135mm f28

G

Guest

Hi;

Has anyone used the 135mm f2.8 "goggle" M lens? While I like my 90mm, I'm gravitating towards focal lengths that are getting further away from the 50mm, which is still the lens I use the most (on the wide side, I went from the 35mm to the 24mm).

I'm interested in the older, f2.8 with goggles, so that the goggles can magnify the viewfinder. I use only B&W for most of my work, and colour neg for my happy snaps, so I'm guessing the optical quality is fine.

What I'm really interested in is how the goggles affect the viewing. Is it acceptable, terrible,...?

Regards,
Marco
 
G

Guest

Have used it, and from what I remember it was a fine lens. Since my tendency is towards medium/moderate telephotos (70mm to 180mm) I ended up using R series bodies for lenses longer than 50mm because the viewfinder 'feels' gives me 'full view'.
 
G

Guest

Marco, Owning a 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M forever, I can tell you in practical photography it is an excellent lens. The "eyes" do magnify the viewfinder, with an .72 viewfinder you get a life-sized image and with a .85 or M3 finder about 1.4x. The biggest problem was the earlier lenses is the alignment of the eyes. The early versions have a scalloped focus ring and the 'eyes' are attached with screws to the mount. The later version with the milled focusing ring the mount and eyes are one piece construction and I think but do not know for sure, the metalurgy is better. I have never knocked the 'eyes' out of alignment on my version two lens. The lens is very heavy which I think is its biggest problem. View is easier since the image is magnified. Some people have said the image is dimmer, but I've never really noticed it.
Happy Snaps,
 
G

Guest

Hey Bob;

Thanks for the feedback. I'm trying to stay with the rangefinder system & not carry an SLR too, hence my question on the 135 google lens. But you're right - if I got into telephotos more (esp. something like a 180mm) an R series body would be ideal.

Interestingly, I worked with two Leica rangefinders & a Nikon FM2 with an 80-200mm about 10 years ago. I know Leica M bodies & Nikon F bodies are suppose to be a classic combination, but wow, was it ever frustrating to have the lens controls go in opposite directions with the two makes! Another reason to go with an R body if I ever go past 135mm.


Hey Sal;

Thanks for your comments. I didn't know about the eye alignment problem on the scalloped models. I'll look around & see if I can find the version two instead.

By the way, I'm using an M3, so I'm looking forward to the large image size. I just had my finder cleaned, so currently, the view is very bright & clear.

Thanks again to both of you for the feedback.
- Marco
 
G

Guest

Dear Marco,

The later lenses were optically identical to the 1:2,8/135 Elmarit-R.

I endorse all the above comments.

Here is a photo taken with mine.

All the best,

Justin
 
G

Guest

Marco, This is the only 135mm I use with the M6
I've used it for many years with Kodachrome 25 to Velvia and have no complaints regarding contrast or sharpness.
Colin
 
G

Guest

This lens is great. Besides the comments by others, the head works very well for macro work with the Visoflex III and bellows.
 
G

Guest

Justin, Colin, Lawrence;

Thanks for all the feedback. Sounds like I'd do well to find one of these lenses. While I'm sure the current 135 f3.4 is a superb lens, from all of your comments (and your enclosed ex&le, Justin) it's obvious that the f2.8 is no slouch either - plus it has the benefit of the magnified view.

I'll look in my hometown first to see if I can find one; if not, I'll do the usual web searches.

Thanks all,
Marco
 
G

Guest

Marco,

I have one of the later series lenses that I really only use from a sense of guilt from otherwise not using it! Feel free to e-mail me at gmb@cyberone.com.au if you do not find anything suitable in your local area. I would be happy to sell it for a modest price if you are interested. Regards,

Gary
 
G

Guest

Hey Gary;

Thanks for the notice! Currently, I have my local Leica guru, Reinhold Mueller, searching for me. If he doesn't find anything in the next few weeks, I'll contact you.

Thanks again!

Regards,
Marco
 
G

Guest

I'm goig to buy an used 135mm to to bye itmy m4-2 and m7.i would like to know if there is a big difference between the elmar f/4 (which i can find here in durban or should i wait to buy a tele -elmar 135 f/4 in paris next april.
thanks,
walid
 
G

gelsomino

Dear all,

Leica -forum members (on Leica site) are now well acquainted with my Elmarit "epoes".
I now own the latest version of the lens (345...)
One must consider the weight, in my opinion - the Elmarit is huge, compared to the other M lenses and to the camera itself. It is actually heavier than M6. Personaly, i never realised it before i started using the lens. Now i need to buy the hand-grip...
For the image quality, it is untistinguishable from modern M lenses, when closed down to 5.6. IMHO.

Regards,
Leo
 
S

sonc

Dear all, > > Leica -forum members (on Leica site) are now well acquainted with my > Elmarit "epoes". > I now own the latest version of the lens (345...) > One must consider the weight, in my opinion - the Elmarit is huge, > compared to the other M lenses and to the camera itself. It is > actually heavier than M6. Personaly, i never realised it before i > started using the lens. Now i need to buy the hand-grip... > For the image quality, it is untistinguishable from modern M lenses, > when closed down to 5.6. IMHO. > > Regards, > Leo

Leo, with the grip, and the motor (at least the TMP) you cannot switch lenses without removing the grip or motor
 

marco

Active Member
As I mentioned above, I was searching for the goggled 135mm f2.8 lens. I found one which I tried for a day & it's massive. I decided against buying it.

There was a sale on new Leica gear recently, so I had a chance to buy the 135mm f3.4 APO instead. On an M3, the 135mm frame without goggles is still a good view, due to the M3's high magnification. The APO is also a lot handier & lighter than the old goggled 135mm.

Can't say how it compares to older 135mm lenses, as I didn't shoot more than half a roll through the loaner Elmarit I had for one day.
 

m5pro

Member
Now i need to buy the hand-grip...

====================================================

Please do not be so hasty jumping to that conclusion. Examine how you are holding the camera and lens.

Try this:



Hold you left hand palm up. Place the lens in the palm of your left hand. The tripod mount will probably be just behind the "cup" of your palm when it balances. Your fingers are most likely right at the focusing ring and you can reach the aperture ring with your index finger.

Wrap the lower three fingers of your right hand around the body of the camera. Your index finger should fit right on the shutter release and your thumb should be right at the film advance lever.

Now, while looking through the finder, press the camera to your forehead, press your elbows into your sides and you will have a very steady grip.



Unless you have VERY large hands, everything should fall right into place and be very comfortable. So why spend money on a grip ?
 
G

gelsomino

To LCT :
Alors ça, c'est un TRES mauvais coup. Franchement. Je ne parle que de mes propres impressions - au magasin, apres avoir maniée la chose, je me suis dis que l'ensemble n'etait pas gros. J'ai decouvert autre chose, sur le terrain. Et alors? Il faut me le montrer du doigt?

To Photo Phreak:

That is exactly what i do! And in fact i did, from the day one - this is the most comfortable, intuitive, even, way to hold the combo. The problem is, i really have very large hands.I NEED more surface to grab onto. The only grip i appreciate as a "grip" is the Motor-M grip; the fact that i must mount the lens first - and only then, the motor - doesn't frighten me at all.
But the thing is very expensive, i can not afford it; OTOH, it can probably damage the shutter under some circumstances...

Regards,
Leo
 
Top