2 very nice lenses there, Nigel. 90mm is a useful focal length for APS-C cameras, as it translates perfectly into 135mm (90 x 1.5), a focal length that is tricky to find otherwise. I have a Viltrox 85mm for my Fuji bodies, which is a nice lens, but modern and a bit of a beast , quite heavy too, those 2 lenses are more discretely sized, and I believe the Jupiter also comes in a black finish which is great for candid and street work. £50 for a genuine Leica lens is a steal, I'll bet you didn't have to think too hard about THAT purchase, LOL. The haze can be easily removed, it occurs because the oil evaporates from the iris blades and is usually deposited on the inside of the rear element, easy to get at with a lens spanner and minimal dismantling. Remove the haze with lighter fluid, give it a wipe with 3% Hydrogen Peroxide to kill any incipient fungus, a quick clean again with lighter fluid or Isopropyl Alcohol and you are done. Lovely comparison between 2 very good lenses Regards George
Got my sums wrong again George, reminds me of O level maths - thanks for the correction! You're right I didn't think too long about this one, and if it can be cleaned by removal of the rear element only then it should be an easy fix, thanks for the info!
@Tiny W ,thx for the tip for haze I didn t know it. I knew for fungus but haze was for me an issue. I will try . @ Nigel no worries for math we all prefer you as an expert in lenses an cameras ;)
Hektar 135mm is similarly cheap. I've got an elmar 90 that I bought for around £50. Honestly Nigel, get it cleaned and use it on your Barnack with a brightline viewfinder. It's really nice to shoot. I've 10 Leica lenses and I use that combo all the time.
@@zenography7923 The results will blow you away. It's far better for it's intended purpose than on digital. Great video btw. The majority of my vintage lens knowledge comes from you.
I've got a Hektor 135mm too, and (for its vintage), it's rather good. I also shoot it on a Barnack Leica, and the film results (at least on B&W) are excellent. Not tried it on color, save on my Sony A7RIII, but it did well enough if you ran it around F/6.
@@Skipsul the Barnacks are so good, aren't they? People say to me that they're too difficult to use but they're really not. If my house was on fire my Barnack would be the first camera that I would grab.
@@perin99 Mine has quickly become my favorite film camera, to be sure. And those Elmar 5cm's are very very sharp if you can avoid flaring. I've got a Model II, and it's usually locked and loaded at all times with film (currently testing Kosmo's "Agent Shadow" stock).
Thanks Nigel! I really enjoy the comparison videos and appreciate all of the details as you explain the differences. Very helpful and learn more and more about the value and character in these vintage lenses.
Hello Nigel, thank you! My Minolta M 4.0/90mm for the Minolta CLA delivers fantastic photos as well. It's not that cheap, but I got it in top mint condition. Best wishes, Ralf
I bought the Elmar 90/4 (a 1957 make) and soon after another Elmar 90/4 with the collapsible barrel of similar vintage. As you noted, Nigel, the build quality is wonderful (in both models) although the collapsible weighs a ton despite its travel compactness; the collapsible looks great on the camera though so who cares about weight :). The eBay 'Leitz' silver lens hood which clamps on the Summaron 35/3.5 also suits the Elmar 50/3.5 and the Elmar 90/4 and is a compact stylish addition. More importantly, the hood should be a constant attachment as these lenses benefit from better contrast when shaded. Lovely review.
Again on the 90mm f4 elmar seen a video where you can virtually unscrew the lens in half for servicing etc.. It mentioned it having 15 blade diaphragm... Cool!!
Hi, Nigel! As always, a fascinating video. I think that the 9cm Elmar body is brass (a favourite Leitz metal) rather than steel. Also, the lens assembly section (the "optical head") unscrews from the barrel, to enable it to be used with the Visoflex adaptor on M Mount Leica bodies. Maybe this feature would let it play other roles?
I have a slightly earlier Jupiter 11 (earlier S/No and chunkier focus ring) but it has the purple coatings and does perform wonderfully. It offers a pretty hefty 270mm on the M4/3 but I can make that work.
It uses a Tessar optical formula so the sharpness is not a surprise. Personally and for that focal length I like more the image that one can get from the CZJ Sonnar 135/4. Nice review and nice find, Nigel!
I really ought to get a screw mount version of this lens, I have the bayonet version which cane as an extra with an M3 some years back. I also have a some vintage 5cm Elmars from way back and they could benefit from a clean but I have found that the slightly milky look they give, which I assume in down to haze, can easily be rectified in post production simple by adding a little contrast.
The milky look could well be haze, but are your elmars uncoated? Uncoated lenses give a lower contrast look. Whatever the case, easy to fix in post, as you say. Thanks for looking in!
