Leica R 90mm lens.

Can any one tell me the difference between the 1st and 2nd versions

of the Leica R-elmarit f/2.8/90mm and R-summicron f2/90mm. Which one

should I choose?

Ken, when I shot Leica R, I owned both the 2nd version Elmarit 90 as well as the 90 Summicron. The 2nd version Elmarit is a very good performer, equivalent to the current M Elmarit, but I found myself using the Summicron more often. The brighter image of the F2 SLR lens was the biggest reason, and the Summicron is a fine performer. You can't make a bad choice.

the first version was made in: 1964 to 1983. code: 11239, in two or three cams, filter size: Series 7, weight 515grs. The second version was made: 1984 to 1997 code # 11806 for the Leicaflex SL,SL2. and the Leica R: 11154, filter size E55, weight 450grs. this leses is one off the very best of Leica even today! this can be used with Elpro # 3 for close-ups., in a reproduction ratio of 1:3, sharp, exceptional optical correction.-

I use the 90mm summicron e55 filter size with the telescopic hood. It is the only lens I use in Leica R. I find it exceptional and originally bought it thinking that I would later buy a 35mm summicron. I still have yet to buy the 35mm, I use the 90 for everything.

 

Regards

There was only one optical version of these lenses until this year, when the APO-Summicron ASPH came out. The mounts were changed on the 90 Summicron and Elmarit, but optically they were identical. The first versions of the mounts took series 7 filters, the second vesrion took 55mm filters. It doesn't matter at all which one you choose, they are optically identical. The cams differed over time, so you have to make sure you get the right cams for your camera. The new APO-Summicron ASPH is a completely new design. The Elmarit has been discontinued for a while now.

Is that the 90 summicron and 1st version 90 elmarit were made with 5 elements/4 groups, and the 2nd version 90 elmarit were made with 4 elements/4 gropups?

Hans is not correct. There was one optical version of the

pre-APO 90mm Summicron-R, but there were two optical

versions of the 90mm Elmarit-R. The first version is a

Gauss-type design which is larger and heavier that the 2nd

version. The first version was available in one- two- and 3-cam

configurations; filter sizes were iniitally Series VII but this was

changed to E55 some time in the 1970s.

<P>

The first version of the Elmarit-R is quite a good lens, and its

performance holds up well with extension tubes or bellows. The

2nd version is optically identical to the Elmarit-M and is an

outstanding lens, as well as being light and compact. The 2nd

version was only made with E55 filter threads, and as far as I

know only in 3-cam configuration.

<P>

The pre-APO Summicron-R is great for portraits, but has severe

field curvature with extension tubes or bellows. The ELPROS

are good choices for close-up photography with this lens. This

is one of my oldest lenses and I will never part with it. It was

made with 2 different barrels. The first barrel was made in 2-cam

and 3-cam configuration, with Series VII (early) or E55 (late) filter

threads. The second version of the barrel was made only as a

3-cam E55 model.

"Hans is not correct. There was one optical version of the pre-APO 90mm Summicron-R, but there were two optical versions of the 90mm Elmarit-R. The first version is a Gauss-type design which is larger and heavier that the 2nd version. The first version was available in one- two- and 3-cam configurations; filter sizes were iniitally Series VII but this was changed to E55 some time in the 1970s."

 

I may be mistaken. I was unaware of any change in the design.

 

I owned the first version of both the Elmarit-R and the Summicron, and I still own the Summicron. I think the Elmarit-R had a touch more contrast, but only a touch.

Having quite literally just bought a used 90mm F2.8 Elmarit (UK £195)which I believe to be a first version, can someone please enlighten me as to the following: at what point did production pass from Wetzlar to Canada & when did the script around the front element change from red to white (or vice versa). Thanks in advance.

I don't think the 90 Elmarit was ever made in Canada, all production was in Germany. However, some of the 90 Summicrons were made in Canada.

