Johannes Knightworth Posted May 7, 2007 Share #1 Posted May 7, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) In use with an M4 which has 135mm framelines can you take the goggles off or do you have to leave them on, if so will this have any effect ? Is this a good M 135mm lens, or are there better 135's ? The lens will mainly be used for architectiral details and details of sculptures. Reason for asking is that I have been using the 135mm on my leicaflex sl2 and I really like this focal length so i have decided to purchase one for my M4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 7, 2007 Posted May 7, 2007 Hi Johannes Knightworth, Take a look here Elmarit 135 2.8 Goggles. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
doubice Posted May 7, 2007 Share #2 Posted May 7, 2007 Johannes, The goggles magnify the finder image for better focusing accuracy. The magnification ratio is 1.5x, which also means that the lens keys in the M4's 90mm finder frame. If you took the goggles off, you would need a separate 135mm finder or, would have to key-in the finder manually. Most importantly though, you focus would be off, because the goggles affect the linearity of the focusing action. A short answer - don't do it.... The 2.8/135mm Elmarit M came in two version - first had a scalloped focusing mount and a two-piece telescoping lens hood, the second version had a finely ribbed focusing mount and a one-piece telescoping hood. The second version used the same optical formula as the Elmarit-R that you own for your SL2. Generally, both are good lenses, with the second version having a better reputaion for sharpness. There were of course other 135mm lenses made for the M bodies: Hektor 4.5/135mm, Elmar 4/135mm, Tele-Elmar 4/135mm and the current Apo-Telyt 3.4/135mm - in order of their introduction. The best one is the latest Apo Telyt, followed very closely by the 4/135mm Tele Elmar. If one takes cost to performance ratio into consideration, the Tele-Elmar wins by a wide margin. All the best, Jan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 7, 2007 Share #3 Posted May 7, 2007 I have 135 2,8 as well as the Tele Elmar f4: I always prefer the second, both for results and ease of use: when you are accustomed, the larger frame with the goggled 2,8 is not such a great advantage; I have noticed with pleasure that many people in this forum rate very well the T-E, also when "unscrewed-macro-dressed" on Viso flex : is perfect in accord with my feeling; if you think of buying a 135, no doubt to suggest you the Tele Elmar (of course, I think that Apo Telyt 3,4 is even better, but price is significantly higher) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Knightworth Posted May 7, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted May 7, 2007 Thanks for the (egain) excellent advice ..... The elmarit I was looking at is in perfect condition, and very cheap. Another thing that struck me as being a good thing is the built in tripod attachement for I think I will be using the lens with tripod. The Elmar however has a better press, a good version, comparable to the Elmarit I was looking at is more than twice as expensive. I will review my plans, read up some more and then decide. How the elmarit at 2.8 .... it is a full more than the elmar but if the image is not all that good then it's not of any use is it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Knightworth Posted May 7, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted May 7, 2007 It is of course the tele elmar I am talking about. If the Elmarit is the same build as my R 135mm does this mean it will produce similar image rendition, I am quit pleased with the results of the R 135mm I must say. I actually also like the 90 Elmar 4.0 I use on my screw mount leica, is this 1 to 1 comparable to the M version Elmar 4.0 ? I have the Apo Summicron 90 asph. 2.0 in an M-Mount as well, this I like the least of my leica lenses, it produces a quality which some might rate very highly, but I find it over sharpened, over contrasted "digital" looking ... in B&W that is. Are these remarks of any use for an advice on the purchase of a new 135MM ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 8, 2007 Share #6 Posted May 8, 2007 If the Elmarit is the same build as my R 135mm does this mean it will produce similar image rendition, ... Well, as Jan has correctly pointed out above, the optical formula of Elmarit-R 2.8/135 and the Elmarit-M 2.8/135 is identical. Their image rendition will thus be not only similar, but most likely identical. I actually also like the 90 Elmar 4.0 I use on my screw mount leica, is this 1 to 1 comparable to the M version Elmar 4.0 ? Depends on which version of the M Elmar you are talking about. The first one was the old 4 element Elmar 90 offered for screw mount and (later) also in M mount. Optical formula was identical for both mounts. The second one was the 3 element Elmar, offered in both screw and M mount. Again, optical formula is identical for both mounts. The third one was the Elmar-C 4/90, offered only in M mount and intended to be used with t´he Leica CL. The fourth one is the current Macro-Elmar-M 4/90. Cheers, Andy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Knightworth Posted May 8, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted May 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Andy, thanks for the info. I will purchase the 135mm 2.8 with the goggles. I browsed through the B&W prints made with my R version they look marvelous, I couldn't wish for anything more thanks Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.