@@zenography7923, Only one is coated, I'm referring to my various 50mm Elmars now and as you say it could just be lack of contrast, it only occurred I think, when the lens was mounted on a digital camera and to be honest may well have been over exposure. It's amazing how good some of these lenses are and the uncoated ones are capable of that vintage look.
Nice review, Nigel. I got quite a lot of 135, including the SU manufactured jupiter11, jupiter 37a, and tair-11, and a bunch of german and japanese brands. (They are cheap, so I can satisfy my hoarder symptom without breaking the bank) I have never managed to befriend the jupiter 11. It has some good quality for sure, but I guess I find it a bit too slow for my purpose. Also the tair11, is just pure fun to use, so I tend to grab that one. Your review has given me a push to test out the jupiter 11 more.
I have one of the rarer, all black, Jupiter-11s made in 1973. It is a beast. Great lens. All metal and built like a tank. Mine is M42 mount. I wish I knew what type of metal was used, as it is very heavy.
I want one of those L90mm for my FED 2... seem a lot of diaphragm leaves did you count them? Been told if you can't afford a 90mm finder.. then rely on the rangefinder spot in your vf for a rough guide.. Thanks a lot Nigel..
Please review any vintage pocket calculators or slide rules from the former SU too! These handy items will also support you to calculate the equivalent focal length of any vintage lens on APS-C sensors! 😉😀
Let's not forget all of the KMZ stuff that's out there, as well as using helicoid adapters to be able to use a bunch of very interesting enlarger lenses. There's an adapter for everything out there and there's a lot of glass that can yield very interesting results!
Thanks to previous commenter.. Make sure to tell all that is te Jupiter 11 (Rocket lens) us dsl;r users need M42 fit Jupiter 11A. But good vid Nigel.. Gonna send you mine down to review.. Stay Cool : )
I got myself the (Leica) Leitz Colorplan 90mm f2.5 for 10€. Now its my goto lens for portrait. Must be one of the best price/performance lenses out there.
By the way in another video you mentioned your Olympus OM2 with the Olympus OM Zuiko 2.8/100mm. Do you like that focal length and what for? (I have the Canon FD counterpart)
One comment about your 90mm f4 elmar...re lens hoods a leica lens hood dedicated to that lens is quite small...so comparing to a modern vented lens hood is less likely to block the vf but expensive I guess Unusual filter hood size would be 34mm or am I guessing please confirm Nigel.....keep up the good work....btw...
90mm is a focal length I'd like to try. And for £50, that does seem to be a pretty good bargain. Very impressive shots considering its age. The blur is very nice imho, even if not as extreme as many vintage lenses. I'd be happy with it. And of course, the Jupiter 11 is a wonderful bit of kit. My own purchases this week are a Mamiya C3 TLR and and a nice SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 (radiation included).
I find 135mm a difficult lens to use so length wise so I don't tend to use mine that much. I've got a primotar 135 which is soft wide open but gives nice bubbles and the length gives nice compression of the background so it's a bit of an arty lens I've also got the czj 135 and a jupiter 11a my jupiter is my bad weather lens because it looks pretty battered but there's something really nice about the photos I get from it. I'm a huge czj fan but for me that battered old jupiter gives something extra to the images that my czj 135 just doesn't seem to do. I took some photos of live groups performing in my local park the other week and took the czj but although there's nothing wrong with those photos I regret not using that scratched up old jupiter, I may even sell the czj just because I prefer the images I get from the old war horse jupiter 11a.
I appreciate these videos -- thoughtful, careful commentary. Thanks!
2 very nice lenses there, Nigel. 90mm is a useful focal length for APS-C cameras, as it translates perfectly into 135mm (90 x 1.5), a focal length that is tricky to find otherwise. I have a Viltrox 85mm for my Fuji bodies, which is a nice lens, but modern and a bit of a beast , quite heavy too, those 2 lenses are more discretely sized, and I believe the Jupiter also comes in a black finish which is great for candid and street work.
£50 for a genuine Leica lens is a steal, I'll bet you didn't have to think too hard about THAT purchase, LOL. The haze can be easily removed, it occurs because the oil evaporates from the iris blades and is usually deposited on the inside of the rear element, easy to get at with a lens spanner and minimal dismantling. Remove the haze with lighter fluid, give it a wipe with 3% Hydrogen Peroxide to kill any incipient fungus, a quick clean again with lighter fluid or Isopropyl Alcohol and you are done.
Lovely comparison between 2 very good lenses
Regards
George
Your maths are better than Nigel ones :)
@@philmtx3fr That's because I'm an engineer not an artist 😂😂
Got my sums wrong again George, reminds me of O level maths - thanks for the correction! You're right I didn't think too long about this one, and if it can be cleaned by removal of the rear element only then it should be an easy fix, thanks for the info!
