LTM lens prices

[david_werbeloff1]

Hi All:

 

I have wanted to buy a 90mm Elmarit f2.8 lens for years but somehow

I've continued using my 1937 Elmar f4 and not gotten around to it.

Of recent years I have started using a Barnack IIIa as my

"go-everywhere" point&shoot and am interested to find an Elmarit in

thread mount.

I should mention that I have a 135mm f4 Elmar (1960) which is a

fantastic lens and since it is a thread mount I can use it on the IIIa

(with a SCHOOC BL finder), on my M3 with the bayonet adaptor AND just

the lens head with my VisoflexIII. I would like to have the same

options with the Elmarit.

As I look at prices, I find that an Elmarit in thread mount typically

goes for more than $1000, where-as the same lens in bayonet mount

usually sells for about $500-$700. I understand that there were only

a little over 2000 of the Elmarits made in thread mount so I can see

paying a premium.

The part that surprises me is that thread mount versions of the 135mm

Elmar, a superb lens and almost as rare as the Elmarit (3200 in thread

mount) seem to go for about $300.

I also find myself wondering if it is actually worth paying this crazy

amount of money when I could forsake the versatility of the Elmarit

and just go and buy a faster 75mm AND 90mm for less money from

Voigtlander. I'd be interested to have your collective input.

Best, David

[al_kaplan1]

Well, you'd lose the option of a short mount for Visoflex use but you can get some decent bargains in 85mm lenses in LTM. The first Canons were called "Serenar". The late model 85/1.8 Canon is excellent, but the earlier 85/1.9 and 85/2 were very good also. The Nikkor 85/2 is my favorite. They work fine with a 90 finder. I use my 85/2 Nikkor all the time while the 90/2.8 Elmarit sits home. About the only use it sees is when I need to use a filter because I have a mess of 39mm filters.

[awahlster]

In a nut shell the 90mm Elmarit f2.8 lens is a collectors lens and priced for it's rarity not it's use. I would venture there wer a lot more then 3200 135mm f4. Elmars made where do you get those numbers?

[SCL]

Sometime in the 1980s or thereabouts the 135mm lens, which was a must have lens in the 1960-70s, lost its cachet -- which I suppose is why its price is almost a give-away. I like the 135 but use it less than my 90.

[eliot_rosen1]

The 90/2.8 Elmarit ($ 1000+) and 135/4 Elmars ($ 600 or so) in original screwmount are uncommon lenses. Both sell for a substantial premium over their bayonet mount equivalents. These are collector lenses. The CV 75/2.5 and 90/3.5 are good alternatives as users. Much less expensive and provide modern levels of performance. BTW, the 90/2.8 and 135/4 are mated to much later screwmount cameras (IIIg) if you really wanted contemporary lens to go with a IIIa. Best wishes.

[awahlster]

Sorry David I mixed up the F4.5 with the later f4.0 version you were talking about though the qouted prices seam a bit high for the 135mm f4.0 Elmar considering the last ones to sell (4+ in the last two weeks)on ebay all sold for under $300.00 a few reached above that amount but did not sell (must have had higher reserves)

[david_werbeloff1]

Hi All: Thanks for your responses. I'm a little nervous of venturing into the CV camp, because I find that I don't much care for the "poppy", super contrasty, "larger-than-life" images yielded by current optics. The look of old Leitz glass seems to yield longer grey scale(or the equivalent in color terms) which when coupled with modern color films (which are themselves super contrasty) and an image which corresponds with the image I remember as I press the shutter. I do like Al Kaplan's suggestion of the Canon 85mm. Have to start looking at those. I wouldn't have expected that the 90mm Elmarit was such a collector's item.

[john_shriver]

The Canon 85/2.0 is a heavy lens at 20 ounces, and relatively long and front-heavy. It will surprise you in comparison to the 90/4 Elmar.

 

Al Kaplan has previously noted the Nikkor 85/2.0 is squatter and better balanced. It looks the part, but I've never handled one.

[rjm photo]

I can vouch for the Nikon 85 F2, I have one in Leica screw mount and one in Nikon rangefinder mount. They are very sharp, great color rendition with smooth out of focus. I too leave my 90mm Elmarit (latest) at home and shoot with the 85mm Nikkors - whatever camera I use, screw mount or M, or with my thirties era 90mm Elmar F4.

 

Sometimes the latest cannot provide the look which we are after.

[pensacolaphoto]

I vouch for the Canon 85mm/1.9 in LTM. It is beautifully built and it is sharp. Needless to add that it is heavy.

[peter_evans4]

If I remember right, the Canon 85/1.8 is fatter than the earlier 85/1.9. It's certainly a big lens, and it's fairly heavy too.

 

Reconsider the CV 75/2.5 with slightly less contrasty paper or some similar ploy. Or if you want a longer lens, the Canon 100/3.5 (compact, light) or earlier 100/4 (compact, fairly light, dirt cheap).

[bruce_fichelson]

I own a chrome screwmount 90 2.8 Elmarit and wondered if anyone can tell me the inclusive dates this model was in production? What is the appropriate pricing for such a mint lens in today's market?Thanks in advance.

[bruce_fichelson]

Well, it took a long while, but I found a near mint chrome 90mm Leitz Elmarit f2.8. The only signs of use are on the front ring and that is probably due to mounting a hood. Glass is perfect. The leather is perfect. Does anyone know the value of such a lens AND its inclusive dates of production? Can't seem to find info on either. Thanks in advance.

Bruce<div></div>