Elmarit 135mm f2.8-M

[viramati]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi.

am thinking of one of these for the M9 and was would appreciate any feedback. At the moment I use the 90 Elmarit-M on the M8.2 when I want a bit more reach but am thinking of selling it to finance the new lux 35. Thanks

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

The main point with this lens is that you must test the sample you are actually going to buy with your camera, because the goggles can get out of alignment in some samples, making accurate focus impossible. Presumably, Leica or a third party can fix this for a price if you are really "sold" on the lens otherwise.

 

It is large and heavy and the "T"-shape of the goggles can make it a bit unwieldy getting in and out of a gadget bag. OTOH, it is less so than carrying an additional SLR with a 135 or 180 f/2.8.

 

It is not quite as crisp as the Tele-Elmar 135 f/4 @ f/4-5.6 (or the APO-Telyt) - but as 135 f/2.8s go, it is in the top tier. It has the slightly green color rendition (which I like) of the other Leitz Canada lens designs 1960-1980ish. Compared to your 90 Elmarit-M - which was Leica's "best" M tele ever until the APO-'cron came out - it may seem a tad muddy at first - not hard to fix with a contrast boost in post-processing. It shows a little color fringing, as with any non-APO tele of a certain age.

 

There are three optical versions 1963(M), 1964 (M and R), and 1968 (R - adopted for M 1973). Erwin Puts says the imaging differences were minimal, except that the last (post-1973) version added contrast overall while becoming a bit softer in the "outer zones" @ f/2.8-4.

 

For me, Leica M has always been about compactness, so I have a bias against the 135 f/2.8 due to the oddball shape. If you can get past that, it is a very good performer and the f/2.8 aperture is a plus. I'm definitely using a 135 more on the M9 - and a 90 less - than I did with the M8.

[bill]

For me, Leica M has always been about compactness, so I have a bias against the 135 f/2.8 due to the oddball shape. If you can get past that, it is a very good performer and the f/2.8 aperture is a plus.

 

Spot on. I had one for a few years. It was a good performer, particularly wide open. The weight and awkwardness killed it for me in the end. These days I have a late model Canon 135 3.5 that is slightly slower but gives crisp results.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[viramati]

thanks Andy and Bill. will keep an eye out for the canon 135

[leicamr]

Hello Viramati,

 

I have a 135 f2.8 -M which I purchased new years ago. It has rarely been used. I have the box. If you are still considering buying one I may consider selling mine.

 

regards

 

Mark

[swamiji]

It does make an excellent lens on the Visoflex and bellows. The best for Macro work.