Elmarit 28135 with M6

[unowen]

Being somewhat of a Leica "newbie" and have yet to graduate in the "Leica Lens Knowledge Scjool" I must ask if the Elmarit 2,8/135 mm lens is a good option to complete my M6 system with a "tele" lens (already own 'crons 2/35 & 2/50).

I know M2 to M4 needed the the viewfinder attachment. Would I need this with the M6 or would it work with the built in 135 frame?

I don't know if I'll go for the Elmarit or a Summicron 2/90 instead.
Opinions please!!!

U.N.Owen

 

[jem]

UNOwen,
the viewfinder goggles on the 135/2.8 Elmarit-M are non removable, as were the later viewfinder goggles on the M-35mm lenses. All of them work correctly on all M cameras, just don't ever try to take the finders off as you'll wreck the rangefinder focusing!
On the 135 Elmarit-M it takes a (the 90mm?) frame and magnifies the image seen to give you a much better view of the picture. In this sense its a much better lens than any other 135 as it gives you a better view and more precise focusing via the magnified rangefinder image.
The down sides are the large size and heavy weight compared to say a late 135/4 Elmar-M but there's another payoff - the prices have fallen greatly in recent years as M-rangefinder users seem to prefer smaller wideangle lenses.

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

I am not wholly convinced that a 135 and a rangefinder go together terribly well. I think a 135 is the more natural partner of an SLR and that a 90 is the optimum long lens for a rangefinder. It has the additional merit of being a wonderful portrait lens. Wilson

 

[ellie]

I would agree. The R8 and R9 are made to order for anything past 90mm. The lenses Leica has made available to us are fabulous, but unfortunately, quite costly.

I want to add that the R 50/1.4 is a magnificent lens. It will be interesting to see the new M 50/1.4.


Ellie

 

[jem]

People can get very cautious sometimes, it is tempting to think we know better than professional camera designers with many years of experience. When Leitz first released a 135mm lens for the Leica in 1931 they were content to carry on providing them to the market for the next 75 or so...
Of course the Rf system becomes less satisfactory as the focal length increases but if you use a r/f camera don't deny yourself a 135mm lens, they have lots of potential. I certainly wouldn't want to carry another camera (SLR) and lens around purely for any 135mm shots I might take. But if I was taking mainly long shots and wanted an outfit for 135, 180, 400 and 800 then I'd take an SLR of course. For 12, 15, 21, 28, 35, 50, 90, 100, 105 and 135 I'm very happy with a r/f camera.
BTW, I even have a 200mm Komura that was made for the r/f Leica system but that was sold with an additional viewfinder magnifier (like the 135/2.8 Elamrit-M) for more critical focusing and it went missing before it was sold to me.

 

[unowen]

Thanks for all your opinions and inputs!
A 90mm lens it will be! (2/90 that is!)

U.N.Owen

 

[flyboy]

I have used both the 135mm with goggles and the one without. The one without is superior. It is a bit of bother to use the little rangefinder patch which is why the lense with goggles was built.

Some of us who are into gadgets have acquired reflex housing to use with the m bodies. I have lenses up to 400mm that work well with this set up. It is better to tripod mount which allows you to flip the mirror up for metering and then bring it down to compose and make the shot. The reflex housing lenses may also be used on the R bodies with the appropriate adapters. However, they must then be used as preset lense.

 

[unowen]

Robert,
I am getting a little bit confused. Are you saying that there are two versions of the Elmarit 2,8/135? One with goggles and one without?

U.N.Owen

 

[kajabbi]

Sigurds, There are two versions of that lens. Both have the "eyes". One uses a srew-in filter(55MM I think), the other uses a series 7 filter with a retaining ring.

 

[flyboy]

Leica produced two 135mm lenses. One a 2.8 Elmarit and the other a F4 or F4.5 I don't remember exactly. The slower lense, in my opinion, was better optically than the 2.8. The lense is also much smaller and lighter.

 

[kafir2]

Dear Robert,
Hold on a minute: Leitz produced several lens and variations on the 135mm focal lenght in its history.
As I recall (don't have the books here) we have:
Hektors: f4,5 available in both screw and M mounts
Elmar: f4 available only (?) in M
Tele Elmars: f4 available only in M (more than one version)
Tele Elmarits: f 2,8 available only in M (more than one version)
Apo Telyt: f3,4 available only in M

A lot of choice as you can see on this focal lenght.
I assume the best is the APO one...
My only experiences with a Leitz 135 were made on an Hektor that I sold after a quick comparison with both Nikkor and Canon (in LTM) 135s that I am lucky to have.
I hope you'll find this interesting and keep on investigating.
All the best
Enrico

 

[hektor]

Dear U.N.Owen,

If the choice were mine I would buy the Tele-Elmar, which has nearly APO qualities at a fraction of the price, and the Viewfinder-Magnifier-M 1.25x.

Have fun,

Justin

PS Enrico, the 1960 f/4 was also available in screw mount (code 11750).

 

[colin]

I second Justin's comments. Although I own/use the f2.8, if I were to buy I would go for the f4 Elmar and eyepiece.(I must admit I haven't tried the magnifier).
Colin

 

[kafir2]

I agree with Scott (and thanks for the Elmar info) and I think he makes a good point in suggesting the viewfinder magnifier: especially if you have a 0,72 VF!

 

[jem]

My choice is the same as Colin's; the 135 Elmar-M. It was a very good improvement on the Hektor but the Tele-Elmar, in comparison, is much heavier and not much shorter, so much for the telephoto design. It comes down to what your criteria are: lowest price, minimal weight and size, maximum aperture or maximum image quality.

 

[leica_cl_m]

my choice was like Jem and Colin: I tried the cheaper nostalgic and light 135 Elmar M. It has the new glass types and comes near to the Tele-Elmar (which was delvered for more than 40 Years!). The T-E is heavier but that's good for shooting and it comes near to the APO.

I think You do not need the magnifier, if You have the 0.72 version - i use it only for better viewing of complex pcitures or for Summilux 75.

And the "CHEAP" first version of the T-E may unscrew the lens head. So You have the option of Visoflex-work but to use this fine lens with LEICAflex or Leica R up to version 9!
Regards,
Giselher