Jump to content

135mm lens - Elmarit or Tele-Elmar?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I occasionally take photos for my friend's Australian Rules Football team. In the past I've used DSLRs, which are of course well suited to shooting sports when paired with the right lens. At the moment though, I don't have a DSLR - just my M8 - and I want to have a go at shooting his upcoming game using that. I do this as a favour to my friend (all I get out of it is free travel to the area and more experience in shooting sports), so I can afford to experiment!

 

The pitches they play on aren't full sized, but they're still pretty big, so I'm going to need a lens with some reach for the majority of shots. They generally play during the daytime, so light shouldn't be an issue.

 

With all that as background, I was debating getting hold of an inexpensive 135mm lens. I've already read up on the ways around the framing issues (use the area which is roughly between the focusing patch and the 90mm lines, if I recall correctly), and I get plenty of practice with action when I shoot a local parkour group, also with the M8.

 

There seem to be two 135mm lenses out there - the Tele-Elmar F4 and the Elmarit 2.8. There is an example of the latter currently on sale at an auction site here in Japan, and the price is currently a steal (even the "buy it now" price is not bad, but there are only 14 hours left and it's still at a very nice price). It has the "glasses" with it, and I've never used those before, so one question is : how easy is it to get used to using them? I assume one is for focusing and the other is for viewing.

 

There are also Tele-Elmars regularly turning up on the site, at reasonable asking prices. Obviously the Elmarit has an advantage in that it's faster, and for sports that's useful in that you can go at a higher shutter speed to freeze the action. I imagine that in daylight, F4 should be enough anyway, but it's always nice to have the extra there if you need it.

 

Love to hear from anyone who's used either of these lenses and has anything, good or bad, to say about them.

 

Thanks as always!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use an Elmar 135/4 - a different beast than Tele-Elmar 135/4?

 

The biggest issue will be spot-on focus. The play you want to capture will be near you on the sideline sometimes and not so near at other times, yes? I shoot still scenes, and I need time to get good focus. The depth of field at a focal length of 135 mm is narrow. Maybe you know from your practice shooting the local group how quickly you can work; if you have a shorter lens, you could set the aperture wide to get a comparably narrow depth of field, and see how it goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect high hit rates at f/4 or even f/4.5 with the Tele-Elmar if you don't use a magnifier. Due to the crop factor and 0.68x VF magnification, the M8 rangefinder is not accurate enough for that. Easier at f/4 with the Elmarit if the goggles are well adjusted. Beware that it is a bulky lens though. F/2.8? You can try with the Emarit but low hit rates expected for the same reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can nail a very good focus with the Tele-Elmar, and pretty sharp pictures, even in difficult light conditions, but as stated above you need a VF magnifier. Mine is 0.25x

 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3523/3736067356_3d78cb0ae4_b.jpg

 

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2467/3980802199_9b798cfbdc_b.jpg

 

It's a lens I really love. I like it so much that sometimes i mount it on my M8 and get around with it as my only lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can nail a very good focus with the Tele-Elmar, and pretty sharp pictures, even in difficult light conditions, but as stated above you need a VF magnifier. Mine is 0.25x

 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3523/3736067356_3d78cb0ae4_b.jpg

 

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2467/3980802199_9b798cfbdc_b.jpg

 

It's a lens I really love. I like it so much that sometimes i mount it on my M8 and get around with it as my only lens.

 

Nice pictures. I hope you titled that second one "Robert Plant, ten years from now";)

 

Is a magnifier necessary if you use the goggles? (The Elmarit on the auction site has them, and there's also one for sale at Red Dot Cameras which also has them).

Link to post
Share on other sites

(The Elmarit on the auction site has them, and there's also one for sale at Red Dot Cameras which also has them).

 

Never owned an Elmarit 135. I find lenses with goggles quite goofy and uneasy to carry in pockets (I usually do that). It is 2.8 against 4, that's for sure, but it's even bigger.

What I've noticed (and it's quite obvious) is that on such a long lens quality of the image quickly decreases as the exposure time increases, unless you have a very steady hand.

Edited by epand56
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both the TE 135/4 and Elmarit 135/2.8 and use them on my M9.

I don't have an M8. The Elmarit is quite bulky and heavy relative to the TE.

But I am not bothered by that. 135 mm is one of my favorite focal lens, especially for landscapes.

 

For the TE 135/4 I use the 1.4x and 1.25x Leica magnifiers for a total magnification of 1.75x, provided my math is correct.

For the Elmarit 135/2.8 I use just its goggles, no additional magnifiers. IIRC, the goggles give 1.5x magnification.

 

Best, K-H.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

I am using a tele-elmar 135 and a elmar 135. I have had the tele-elmar revised to measure accurately with my M8 and since then it is perfect (before it was sharp after the point of measure only). The Tele-Elmar is really sharp and contrasty. You should use it at high speed (1/500 at min) to get perfect prints. The Elmar is less contrasty than the tele-elmar, but also spot on and gives more details than the Tele-elmar on some pictures (it seems to give more lines per milimeter at less contrast than the tele elmar).

I am using the Tele Elmar quite often, since it has been revised and get really sharp, contrasty and colourfull pictures. I use it also with teh UV/IR filter on, as it gives more vivid and "true" colours with it. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also like the Elmar on my M8. Don't have experience with the Elmarit but focussing at f4 is difficult enough. In your case I do not think you need f2.8. Don't have a magnifier but was able to produce sharp results at f5.6 or smaller. Try to shoot at 1/250 at the least and stop it down as much as possible. Pre-focus as much as possible and results should be good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another vote for the Tele-Elmar. As has been said, just shoot it wide open for the sports. Make sure you get sharp infinity at the hard focus ring stop.

 

The f/2.8 version has been said to be inferior to the Tele-Elmar.

 

I like the Tele-Elmar so much, I have one for my Canon 5D!

 

 

Jim,

 

Thanks for posting the photo.

I use a TE 135/4 lens head with a universal focus mount and adapter on a Nikon.

It appears one of your TE 135/4 is modified to fit directly on a Canon? Interesting.

 

Best, K-H.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a huge-ass camera fair in my city today (which runs for a whole week!) and there are hundreds of Leica lenses there.

 

I got the chance to try out the 135 F2.8 (with the goggles), but it nearly broke my wrist:eek:

 

I tried out a 90mm Elmarit at 2.8 as well, which was very nice and pretty tempting. Might end up with that, it took some lovely shots when I tested it out.

 

I could walk in there with the Japanese equivalent of several thousand dollars and it wouldn't last long:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...