@Tiny W ,thx for the tip for haze I didn t know it. I knew for fungus but haze was for me an issue. I will try . @ Nigel no worries for math we all prefer you as an expert in lenses an cameras ;)
Loved the video so precise and detailed so much so that I'm on the look for one ! Thanks very much.
Hektar 135mm is similarly cheap. I've got an elmar 90 that I bought for around £50. Honestly Nigel, get it cleaned and use it on your Barnack with a brightline viewfinder. It's really nice to shoot. I've 10 Leica lenses and I use that combo all the time.
Seems a shame not to get it cleaned - and I'd love to try it on film too!
@@zenography7923 The results will blow you away. It's far better for it's intended purpose than on digital. Great video btw. The majority of my vintage lens knowledge comes from you.
I've got a Hektor 135mm too, and (for its vintage), it's rather good. I also shoot it on a Barnack Leica, and the film results (at least on B&W) are excellent. Not tried it on color, save on my Sony A7RIII, but it did well enough if you ran it around F/6.
@@Skipsul the Barnacks are so good, aren't they? People say to me that they're too difficult to use but they're really not. If my house was on fire my Barnack would be the first camera that I would grab.
@@perin99 Mine has quickly become my favorite film camera, to be sure. And those Elmar 5cm's are very very sharp if you can avoid flaring. I've got a Model II, and it's usually locked and loaded at all times with film (currently testing Kosmo's "Agent Shadow" stock).
Thanks Nigel! I really enjoy the comparison videos and appreciate all of the details as you explain the differences. Very helpful and learn more and more about the value and character in these vintage lenses.
Thanks Karen, glad it was useful!
Hello Nigel, thank you! My Minolta M 4.0/90mm for the Minolta CLA delivers fantastic photos as well. It's not that cheap, but I got it in top mint condition. Best wishes, Ralf
I bought the Elmar 90/4 (a 1957 make) and soon after another Elmar 90/4 with the collapsible barrel of similar vintage.
As you noted, Nigel, the build quality is wonderful (in both models) although the collapsible weighs a ton despite its travel compactness; the collapsible looks great on the camera though so who cares about weight :).
The eBay 'Leitz' silver lens hood which clamps on the Summaron 35/3.5 also suits the Elmar 50/3.5 and the Elmar 90/4 and is a compact stylish addition. More importantly, the hood should be a constant attachment as these lenses benefit from better contrast when shaded.
Lovely review.
Mine does seem to flare a bit, but not as badly as some others. I'd love to find a collapsible version too!
Great video. I love your reviews of the old lenses and cameras.
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying them!
Again on the 90mm f4 elmar seen a video where you can virtually unscrew the lens in half for servicing etc.. It mentioned it having 15 blade diaphragm... Cool!!
Yes, lots of blades on this one, and it does come apart fairly easily too!
Hi, Nigel! As always, a fascinating video.
I think that the 9cm Elmar body is brass (a favourite Leitz metal) rather than steel. Also, the lens assembly section (the "optical head") unscrews from the barrel, to enable it to be used with the Visoflex adaptor on M Mount Leica bodies. Maybe this feature would let it play other roles?
I have a slightly earlier Jupiter 11 (earlier S/No and chunkier focus ring) but it has the purple coatings and does perform wonderfully. It offers a pretty hefty 270mm on the M4/3 but I can make that work.
The Minolta 90mm is a lovely little lens as well
It uses a Tessar optical formula so the sharpness is not a surprise. Personally and for that focal length I like more the image that one can get from the CZJ Sonnar 135/4. Nice review and nice find, Nigel!
Totally agree. The Elmar 90mm F4 gives great images and great bokeh with its 10+ aperture blades. The Canon Ltm 135mm is also a good buy.
I'll look out for one, thanks for the tip!
I really ought to get a screw mount version of this lens, I have the bayonet version which cane as an extra with an M3 some years back. I also have a some vintage 5cm Elmars from way back and they could benefit from a clean but I have found that the slightly milky look they give, which I assume in down to haze, can easily be rectified in post production simple by adding a little contrast.
The milky look could well be haze, but are your elmars uncoated? Uncoated lenses give a lower contrast look. Whatever the case, easy to fix in post, as you say. Thanks for looking in!
@@zenography7923, Only one is coated, I'm referring to my various 50mm Elmars now and as you say it could just be lack of contrast, it only occurred I think, when the lens was mounted on a digital camera and to be honest may well have been over exposure. It's amazing how good some of these lenses are and the uncoated ones are capable of that vintage look.
There are a few extension tubes on eBay for that Leica lens, for a tenner. I may snap up a lens and tube. The build quality looks superb
It really is - these lenses are really nicely engineered!
