Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/01/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>>Hmm. There are those of us who don't find the 4/90 collapsible Elmar 'ugly'! >> >>Many of the aftermarket lenses you mention aren't really competitive in >>today's world -- the Serenar and Steinheil aren't bad, but aren't great, >>either. A Schacht Travenar would be a better choice if you could run one >>down, though only the 3.5/135 is common these days. The 2/85 Jupiter-9 is a >>fine lens, being a clone of the Prewar Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar, and a late >>one will possibly be multi-coated. I'd check with Mark Chaney, that >>stalwart purveyor of things Soviet and Post-Soviet for that: his e-mail is >><chano@teikyopost.edu>. >> >>SHAMELESS COMMERCIAL MESSAGE: There are a zillion more aftermarket lenses, >>but you'll have to await the impending release of my NON-LEITZ LEICA >>THREAD-MOUNT LENSES: A THIRTY-NINE MILLIMETER DIVERSITY, due out >>momentarily from Rita Wittig, to read the saga of these sterling optics. >> >>The current 2.8/90 Elmarit is HIGHLY praised by those whose opinions I >>trust, but I've never used one. The earlier 2.8/90's I've owned and used, >>but they never did a lot for me. The current 2/90 is a wonderful lens, but >>a bit on the large side (though NOT as big a mass, at all, as the older 2/90 >>Summicron!). >> >>Marc >> >>msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315 >>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir! > >I use a 85mm/1.8 Nikkor for most of my portrait-type work, and though I >have a 90/2 Tele-Elmarit (Canada), I rarely use it. What's the difference >between this Tele-Elmarit and the Elmarit-M 90mm that everybody's bragging >about? Any information on this lens would be appreciated. > >Robert Oops! Bad proof reading! 90/2.8, of course. Sorry about that. Robert