anyone here used those and care to comment?
I keep thinking I might one day trade it toward the 90mm/f2.8 Elmarit-M, which is probably as sharp or sharper at f2.8 as the Summicron is--and is a good bit lighter.
If you want to go really light, the thin 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit is probably your best bet--I owned one for a while with a slightly dodgy front element, and I loved the size and it was decently sharp despite its condition. I also once owned the early-60s 90mm/2.8 Elmarit, and it was actually a pretty good performer, too, and not terribly heavy--optically, it's probably at least 90% as good (no pun intended) as any modern lens and is built extremely well.
I've never owned the "fat" Tele-Elmarit, but I know people who have and they were also quite pleased with its performance. Maybe not the lightest of Leica's 90s, but possibly the most compact of the faster lenses. They, and the early Elmarit I just mentioned, are probably the cheapest options for 2.8 or faster lens if you go that way.
Another possibility, which I've been a bit intrigued by, are the Voigtlanders: the Apo-Lanthar and Apo-Skopar. Anyone here used those and care to comment?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |