Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/02/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have no experience with the fat tele but I have used the thin tele- and the elmarit. The thin one commonly gave me washed out pics when used against some degree of back-light. I traded it in for the latest elmarit which I found was much better. While we are on the subject of 90mm leitz lenses, the 9cm thin Elmar f4 SM lens is one fine lens. I found that it can deliver great pictures even though the one I used is made circa 1939 and is uncoated. Dan K. At 02:40 PM 2/12/97 PST, you wrote: > Hi, > > More than likely this subject might have been brought up before. The > same guy who told me about the coating difference said that he had > been using the 90mm Tele-Elmarit with some image problems. He finally > switched to the Elmarit with satisfaction. I remember reading a lot > of praises about the Tele-Elmarit with a little bit of gripes. > As far as I know there are two versions of the Tele-Elmarit, fat and > slim. I also would like some information on the performance > difference between these two versions. Basically I am talking about > three different lenses, Fat Tele, Slim Tele and Elmarit. > Thank you in advance. > > Regards, > David > seungmin@luxcom.com > >