Konica M Hexanon 90f2.8 compare with Leica M Elmarit 90f2.8

Discussion in 'Leica M and LTM Lenses' started by rflove, Sep 3, 2015.

  1. Konica MHexanon 90mm f2.8

    33.3%
  2. Leica M Elmarit 90mm f2.8

    66.7%
  3. some other choice

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    A non precise laboratory compare of the Konica M Hexagon 90mm vs the Leica Elmarit M 90mm Lenses.

    I saw this minty looking Konica and picked it up for a good price even though I already had the Elmarit M... I just could not resist trying it (I have 7 day take it back)... Anyway I considered selling the Leica and keeping this Konica if it was of comparable quality.

    So I set up a tripod, got a few objects and shot both lenses wide open with AE with the M240. I did a white card WB and manual lens selection. These are as they came out of the camera in RAW format and exported to JPG with LR5 they are full frame and 100% crops.

    There might be small variations of focus area as I had to refocus each lens, each time I changed lenses... I tried to focus on the exact same place using the LV and the focus aid.

    What do you think? Is one of them noticeably better than the other?

    L1009309. L1009309. L1009310. L1009310-2. L1009311. L1009311. L1009312. L1009312. L1009313. L1009313.
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2015
  2. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    More samples

    L1009314. L1009314. L1009315. L1009315. L1009316. L1009316. L1009317. L1009317. L1009318. L1009318.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    It would be interesting to see focus using the RF. There were some differences in the assumptions made for focus with the Konica versus a Leica M film body, made a slight difference.

    The Leica 90/2.8 is the older "Elmarit", not the "Tele-Elmarit"?
     
  4. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Yes, I think using the RF would be an interesting experiment. However, neither lens has been officially calibrated and I thought that using the focus peaking on both lenses would be a more fair test. Of course, I could not replicate the focus points exactly. I just could not remember where "exactly" I focused on from shot to shot.... The Elmarit is the later version, it's 6 bit coded and all....
     
  5. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    I just realize a possible problem with the compare. The Leica lens was fitted with a UV filter.... I'll take a couple of shots of both lenses without filters to see if there are more obvious differences. It's interesting to me that Ken Rockwell is very dismissive of the Konica Lens when compared to the Leica and yet to my admittedly non-professional eyes, I see precious little difference if at any between the 2 lenses so far.....
     
  6. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Here are some shots without filters. in the first 2 shots, the tripod moved when I changed lenses :p and the sun moved as well.... The second set was done with a much more stable tripod, but the sun moves a little between shots.




    L1009322. L1009323. L1009324. L1009325.
     
  7. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Crops of both sets, exposure correct with LR5 with the "AUTO" setting.
    On the glasses I tried focusing on the chain between the lenses.
    On the coasters I tried to focus on the roof of the house in the foreground.

    L1009322-3. L1009323-3. L1009324-2. L1009325-2.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    In the last several, shadow detail was showing better with the Leica, but there's just an obvious difference in the shadow brightness in the images that makes comparisons difficult. In the very first set with the upside down glasses on the table, the Leica looked better around the nose areas - it just looked more alive somehow on the metal parts, but not a big difference.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. uhoh7

    uhoh7 Leica Place Regular

    163
    Oct 14, 2014
    Would be an interesting comparison, but these type of shots are not so great for it. For one thing, no way to gauge the fundamental lens property of sharpness across the frame.

    Also there are numerous "elmarit 90/2.8" models. All are very different. The last Elmarit-M is the heavy hitter.

    I would love to see these both in longer landscape shots at various apertures.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Generally, I see reviewers judge lenses on their sharpness wide open and well as sharpness across the frame. Frankly, I'm not an expert in these lens testing procedures. I set up a quick test to compare the 2 lenses in a more or less typical application. While I don't dispute the validity of laboratory tests, I frankly don't see the differences appear in my day-to-day use of the lenses. Ken Rockwell pretty much dismisses this lens (along with some praise) . Others like it.

    I can definitely see very obvious differences in sharpness, IQ, CA and other glaring differences when comparing fine lenses with substandard, cheap lenses. There is a huge difference between a 50mm ASPH f1.4 Summilux for instance and a Canon FD 50mm f1.8 or any one of many older "nifty fifties", they are "soft" wide open and show flaws like distortion, CA or various other observable defects. Likewise a Leica 35mm f2 summicron and any number of 35mm lesser lenses. But frankly, when comparing better quality lenses sometimes it's very difficult to judge one as better than another. For instance, I had the 50mmf2 Planar before I got the 'lux and other than the extra f stop and the lack of 6 bit coding, it's difficult to see a clear, overwhelming superiority of the Leica lens.... I did sell the Planar and got the 'Lux which I love, but in retrospect it's hard to find fault with the images I captured with the Zeiss.....

