90 Tele-Elmarit-M Probs

[Stephen <cameras@jetlink.net>]

This topic was discussed some time ago on LUG.  Although everyone did
not agree, I believe the problem is a result of the Leitz animal based
grease  which attacked the glass.  IN this particular lens (due to
design changes to save the almighty $$)  it is very difficult to take
apart the rear element once it has been attacked in order to clean it
properly.  The only thing you can really do is have a clear one taken
apart and rel-ubed with modern synthetic grease BEFORE the problem
presents itself.  I did it on mine, and have had no trouble.  My source
of information is Don Chatterton.

Regards,

Stephen Gandy


Len Schweitzer wrote:

> Kent - I owned a Tele-Elmarit-M for some time and wasn't  satisfied
> with
> the image quality; then I found out why:  I decided to trade it for a
> newer 90M and had it rejected by the dealer.  He pointed out that
> there
> had been a bad batch (or more) of this lens ... a problem with the
> cement, I believe, as a result of which some of the elements separated
>
> and there was a permanent haze on the rear element.  You can see the
> haze by shining a flashlight at 45 degree angle through the rear
> element.  Since I bought it used some time ago, I have  to "eat" it.
> I'm kinda ticked off since Leica US did a clean/lube/etc on it a few
> years ago and never said anything to me about it.
>
> For convenience, it was hard to beat.  Exteriorly, the glass looks
> great
> and you can't tell anything is wrong with it.    I can't even
> ethically
> offer it for sale, so I guess it'll make an attractive paperweight.
> I've transferred the screw-in rubber lenshood to my 135 Tele-Elmar, so
>
> that'll be more convenient than fiddling with a separate lenshood.
>
> Bottom line: do some careful research on the one you're looking at to
> be
> sure it's not from the bad batch.