Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Steven Blutter wrote: > > This lens is avail for pretty good prices. I've seen more positives about > the 2.8 Elmarit, also lower cost. > > I'm curious if anyone's compared these 2. > > Thanks in advance, > > Steven > You'll find plenty of negatives as well in the lug archives. I'd guess more negatives than positives. Me, I'm a negative. But you can stick me in a slide mount and project me anyway! Owning this lens was the worst disaster in my Leica experience as I had it for a year and went into denial (which was chilly and cold) as to how awful it was… Which you can read about worded the same I bet on the archives and anchovies. One point is this. If it's so great why was it discontinued for a lens which was or is twice as big and heavy? The current Elmarit which came out in 1980 with partial NASA money behind it and was called by that crazy but prestigious French magazine "Caliers du jour" the second best lens in the history of 35mm photography. The first being a Canon 180 f2.8 or 2! So much for a tele lens which you can use with a normal never-ready camera case. That'll stop em from going SLR! I used to complain that they should make one now and that the "Voigtländer" Color Heliar 75 F2.5 didn't float my boat. But now I cant say that because they do. The LEICA MACRO-ELMAR-M 90mm f/4 is which weighs as I recall 250g's which is half what the Summicron weights and the Elmarit weighs like 420. But at that lower price bracket I'd go with the Elmar C for the CL than the Tele-Elmarit any day. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabinergroup.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html