Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2021/06/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I had one of those on my CL back in the day, and I was very happy with it. Cheers, Nathan Nathan Wajsman Alicante, Spain http://www.frozenlight.eu <http://www.frozenlight.eu/> http:// <http://www.greatpix.eu/>www.greatpix.eu PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws <http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws>Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/ <http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/> Cycling: http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator <http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator> YNWA "I?m not arguing, I?m just explaining why I?m right" > On 8 Jun 2021, at 20:43, Frank Filippone via LUG <lug at leica-users.org> > wrote: > > Speaking of the TE ( 90mm F2.8 Tele-Elmarit), I just picked up a 90mm F4 > Elmar-C lens for the Leica CL camera. > > It will be used on my Sony A7. It is significantly less costly then the > TE. > > It has a different optical design, still 4 elements. > > I am interested in how it performs compared to its Big Brother. > > Not that this lens uses a different rear mounting flange, and I think the > 6bit coding replacement flanges will be too thin for it....(wrong focus) > > > Frank Filippone > BMWRed735i at Gmail.com <mailto:BMWRed735i at Gmail.com> > On 6/8/2021 7:33 AM, Sonny Carter via LUG wrote: >> I like the TE too. It is one of the few Leica lenses I kept, compact and >> crisp. >> >> Regards, >> >> Sonny >> http://sonc.com <http://sonc.com/> <http://sonc.com/look/ >> <http://sonc.com/look/>> >> Natchitoches, Louisiana >> 1714 >> Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase >> >> USA >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 11:37 AM Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu >> <mailto:photo at frozenlight.eu>> wrote: >> >>> One of my favorite lenses is the 90mm Tele-Elmarit. It is great on film >>> and on my Fuji digital cameras. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Nathan >>> >>> Nathan Wajsman >>> >>> Alicante, Spain >>> http://www.frozenlight.eu <http://www.frozenlight.eu/> >>> <http://www.frozenlight.eu/ <http://www.frozenlight.eu/>> >>> http:// <http://www.greatpix.eu/ >>> <http://www.greatpix.eu/>>www.greatpix.eu <http://www.greatpix.eu/> >>> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws >>> <http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws> < >>> http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws <http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws>>Blog: >>> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/ >>> <http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/> < >>> http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/ >>> <http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/>> >>> >>> Cycling: http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator >>> <http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator> < >>> http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator> >>> >>> YNWA >>> >>> "I?m not arguing, I?m just explaining why I?m right" >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 7 Jun 2021, at 18:34, Don Dory via LUG <lug at leica-users.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I have a very good selection of the "great lenses of the past" You have >>>> seen some of them posted in my weekly postings. My personal problem is >>>> that I prefer the uber sharpness and acuity that the new glass provides. >>>> Acquiring very high MP cameras seems to ask for the same in the lenses. >>>> Yet, when I go to the older formulations the image is the thing. If the >>>> message in the image is weak then who cares if you can count eyelashes >>>> on >>>> the dog in the corner. >>>> >>>> So, off I will go with a 50 Elmarit or Zeiss equivalent and see what >>>> becomes magic before me. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 10:17 AM Frank Filippone via LUG < >>> lug at leica-users.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I bought the M42 early version of the Pentax 300mm lens for travel. It >>> is >>>>> pretty light, very sharp, and physically smaller than anything I could >>> buy >>>>> today. It is F6.3, which allows it to be small. It is one of what I >>> call >>>>> Cult Lenses. Good to superb optics, but not modern. They exist in >>> every >>>>> brand. Nikon 105, Leica 35 Summicron, Canon FD 135/3.5, Contarex >>> Distagon >>>>> 25mm, Pentax 18mm F4 semi fisheye to mention a few. Usually they sell >>> for >>>>> the equivalent of the sales tax on a modern lens. >>>>> >>>>> The genius of the mirrorless bodies is that with an adapter, they are >>>>> pretty much all usable..... I have several. Differing brands. All >>> great >>>>> lenses. >>>>> >>>>> And some are dogs. You find this out AFTER you test out the >>> lens......But >>>>> usually, and because of the Internet, you can read and avoid the >>> terrible >>>>> lenses. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Frank Filippone >>>>> BMWRed735i at Gmail.com >>>>>> While this lens combo works, many others are very poor, and inevitably >>>>> I'll probably have to buy Sony E mount lenses. >>>>>> Douglas >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 06/06/2021 22:02, Don Dory via LUG wrote: >>>>>>> This isn't about a great lens I found. What I am really questioning >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> using equipment that is "good enough" I stumbled on a 40mm Makro >>> Kilfit >>>>>>> f3.5 D version at a stupidly cheap price. Even in Exacta mount that >>>>> wasn't >>>>>>> an obstacle with a mirrorless body. It is a four element in three >>> group >>>>>>> design. Using it I found it quite usable wide open if you kept the >>> main >>>>>>> subject in the center third. Stopped down to 5.6-8 it was quite >>> usable >>>>> out >>>>>>> to the outer third. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Even compared to the Leica 60mm Macro it is half the size and weight. >>>>> So, >>>>>>> what is everybodies feelings about good enough even though modern >>>>>>> technology will be far superior? I know more than several members >>> have >>>>>>> transitioned to the Q2 for the size, weight, and simplicity of use. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Part of this is that younger photographers need a beginning place. >>>>> Most of >>>>>>> us started out on used equipment that worked and as our fortunes and >>>>>>> interests matured we acquired better tools. My child didn't really >>> get >>>>> an >>>>>>> income that would support a lot of hobbies until thirty after the >>>>>>> PhD. >>>>>>> Many folk don't get to that point so the tools need to be more >>>>> reasonable >>>>>>> than a $2000 M body and a $500 foggy Russian lens. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyway, thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Don >>>> don.dory at gmail.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug >>> <http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug> for more information >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug >> <http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug> for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug > <http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug> for more information