Elmar 180/4

[Airy]

I'm curing my NAS by indulging in GAS.

In Köln, at the bottom of the cathedral, there is a shop many may know already. This time they had an Elmar 180/4 (R mount) on display.
It may not be the best of Dr. Mandler's, but I definitely can use a "pocketable" 180. There are few reviews to be found on the net, and I cound not find any MTF chart (not my first concern anyway).

Users insist on size and weight benefits, and credit the lens for good IQ (though not overwhelming), good contrast but a tendency to flare, and very good bokeh. Also, it is quite cheap, pricewise (279€) but well-built. The copy I got looks faultless. Now I'm waiting for the Leitax mount to be delivered by mail.

Any experience, anybody ?

[Airy]

I just replaced the original R mount by the Leitax mount. The exercise was a bit unnerving because placing correctly the internal baffle is not easy: it must be glued to the new mount with cement glue. I did not get it quite right; it seems misaligned; consequently, apertures beyond f/8 become increasingly harder to set (but remain usable).

The first tests reflect what I could read from the internet:
- good color, good central sharpness
- overall sharpness is better than expected
- outer edges a bit soft (lack of contrast) at f/4, already much improved at f/5.6
- sensitive to flare (fortunately, there's the sliding hood)
- visible LoCA

We'll see tomorrow how it behaves outdoors.

Forgot to say - Leitax does a great job: very detailed instructions are made available on their website Leitax.com.

[Airy]

Finally some examples.
My usual test for LoCA at short distance (about 2m), wide open. Nothing outrageous. Better than, say, Tamron SP 90 macro.

[Airy]

One of my standard shots for testing, from the tram station I use every morning.
Pretty sharp and clean.

[Airy]

From the same place, a building opposite the street. Wide open again. Sharp center, not so sharp but clean corners (not "mushy")

[Airy]

Lille Europe station. The third shot shows what happens when strong light is slightly off the field. The fourth shows some moderate gain on stopping down.

[Airy]

When not shooting against the light, contrast is quite good. However backlit subjects are problematic. The Summicron 50/2 also has this problem.

[Fons Baerken]

Gand, ça c'est pas loin.

[Airy]

Gand, ça c'est pas loin.

And conversely

[Airy]

The Elmar as a portrait lens. Bokeh is really nice.

[Airy]

Close to MFD, f/5.6

[Akira]

Looks like a promising purchase.  Flare should be inevitable, but LoCA seems to be practically non-existent.  And, yes, bokeh looks pleasing.

[Airy]

Assorted views. The lens is sharp at all distances. Last shot is another example of flare.

[Airy]

Looks like a promising purchase.  Flare should be inevitable, but LoCA seems to be practically non-existent.  And, yes, bokeh looks pleasing.

Indeed, and better than its reputation. Well, it is not an Apo-Telyt. It flares significantly more than most Zeiss lenses though. Leitz Canada did not have such good coatings at the time, otherwise the Summicron R 50/2 could be considered one of the best lenses ever built...

Another problem is, in case of flare, the Df metering is fooled (as if not noticing it) and overexposes.

[Airy]

Music festival between the two stations. Somewhat stopped down. Good subject isolation due to the smooth bokeh, probably better than the otherwise superior 180/2.8 ED.