Nice review, Nigel. I got quite a lot of 135, including the SU manufactured jupiter11, jupiter 37a, and tair-11, and a bunch of german and japanese brands. (They are cheap, so I can satisfy my hoarder symptom without breaking the bank) I have never managed to befriend the jupiter 11. It has some good quality for sure, but I guess I find it a bit too slow for my purpose. Also the tair11, is just pure fun to use, so I tend to grab that one. Your review has given me a push to test out the jupiter 11 more.
Thoughts please on converting an M fit bayonet on a Leica lens to screw fit as on a 90mm f4 elmar... Nigel... Cheers
I have one of the rarer, all black, Jupiter-11s made in 1973. It is a beast. Great lens. All metal and built like a tank. Mine is M42 mount. I wish I knew what type of metal was used, as it is very heavy.
It sounds magnificent!
I want one of those L90mm for my FED 2... seem a lot of diaphragm leaves did you count them?
Been told if you can't afford a 90mm finder.. then rely on the rangefinder spot in your vf for a rough guide..
Thanks a lot Nigel..
Please review any vintage pocket calculators or slide rules from the former SU too! These handy items will also support you to calculate the equivalent focal length of any vintage lens on APS-C sensors! 😉😀
:) I got my sums wrong - apologies! The correct equivalent focal length for a 90mm lens on aps-c is around 135mm.
Let's not forget all of the KMZ stuff that's out there, as well as using helicoid adapters to be able to use a bunch of very interesting enlarger lenses. There's an adapter for everything out there and there's a lot of glass that can yield very interesting results!
Indeed there is, and I haven't looked at enlarger lenses yet - thanks for the suggestion.
Thanks to previous commenter.. Make sure to tell all that is te Jupiter 11 (Rocket lens) us dsl;r users need M42 fit Jupiter 11A. But good vid Nigel.. Gonna send you mine down to review.. Stay Cool : )
I got myself the (Leica) Leitz Colorplan 90mm f2.5 for 10€. Now its my goto lens for portrait. Must be one of the best price/performance lenses out there.
Попробуйте объектив Юпитер-37а. Это недорогой объектив под резьбу М42, прекрасный во всех отношениях.
Попробую, спасибо за предложение!
I'll give it a try, thanks for the suggestion!
What is the thing you attach in the hot shoe for other focal lengths called?
What Fujifilm X mount adapter would I be looking for to use the vintage leica lenses ?
Back in Beaumaris again! Give me a call next time, the beer is the Bull is excellent.
Thanks for the invite, I will!
By the way in another video you mentioned your Olympus OM2 with the Olympus OM Zuiko 2.8/100mm. Do you like that focal length and what for? (I have the Canon FD counterpart)
EXCELLENT
One comment about your 90mm f4 elmar...re lens hoods a leica lens hood dedicated to that lens is quite small...so comparing to a modern vented lens hood is less likely to block the vf but expensive I guess
Unusual filter hood size would be 34mm or am I guessing please confirm Nigel.....keep up the good work....btw...
90mm is a focal length I'd like to try. And for £50, that does seem to be a pretty good bargain. Very impressive shots considering its age. The blur is very nice imho, even if not as extreme as many vintage lenses. I'd be happy with it. And of course, the Jupiter 11 is a wonderful bit of kit.
My own purchases this week are a Mamiya C3 TLR and and a nice SMC Takumar 50mm 1.4 (radiation included).
Those sound like some very nice buys - enjoy!
Great video ⭐️
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
The Leica Hektor 135mm is also quite good, and a bargain too.
I'l keep a lookout for one, thanks!
I find 135mm a difficult lens to use so length wise so I don't tend to use mine that much. I've got a primotar 135 which is soft wide open but gives nice bubbles and the length gives nice compression of the background so it's a bit of an arty lens I've also got the czj 135 and a jupiter 11a my jupiter is my bad weather lens because it looks pretty battered but there's something really nice about the photos I get from it. I'm a huge czj fan but for me that battered old jupiter gives something extra to the images that my czj 135 just doesn't seem to do. I took some photos of live groups performing in my local park the other week and took the czj but although there's nothing wrong with those photos I regret not using that scratched up old jupiter, I may even sell the czj just because I prefer the images I get from the old war horse jupiter 11a.
It does make nice images doesn't it! And as you say, they do have quite a special feel - perhaps it's come into its own at last!
Most early Leica lenses used the 'Gaussian Formula.'
I didn't realise that, thanks.
I think nickel plating would have a slight gold colour.
You're probably right, but I thought nickel as it really doesn't look like chrome. It does seem to be plated with something...
hahahaa soon as something is recommended on-line, the prices go up. :(
The amazing 90mm 2.0 Fuji, considered to be at the top of Fuji's sharpness line, is just bad at 2.0. Useless. So, there.
Gosh, that's quite surprising!
First!!
Well done, and thanks for looking in!