Douglas,

 

I had a 90mm Elmarit-R serial number 36xxx that was 3rd cam only. It was made in Germany rather than Canada. I was disappointed to discover this particular lens wouldn't mount on the Leicaflex SL I had at the time. I never understood why that was so. Does anyone know?

 

Steve

BTW:For those not familiar with Leica lens serial numbers,I should point out the #36xxx 3rd cam only 90mm Elmarit-R German made lens I had was a very late 2nd version 90mm Elmarit. I had others of the 2nd version that were made in Canada. Those had a serial number around 33xxx.

Steve - I was unaware of 3rd-cam Elmarits. Some 3rd-cam lenses can be used on Leicaflexes w/o modification, requiring stop-down or hand-held metering, while others have the R-only bayonet flange which must be replaced or modified to fit a Leicaflex. <P>

 

The 50mm Summicron-R I had was originally a 3rd-cam lens but had a Leicaflex flange, while my 280mm f/4 APO was also originally a 3rd-cam lens but had an R flange which had to be modified slightly to fit the SL. Don Goldberg does this work, and I believe Sherry Krauter does too. Leica USA also converts lenses from 3rd-cam to 3-cam.

Well, I'm about 5 years late to the post, but someone might find this interesting. I had an early version of the Elmarit 90 2.8 and it was a stellar lens. But the 90 Summicron is magic at 2.0 to 2.8. Here's a shot right out of the camera w/ it at f2. It's underexposed and a bit grainy, but I think you'll see how they can image. The SLR is an easier camera to focus with at such small apertures compared to the RF cameras.<div></div>

<p>Hi!<br>

I have an Elmarit-R 90 first version which I use with a Nikon D5000 body via the Leitax mount. I like that lens quit a lot but I realize it is not perfect in many areas. Anyway what bothers me the most are the colors: comparing to my Nikon kit lens (yeah, I went from kit lens strait up to Leica!) the colors look much less saturated. Not in low light though, just with something like "not-to-dark" overcast up. For example, on a sunny day the images would look to brownish and dull, until I set the color balance manually to try to achieve a natural looking image. Than, after saturation boosted quite a bit, the shadows look too blue. Are those the colors one would expect from the first version Elmarit? I also though it could be because I'm using it in a digital body in which the reflective nature of the sensor's surface could create some flare inside the lens.<br>

I was wondering if the second version Elmarit might perform better color wise.<br>

Appreciate your help!</p><div></div>

<p>Hi!<br>

I have an Elmarit-R 90 first version which I use with a Nikon D5000 body via the Leitax mount. I like that lens quit a lot but I realize it is not perfect in many areas. Anyway what bothers me the most are the colors: comparing to my Nikon kit lens (yeah, I went from kit lens strait up to Leica!) the colors look much less saturated. Not in low light though, just with something like "not-to-dark" overcast up. For example, on a sunny day the images would look to brownish and dull, until I set the color balance manually to try to achieve a natural looking image. Than, after saturation boosted quite a bit, the shadows look too blue. Are those the colors one would expect from the first version Elmarit? I also though it could be because I'm using it in a digital body in which the reflective nature of the sensor's surface could create some flare inside the lens.<br>

I was wondering if the second version Elmarit might perform better color wise.<br>

Appreciate your help!</p><div>[ATTACH=full]447518[/ATTACH]</div>

 

I've noticed the colors being off on sunny days too

Well, I'm about 5 years late to the post, but someone might find this interesting. I had an early version of the Elmarit 90 2.8 and it was a stellar lens. But the 90 Summicron is magic at 2.0 to 2.8. Here's a shot right out of the camera w/ it at f2. It's underexposed and a bit grainy, but I think you'll see how they can image. The SLR is an easier camera to focus with at such small apertures compared to the RF cameras.<div>[ATTACH=full]287809[/ATTACH]</div>

That is good. Who cares if you're late to post, That is good. Bravo.