Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Opinions on the Performance of the Tele-Elmarit - M 90 f2.8 Lens?
From: Mark Rabiner <>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:39:49 -0800
References: <>

Martin Howard wrote:
> The other one, I think, is which lens hood you use with it.  I wouldn't
> use the TE without a hood and I've abandoned the rubber hood in favor
> of the old metal hood (12575?).  This is a deep hood and it shields the
> front element well from stray light.
> M.

My lenshood was I'm sure the one you have in mind, Martin, it is huge
with thick black felt on the inside.
Your own personal hand held black hole in the universe. I'd be careful
to only use one without a dirty UV filter or expect things to be missing
from you camera bag. I cleaned out mine once and found all kinds of
small not necessary metallic objects in there.

Why bother coating the lens at all with a lenshood like this on the
front of it? I thought.
This lens could make ANY lens perform like a Tiger in the circus.

This however did not help MY lens which had the antidote to this
lenshood hidden between it's elements.
Not wale oil either wrong story; not Moby Dick. Peter Pan.

You can't see it when you look through the lens. But the images it
crates can see it as they have no contrast and no tonal separation. Who
knows had I had Sherry or someone else good give it a good cleaning that
could have fixed it. All i know is it cost my 500 bucks and who'd think
a lens which cost that kind of money could have problems like that? That
was my second lens I'd not had anything resembling those kinds of
problems since and I've gotten many lense though most of them new.
I'm tempted to say it's a bum lens and steer my friends away from it.
(It really was a big disaster for me I was in denial for quite a while,
I say " no this has to be medium format I as forgoing 35mm altogether)
What may bare this out is this: Why did Leica change to a design
weighting twice as much and twice as big?
Free money from Nasa?
They were all big on having a 90 which fit in a normal camera case but
when this NASA thing comes along why not continue this compact thing
perhaps at F4 to give their users that compact option (which I'd love)
The answer is the technology was really not there yet to give Leitz what
that wanted. It is there now. I'd love some compact lens options for the
M system from Leica. I refuse to get it from Cosina but I'll get an ulta
wide from them as I sense it just isn't going to happen from Leica
period ever.
In effect Leica is already doing this by offering the Elmarit as it a
lightweight answer to the Semicolon. Trouble is it is a lead pipe which
you can't exactly put in your back pocket the Summicron a length and a half.

The Collapsible 50 Elmar really is a baby 50 and I've got my eye on that
lens i could get come real  use out of it. Make my camera fit in my
portfolio bag.

An old pre aspheric might as well be called a pancake. It's quite a big
lighter than a 50 Summicron the new Asph 35 is quite a bit heavier; and
longer. I cold get the old lens and do OK but I'd love even more if
Leica camera out with a super compact 2.8 super lightweight lens to tote
around all day with it's companion the 50 Elmar.

The new 28 Summicron of course IS a super compact version of the options
before it. With greater not less speed and quality. I think Leica is
doing OK by us.

Mark Rabiner
Portland, Oregon USA
- --
To unsubscribe, see

In reply to: Message from Martin Howard <> (Re: [Leica] Re: Opinions on the Performance of the Tele-Elmarit - M 90 f2.8 Lens?)