Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Christer Almqvist wrote: > > I have no comparison to offer, but I have a lot of experience with the > 'thin' 2.8/90 mm Tele-Elmarit M model that takes the 39mm filters. I > bought the lens because prices are so low. However, it turns out to be a > lens that there is no need to upgrade. 16x times enlargements are stunning! > But then I use a tripod, stop down to 5.6, use Delta 100 and I am generally > careful when developing. BTW, among today's messages is one from Harry Haig > who wants to buy a 21mm lens and offers a Tele-Elmarit in part exchange. > Perhaps you can do a deal with him. I see the advantage of this lens (over > the f4 one) as being one step (= one stop) ahead when stopping down, which > obviously improves the result, especially in the f4 and 5.6 range. > snip I'ts possible we've been through this before but my tele-Elmarit M 2.8/90 was a real bum lens which really screwed me up for a year as I went into deep denial thinking it was my developer or too much back light or stopping down not enough or too much. I finally traded it in for the new current Elmiret and not a chirp of low contrast low res gremlins. Check Erwin and I think you will find he delicately says that they went too far in the compactness quest on this one and that the previous one "Elmar" was better and similar to the current. I knew it was a dog before I discoverd Erwin though. Mark Rabiner