90mm Macro Elmar

[Jarvman]

Can anyone tell me anything about this lens. I'm interested in it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Can anyone tell me anything about this lens. I'm interested in it.

What do you want to know? I REALLY wanted to try this lens, and borrowed one from Leica, with the close-up attachment -- and then used it far less than I expected, because for me, the 90/2 is a lot more useful. But the close-up facility is invaluable if you shoot many close-ups, which I tend not to do, probably as a consequence of using rangefinders for so many years.

If you don't have a 90, and rarely need speed, it's a more useful lens than the 90/2; but so much depends on your needs and preferences.

 

[Jarvman]

Just interested in what it can do really. I've never shot any macro and in certain situations the minumum focus of some Leica lenses is a pain. Pretty rarely though. For example when I was taking part in a competition called photomarathon and wanted to take a picture of a smashed mug of tea for a topic titled 'tea break' and couldn't get as close as I liked so filled the frame with some custard creams to fill up the blank space. Would've been nicer to get closer. I already have a 90mm/2 summicron. Perhaps It'd be better to look at a macro lens for my EOS if I want to attempt some. It's a curious lens though.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Or consider a 65/3.5 on a Viso.

What can it do? Take very sharp pics down to about 1/3 life size (that's from memory). Not a lot else to know, really.

 

[tzillman]

Jarvman,

I have a copy of this lense. I bought it for several reasons. First it's rather small for a 90mm since it collapses and it is fairly light, so it makes a pretty good travel lense. It makes a nice portrait lense. It focuses to .76 meter and as a 90mm you can fill the frame with anything that's the size of a larger flower, such as a day lilly. Even though the largest aperture is fairly small at f4, it will blur out a background quite nicely for a portrait or close up. It uses a 39mm filter, so it is the same size as my other three lenses and when I bought it it was fairly reasonably priced for a Leica lense at around $1200 (three years ago). I bought it without the macro adapter, but I would like to try it with one someday. Overall, it does a number of functions very well. If you have any specific questions, I have the lense and the manual, so I'd be glad to look up an answer if I do not know it.

Tom

 

[Chazzy]

Isn't using a rangefinder for macro doing things the hard way?

 

[elekm]

I have a Contameter (three Proxars + rangefinder) for a Contax IIa rangefinder. It turns out nice photos, but doing macro with a rangefinder is much more difficult than with an SLR.

The SLR clearly is the better tool in terms of focusing, judging depth of field and framing when it comes to macro photography.

(Even so, I love the Contameter, and it does a great job. It really slows you down, because focusing is accomplished by moving the camera to and fro.)

 

[Roger Hicks]

Isn't using a rangefinder for macro doing things the hard way?

Yes, except when you don't want to carry both an SLR AND a rangefinder. When I went to China a while back, for example, I found the 90/4 Makro-Elmar a much more satisfactory solution than lugging a separate reflex body and a lens that could be used only on that body.

At home, or if I know I'll need a macro lens for some reason, I'll use the 90/2.5 Vivitar Series 1 Macro or 90-180/4.5 Vivitar Series 1 Flat Field. If I'm flying somewhere, the 90/4 is a better bet, or the Viso + 65. Or even a DR Summicron.

These solutions aren't designed for dedicated macro photographers: they're designed for dedicated Leica-M users who want the occasional close shot. Even then, I've found that most 90s or the 75 Summicron normally do all I need, at around 1/10 to 1/8 life size on the film.