Leica apo 135mm 3.4 Framelines

[guy_mancuso]

Well my 135mm apo just showed up and WOW this thing is very sharp lens even wide open , great choice for me. But what framelines should come up. i was hoping 28-90 would and i am getting 24-35 frames. Is this correct ??? Is there a way i can change it on a permenant basis to 28-90. i can use the lever which helps

[sdai]

Guy, go find an accessory finder on eBay ... now you see why I've wasted that amount of energy in the menu thread. You'll love this. LOL

[macusque]

Guy, even the 90mm framelines ar way too large for the 135.

When I had mine I used for reference double the size (lenght and height) of the rangefinder patch.
This way you also always know the 135 framing despite the framelines used

P.S. I bought on ebay a TEWE 35-200 zoom finder, but in the end I prefer to use the central patch method.

[guy_mancuso]

Thanks Simon and Marko. i will just use the patch and it is really not that bad and easy to focus this lens. Very nice lens

[doubice]

Guy,

As the 135mm lens effectively becomes a 180mm, none of the Leica accessory finders will give the correct angle of view. There were a few finders available in the past, that had a 180mm setting - Zeiss for the original Contax and a TEWE finder mentioned above.

The Zeiss is pretty rare and hard to find, the TEWE sometimes pops up on eBay. The only problem with the TEWE is that the edges of the viewfinder frame are not particularly sharp, so an exact framing is not that easy, but definitely more accurate than using the patch method.

I would recommend either the TEWE or the central patch method, as noted by Marco. I have owned the TEWE for a long time, never used it on my film M's and am actually looking forward to trying it on the M8.

All the best,

Jan

[guy_mancuso]

Thanks Jan. Feel like we are buying rifles now. I will loo around for one jus for fun. Thanks

Did i mention this lens is sharp

[boilerdoc]

I have the goggled 135/2.8 so you at least have a starting point for framelines. Is the APO that much sharper, Guy! Don't tell me; if you say yes I'll be tempted to go out and get one.
Steve

[doubice]

Originally Posted by boilerdoc

I have the goggled 135/2.8 so you at least have a starting point for framelines. Is the APO that much sharper, Guy! Don't tell me; if you say yes I'll be tempted to go out and get one.
Steve

Steve,

In my haste to get ready for the M8 I also bought the goggled Elmarit, even though I have used a Tele-Elmar 135mm for ages and still own one. Main reason were the goggles for accurate framing.

Out of the three, the Apo is the best, closely followed by the Tele-Elmar; but very, very closely... Actually, if one is looking for a 135mm lens with an incredible cost to value ratio, the Tele-Elmar is unbeatable. Erwin Putts the Guru claims that at f:5.6 or f:8 the Apo and the Tele are just about equal. Difference in price - roughly US$300 against US$1,500!

The 2.8 Elmarit was available in two versions, the latest one had a single piece lens shade and used the same optical formula as the Elmarit R. The second version is better, but still not as good as the Tele-Elmar or the Apo.

All the best,

Jan

[doubice]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

I will loo around for one jus for fun.

Guy,

don't do that. The neighbourhood patrol might report you for indecent exposure.....

Try looking around instead. Sorry - couldn't pass this up.

Jan

[DaveEP]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Well my 135mm apo just showed up and WOW this thing is very sharp lens even wide open , great choice for me. But what framelines should come up. i was hoping 28-90 would and i am getting 24-35 frames. Is this correct ???

Yes this is a mighty fine lens

Yes, the frame lines you ar getting are correct. It would be too simple the other way

[guy_mancuso]

Just a couple teasers , my internet is all over the place today

Mostly shot wide open just trying this out

[macusque]

Guy, I still have my TEWE 35-200 zoom finder, exactly the same shown by Jan.

It is collecting dust though, because I use the M8 only up to 90mm.

I bother about putting it on ebay, so I could gift you with this little (well, not so littel indeed..) goodie.
I'll go to FedEx tomorrow for a shipment, so I can check now the shipping cost to Arizona and bring the TEWE also.

Shipping cost would be the only money I'd get from ya..

Send me a note via mail if you are interested

Marco

[guy_mancuso]

Wow Marco would love to it , just give me a number

[kidigital]

Guy, it's a little sharper than the 135R isn't it? I really like using it wide-open for the compression it gives. The colors are wonderful and it has that apo-look. It's not a 180/2, but it is a very good lens.

Kurt

[guy_mancuso]

No not the 180 F2 but it is no slouch either, this makes me feel a little better since i sold the 180 f2 and that was the only thing tying me to the DMR was the 180 f2 , I knew it would be the last lens I owned and it was. I really am liking this 135 3.4 though. Bad part is i have portraits tomorrow and i don't have a 49mm IR filter handy unless i tape my WATE adapter to the end which I think i will do until these bloody filters show up. It has some nice bokeh too and yes certainly better than the 135 2.8 R lens. I paid too much though, but it is a new demo so what else is new paying too much.

[carstenw]

Leica Camera Berlin has some 49mm (and 39mm and 46mm) B+W 486 filters, I believe.

[DaveEP]

Please let us know how this viewfinder works out Guy. It's one of those things that may be worth aquiring, and on the other hand.....

So, I await your verdict

[rsh]

Guy:

Glad you like th 135. I have tried it on the M8 and I push the frame lever to 90 and guestimate a closer crop.

[lars_bergquist]

Just about the most impressive thing about the pics Guy posted for us is those little cicular bright discs in the unsharp part of the middle one. These are of course specular point highlights. The fact that these little circles are of absolutely even brightness center to edge does show that the correction for spherical aberration is absolutely neutral – no overcorrection (edges brighter) and no undercorrection (center brighter). This is one of the most important factors behind a good bokeh. I have seen pictures made by Zeiss lenses, including their M-mount 50 mm Planar, which have exhibited clear signs of overcorrection. So BTW did the third version 35 mm Summicron, the one before the bokeh-famous fourth version of 1979.

The old man from the Age of the Cooke Anastigmat

[guy_mancuso]

Lars good eye and have to agree i have seen some nasty specular highlights get so blown on other lenses in the unsharp area's . there actually off a car going by which would probably be the worst kind too because there like a mirror. This lens reminds me very much of my most favorite lenses in the R line the 180 F2 apo. What i loved about that lens is the fall off . i do a lot of corporate portraits so i can't get into the one eye sharp stuff but i can and do get the face completely in focus but right about the start of the ears the beautiful fall off starts and it is a soft look not a real harsh abrupt look. This is very pleasing on portraits and it also gives a nice 3d look to the images , you know that Leica glow the mystical thing everyone makes fun off except me. It's not so much a glow but seperation from the foreground and background that makes a lot of there lenses so special. Now this lens is a little on the slow side but i am thinking it still has that quality to it. I am just going to have to shoot this today to see how it does. Someone also mentioned the lever for the 90 mm framelines and i tried that yesterday and really liked the approximation from that. For folkss new to RF like myself it just takes some time to think framelines in your head and the focal lengths your working with. I hardly ever cropped shooting DSLR's and lately my technique has gotten so much better with the RF that i am there but this has taken some time to get this in your head. So for new users to RF give yourself the chance to get the system in your head. once you get that RF is really easy.