Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/12/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Elmar 90/4 M or LTM
From: "Mark Bergman" <bmwr100r@subcellar.mwci.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1996 14:37:41 +0000

> Date:          Sun, 8 Dec 1996 11:53:00 -0500
> To:            leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> From:          wilcox@umcc.umich.edu (Ken Wilcox)
> Subject:       Re: Elmar 90/4 M or LTM
> Reply-to:      leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us

I had a collapseable once and was not impressed with it's 
performance.  Not bad just not as good as the regular 90 f4.  Even 
collapsed it's a lot bigger and bulkier than the 90 elmar.  a late 
model 90 elmar is a good deal.

> Quite simply, they are inexpensive because there are so many of them. It is
> a fine lens. I use one from 1949 on my IIIf and IIIg. Someday I will buy a
> collapsible one in M mount for my M cameras.
> 

> >Why is the Elmar 90/4 so inexpensive used?