Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have not tried the early chrome tele, but the 90mm F4 Rokkor-C is much much richer in color and warmth than the black tele-elmarit. Working very nicely for portraits in color. My film scanner showed that there was less sharpness at the corners on the Rokkor, however. Mike In a message dated Wed, 6 Sep 2000 4:53:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Peter A. Klein" <pklein@2alpha.net> writes: << > My very early (chrome) Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 works absolute magic on > portraits. I also have the Elmarit and Summicron 90's, but there is > something about the Tele that makes faces glow. For just about everything > else needing a 90mm, I use the Elmarit. The Summicron is an old SOOZI > thread-mount, so once in awhile I put it on a IIIg and look for someone to > take me for a spin in their MG-TD. But if they ever showed up, I would have > to take their portrait with the Tele-Elmarit! Interesting. I've read that the Tele-Elmarit is less sharp in the near range (6 feet or less) than farther out. One person's bug is another one's feature. This "flaw" would indeed make faces "glow," if we accept that "Leica glow" is merely uncorrected aberrations that manifest themselves in a pleasant way :-) What about some of the other LTM 85/90mm rangefinder alternatives? Canon 85/1.8, 1.9 or 2.0? Nikkor 85/2? Russian Jupiter-9 85/2? Anybody use these? - --Peter >>