does anyone has experience with leica 90mm elmmarit 2.8? how is that lens? pls give me some advices, bc i am looking for that one with 550 AUD..
Thanks
Joe
Chuong wrote:
does anyone has experience with leica 90mm elmmarit 2.8? how is that lens? pls give me some advices, bc i am looking for that one with 550 AUD..
Thanks
Joe
My copy srl no 33448XX (E55 or version 2) is pretty much in line with what Erwin Puts has written see P166 on www.furnfeather.net/books/pdf/llcforweb.pdf
There's an actual tested MTF was produced by www.photodo.com/lens/Leica-ElmaritR-90mm-f28-944/images.
The wiki page www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/90mm_f/2.8_Elmarit-R_II suggests the E55 (version 2) was produced from 1978, probably for the best to go for a copy with a number higher than 3088001 (1981) just to be sure.
Hi friends! I've got a random question for fellow adapted-R shooters. My favourite focal length is 50mm, and I shoot almost everything wide open at f/2 using a 50cron. I'm really craving the added light and smoothness/bokeh of a 50 at 1.4, but the 50lux is not cheap, and requires adapting. While I know we all share a passion for the manual focus goodness of Leica R lenses, would it be so blasphemous to jump ship to the new Sigma 50mm Art (with AF)? I imagine that aside from the weight difference, the images will be sharper than Leica 50s manufactured over 10-20 years ago. The main drawback would be that I can't post those images to this great forum. Thoughts? I appreciate it!
And since I haven't posted in a while, here are a couple pics from a few months back. 6D 50cron.
This is an absolutely breathtaking image! I'm currently playing inFamous second son and it takes place in Seattle, so I appreciate this shot even more!
Roni1948 wrote:
...I'm really craving the added light and smoothness/bokeh of a 50 at 1.4, but the 50lux is not cheap, and requires adapting. ...Would it be so blasphemous to jump ship to the new Sigma 50mm Art (with AF)? I imagine that aside from the weight difference, the images will be sharper than Leica 50s manufactured over 10-20 years ago.
There's nothing the slightest bit wrong with using non-Leica lenses. Reasons to try to the Sigma: probably better resolution and contrast, automatic focus and aperture, warranty coverage, exif data recording. Reasons to go with Leica R: better handling such as manual focus feel and size of the lens, possibly better bokeh and aberration handling, probably better reliability, probably lower initial cost and almost certainly lower long-run cost.
If you like the Summicron mostly because of how it handles, the Summilux is the obvious answer for you. If you like the Summicron for how it draws light, then the only way to find out whether the Sigma will satisfy is to wait until more sample images are available. In the meantime, you could buy a Summilux, try it out, and--if you decide to go another route--sell it for about the same as you paid for it. Win-win.
Thanks Roni! It's a popular spot for such photos :-) Also, (shh) mine is a bit out of focus and/or shot at too large of an aperture so not getting the sharpest results from the lens. (think it was at f/4). But it looks OK small
