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.
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?
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?
90mm is the ideal "only" lens.
You can use it for portraits, architecture, landscape.
just use your feet as a zoom.
As for architecture.... there are lots of places you just can't back up enough.....
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.


I've never been comfortable with longer lenses on rangefinder cameras. To me, they are best with normal and wides. But if I did go for a 90, I'd go for a screw mount.
Here's a rare one on Ebay at the moment: 90mm f2.8 Elmarit with caps, $795.00
| 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: ![]() |
