It doesn’t get much love because of its size and weight but the 90mm 2.0 Leica pre Asph is a beauty and super sharp. Has nice bokeh and does flare but In a great way. Thank you for taking the time to make this test. I’ve had old Leica vintage under 300$ lenses. People always complain that Leica are over priced and not worth it when there are tons of affordable vintage lenses. Often these people haven’t even used Leica lenses. I gotta tell you I sold my summicron 50mm vintage Leica and I miss it. There is something about it. The feel of using it and the results. It’s very pleasing compared to new lenses with all auto everything
@@Adventure8 That was my initial thought as well but several have now said to me that the f3.5 has more character and the f2.8 is a bit flat and dull compared to the f3.5. As for speed I agree that faster usually wins but as an outdoor, daylight shooter only I can live with slower as can my wallet LOL. One of my favorites was my 35mm f3.5 Summaron on an M2. Dead sharp center and enough softness that every shot had an artsy sort of vignette look. I sold that lens 20 years ago but still look back on those images as some of my favorites.
What a testament to the classic lens designers. In print I doubt anyone would even notice the difference. Are you using just the plain color jpg or the “smooth film” mode?
Griniflix - Adventure8 there are “film modes” on the 240. Black and white, vivid color, and smooth color film. Was just wondering if you used one. I’m pretty sure they are just the standard JPG in your video though. Nice stuff. Looking forward to more leica vids
Christopher Coppola : yes film type was set to “off”. My favourite modes are either “off” or “black and white”. Maybe I should experiment a little more with Vivid And Smooth...!
This is quite great comparison! Thank you so much. All I need to do is just boost the contrast a little bit to the Elmar. What a great news! For me the size of the lens matters more, and also I have the L-type Elmar.
Clive Jarmusch : easy choice. Buy it, use it, appreciate it, then decide to keep it or not. Chances are if you sell, you will get a similar price. Just like a free extended loan. If you keep it, you have another lens to stimulate your creativity. Cheers
Dan Remigino : yes, it clears the shutter by a few millimeters just like the M film cameras. All good. The old lens looks great on the M240 calapsed. Almost like a pocket camera.
Nice comparison, although I think it's worth pointing out the speed differences - two and a half stops is a lot, and that's really what you buy a Summilux for. If you're shooting at F8, even a cheap Chinese lens would do pretty well.
Lenses are like wine: the more expensive one might not be much better than a similar cheaper one. Summilux lenses are hard to justify for the price/quality ratio compared to cheaper alternatives.
RAW would not impact the final resolution of the image. The definition rendered by the glass would remain the same, whether looking at the JPG image vs the RAW image. Post processing the RAW image, clarity/definition in Lightroom or equivalent could of course help.
Thanks for your comment Earvin. Great timing. Just took a series of photos with the 5cm Elmar on a M10 Monochrom. Very impressive. A video will be out soon. Thanks for watching.
Outstanding comparison! This is very helpful. Thank you so much.
It doesn’t get much love because of its size and weight but the 90mm 2.0 Leica pre Asph is a beauty and super sharp. Has nice bokeh and does flare but In a great way. Thank you for taking the time to make this test. I’ve had old Leica vintage under 300$ lenses. People always complain that Leica are over priced and not worth it when there are tons of affordable vintage lenses. Often these people haven’t even used Leica lenses. I gotta tell you I sold my summicron 50mm vintage Leica and I miss it. There is something about it. The feel of using it and the results. It’s very pleasing compared to new lenses with all auto everything
Thanks for sharing your experiences and commenting.
Great review. Am looking at buying the 2.8 version of the collapsible Elmar for my M3
Faster the better I say. I think the 2.8 version is a better choice.
@@Adventure8 That was my initial thought as well but several have now said to me that the f3.5 has more character and the f2.8 is a bit flat and dull compared to the f3.5. As for speed I agree that faster usually wins but as an outdoor, daylight shooter only I can live with slower as can my wallet LOL. One of my favorites was my 35mm f3.5 Summaron on an M2. Dead sharp center and enough softness that every shot had an artsy sort of vignette look. I sold that lens 20 years ago but still look back on those images as some of my favorites.
The color seems more vibrant in the new lens.. The detail is better. But damn... the vintage lens held its own. Just a different signature.
What a testament to the classic lens designers. In print I doubt anyone would even notice the difference. Are you using just the plain color jpg or the “smooth film” mode?
True. I used the JPG’S straight from the camera. No doubt there is some smoothing in the JPG output.
Griniflix - Adventure8 there are “film modes” on the 240. Black and white, vivid color, and smooth color film. Was just wondering if you used one. I’m pretty sure they are just the standard JPG in your video though. Nice stuff. Looking forward to more leica vids
Christopher Coppola : yes film type was set to “off”. My favourite modes are either “off” or “black and white”. Maybe I should experiment a little more with Vivid And Smooth...!
i was praying you dont drop anything on the water LOL. thank yo for the video :)
Timothy Lua : yes, the thought of dropping the lens in the water was going through my mind at the time....
great comparison
Thanks
This is quite great comparison! Thank you so much.
All I need to do is just boost the contrast a little bit to the Elmar. What a great news!
For me the size of the lens matters more, and also I have the L-type Elmar.
👍
Nice review! A friend of mine is selling 9/10 condition Elmar at $600. Really tempting. I still can't decide, though.
Clive Jarmusch : easy choice. Buy it, use it, appreciate it, then decide to keep it or not. Chances are if you sell, you will get a similar price. Just like a free extended loan. If you keep it, you have another lens to stimulate your creativity. Cheers
Griniflix - Adventure8 Thank you so much for your inputs :) Done deal. Can't wait to try it. Cheers!
Clive Jarmusch 👍
Were you able to fully collapse the Elmar 50mm 3.5 into the body of the M240 without hitting the sensor?
Dan Remigino : yes, it clears the shutter by a few millimeters just like the M film cameras. All good. The old lens looks great on the M240 calapsed. Almost like a pocket camera.
Nice comparison, although I think it's worth pointing out the speed differences - two and a half stops is a lot, and that's really what you buy a Summilux for. If you're shooting at F8, even a cheap Chinese lens would do pretty well.
To get a complete and a fair comparison use those two lenses on a film camera now, like the M3. You may be surprised.
Good suggestion.
Lenses are like wine: the more expensive one might not be much better than a similar cheaper one. Summilux lenses are hard to justify for the price/quality ratio compared to cheaper alternatives.
Do you think RAW would have given more accurate representation?
RAW would not impact the final resolution of the image. The definition rendered by the glass would remain the same, whether looking at the JPG image vs the RAW image. Post processing the RAW image, clarity/definition in Lightroom or equivalent could of course help.
For black and white photography I’d go with the vintage lens.
👍
The Elmar are not made for color.
Try it in monochrom camera, you will see the character of that lens
Thanks for your comment Earvin. Great timing. Just took a series of photos with the 5cm Elmar on a M10 Monochrom. Very impressive. A video will be out soon. Thanks for watching.
The Leica 90mm F4 Elmar is a real bargain. At least 10 aperture blades and often coated. Use a hood.
👍