    Anyway,the Leica lens I have is the last Elmarit M. I saw the Konica at a local shop for $450 + tax and it looked so nice that I picked it up (I still have a few says to return it). I have read reviews which dismiss this lens as clearly inferior to the Elmarit so I made this test. Maybe it's not rigorous enough, but I'm having a hard time finding a big superiority of the Elmarit at 3X the price based on the shots I took using similar conditions with each lens. Frankly, I would love to find the Elmarit to be clearly and obviously better than the Konica, but I'm just not seeing it...

    I will say that the Leica lenses with the native 6 bit coding are much easier to use with the M240. For that reason alone I have sold the non-coded lenses and bought the Leica coded copies. And doubtlessly, the Leica lenses are far superior to many, many other lenses out there in the M and LTM mounts as well as various other adapted lenses.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  11. raid

    raid Leica Place All-Pro

    Apr 12, 2013
    USA
    Raid
    Thanks for this exercise. I have a feeling that both lenses are sharp and that there may exist a small difference in the OOF rendering when tested wide open with the goal to compare bokeh.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  12. uhoh7

    uhoh7 Leica Place Regular

    163
    Oct 14, 2014
    450 a great price if the calibration is good. You want the 90-hex to be close, because handing is so much better. But on paper the Elmarit-M should kill it.

    It's very easy to tell. Take them outside. Up on a hill. Preferably over a town. Make sure the details are at least 200 meters distant, preferably more. True infinity for 90mm is 900 meters. No close foreground. Move focus to infinity. Tripod would help, but if you keep the shutter over 500 and take several, you should get keepers from 2.8, 4, 5.6 and 8.

    Compare edge quality on the fulls.

    That's not the only way to test a lens, but for these 90s it's a very good and definitive way. I'd love to see what happens :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2015
  13. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    In general, many of my digital cameras don't focus on infinity (or even 900 meters) at the 'Infinity' setting. I would think this gets worse on rangefinders, but don't know for sure. I would be inclined to shoot a few manually focused by eye just in case.
     
  14. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Here are a few more shots at various distances. The Hexagon can focus beyond infinity, so it could use calibration. However, I used the Live View feature to focus as accurately as I could on the same feature. The first 2 are focused on the picket fence at the end of the street. The second set is focused on the traffic cone (red & White) near the center of the frame. The 3rd set is focused on the edges of the deck lid of the car and the last one is focused on the flowers near the center of the frame.

    And BTW, I do think the Elmarit is clearly the sharper and better lens. Although the Hexanon is not too shabby for the price...


    L1002514-1. L1002515-1.

    L1002516-1-2. L1002516-1.

    L1002519-1. L1002520-1.

    L1002521-1. L1002522-1.
     
  15. dante

    dante Leica Place Rookie

    20
    Nov 18, 2015
    You need a 0.05mm adjustment to the focus (increasing the master shim) on this lens to make it perfect, at which point it becomes astonishingly sharp at f/2.8 and 1m (and everywhere else). This was like a $60 adjustment at DAG. Makes a huge difference on the digital cameras.

    Dante
     
  16. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    Which of the 2 lenses?
     
  17. dante

    dante Leica Place Rookie

    20
    Nov 18, 2015
    Pretty much every lens I owned when I got the M8 years ago.

    If you want to see what that will do, put a piece of scotch tape on the RF cam.

    Dante
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    I've used my M8 to shim lenses for several other M8 owners. I find it requires a thicker shim on almost all the lenses i own. I have several lenses that are shimmed to be perfect on the M8 and wide-open; the same lenses are perfect on the M Monochrom wide-open with an orange filter; and best on the M9 stopped down 1 or 2 stops.

    I use Copper tape on the RF cam for lenses that are not easy to shim.
     
  19. rflove

    rflove Leica Place Regular Subscribing Member

    199
    Jul 13, 2014
    I'm not sure I understand completely how exactly these shims are applied or where. BTW, I had my M240 body and all the lenses I had at the time CLA'd and calibrated by DAG. I did not have the (2) 90mm lenses at the time though... Any chance of a link that shows exactly how to apply these shims? Pictures would help immensely.
     
  20. Brian

    Brian Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Apr 3, 2013
    • Informative Informative x 1