Ronan Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share #21 Â Posted September 20, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Your last post was not deleted...It was post #15, after that you did not post in this thread. Â I replied to Luigi about thanking him but the postal service is horrible. Â Clicked submit and it showed up loaded on my screen. Â Back to topic, Colapsable elmar... Mmm it means I wild use it more often... Tucked in my bag. Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 20, 2011 Posted September 20, 2011 Hi Ronan, Take a look here Leica M Telephoto, choices?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted September 20, 2011 Share #22 Â Posted September 20, 2011 Something went wrong somewhere-it is not in the forum, nor in the deleted posts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share #23  Posted September 21, 2011 Something went wrong somewhere-it is not in the forum, nor in the deleted posts  Hmnn if it helps, the forum was VERY slow to load the page after posting. Like it timmed out but didn't... or did?... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted September 21, 2011 Share #24  Posted September 21, 2011 I am considering a Leica M telephoto lens for my M6 Classic (if it ever comes back...). Personally, i carried my Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR everywhere because i loved the 150-200 end of it.   Leica made a dandy 200mm f/4 Telyt for the Visoflex. It gets you a lot farther than the 135, and the Viso is much better for focusing and viewing a long lens than even the goggled 135. That said, for "occasional use", either the Elmarit or a Visoflex is quite a bundle to carry around. An Elmar or Tele-Elmar is a lot more portable. One of the old clip-on 135/13.5cm brite-line finders gives you a large, bright image. It's also 1:1, so you can actually keep both eyes open and the frame seems to float in mid-air. Cost:performance the Elmar is the best value. That said, the Leica 90s (any of them really) are good enough that cropping to a 135 FOV still leaves plenty of sharpness, so that's another viable option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandro Posted September 22, 2011 Share #25 Â Posted September 22, 2011 As for the 90 mm I agree with Luigi. The old Elmarit never disappoints me: easy to handle and not very heavy and a crisp quality. I also sometimes use the collapsible Elmar which is heavier and slightly less performing wide open. I bought a Tele-Elmar 4/135 mm (old version) for the times I didn't feel like carrying around the large Elmarit with goggles. A rather cheap lens the Tele-Elmar is a great lens for general purpose. Very good quality for an old design, which is also true for the Elmarit 2.8/90 of course. Lex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 23, 2011 Share #26 Â Posted September 23, 2011 I have the 90mm Elmarit-M and it is great. Small enough (and tiny compared to SLR equipment of course). Built like a tank. I love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted September 23, 2011 Share #27 Â Posted September 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have a Tele-Elmarit M 90mm f2.8 which is quite small and light for a tele lens. Sharp enough in the centre of the image at widest aperture and the edges sharpen up on stopping down a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted September 25, 2011 Share #28  Posted September 25, 2011 Interesting that my last post got deleted... Anyways, I'm also looking at 90mm's. Anyone recommend anything in particular? I'm still thinking economically since I would not use it often.  Thanks  The other guys know more than myself about choices, but I picked up a 135 Hector for my M9 for $100 and it is marvelous. Hey if you do not like it, you can resell and consider any loss, if any, a learning experience.  Also picked up a 226g 90mm 2.8 Tele-Elmarit made in Canada. Sometimes it renders beautifully and other times I get some sort of fog in my images. Very annoying this. Stopped using it for time being as I am contemplating sending for a CLA just in case it is mucked up inside. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 27, 2011 Share #29 Â Posted September 27, 2011 The sweet spot between current top quality and big dollars is 135 2.8 and 135 4.0 tele elmar. Â The purpose of the goggles is is to achieve focus at 2.8 because of RF limitations. The one that takes 55 mm filters rather than ser 7 is slightly better optically. Â The lens heads come off either in case you want to use them for viso work. I have used my 135 4.0 on Nikon full frame D3 and the images are stunning. The lens is really near APO quality. The 2.8 is just your average Leica tele. Â You need .72 VF for the 135 4.0. The .58 will not work well. M3 or .85 even better. Â If you want to go cheap, a 135 4.5 Hector stopped to F8 is really very good. It better not have fog inside, none at all. Most are fogged Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 27, 2011 Share #30 Â Posted September 27, 2011 The head of the last version of the 4.0 does not come off Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted September 29, 2011 Author Share #31 Â Posted September 29, 2011 Thank you. I'm still on the hunt for the right item at the right price. Â So far a lot of insane prices... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted September 29, 2011 Share #32 Â Posted September 29, 2011 Sorry, the head of my 135 4.0 does come off. I am holding it configured for my D700 in my hand as I type. Â The last 135 3.5 or whatever the stop is does not come off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted September 29, 2011 Author Share #33 Â Posted September 29, 2011 Question. I keep hearing about 'heads' that come off. What do people mean and whats the purpose of that? I think this is the third or forth thread i see something like that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 29, 2011 Share #34  Posted September 29, 2011 Question. I keep hearing about 'heads' that come off. What do people mean and whats the purpose of that? I think this is the third or forth thread i see something like that With some earlier Leica lenses (the v.2 'rigid' 50mm Summicron, the 90mm Elmar, the 90mm Elmarit from 1958, the 135mm Hektor, Elmar and Tele-Elmar lenses come to mind) the optical cell in front could be unscrewed from the focusing unit, which contained no lens elements. This was so that the cell could be mounted on various copying or close focusing apparatus, or on a Visoflex mirror housing – in the latter case with an intermediate focusing mount like the general-purpose OTZFO helical or a bellows unit for macro work.  Leitz made a bewildering array of such accessory gear – the company was sometimes jokingly referred to as "the well-known extension-ring factory in Wetzlar" – and I have played with some of this. It made the RF camera amazingly versatile, but SLR cameras developed with time to become far more practical, and all this stuff was gradually discontinued. The Visoflex III and the Reprovit copying gear held out longest, into the 1970's. A Reprovit II is still very useful, is some ways handier for heavy duty than a SLR on a copy stand.  The old man from the Age of the NF Summicron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronan Posted September 29, 2011 Author Share #35  Posted September 29, 2011 With some earlier Leica lenses (the v.2 'rigid' 50mm Summicron, the 90mm Elmar, the 90mm Elmarit from 1958, the 135mm Hektor, Elmar and Tele-Elmar lenses come to mind) the optical cell in front could be unscrewed from the focusing unit, which contained no lens elements. This was so that the cell could be mounted on various copying or close focusing apparatus, or on a Visoflex mirror housing – in the latter case with an intermediate focusing mount like the general-purpose OTZFO helical or a bellows unit for macro work. Leitz made a bewildering array of such accessory gear – the company was sometimes jokingly referred to as "the well-known extension-ring factory in Wetzlar" – and I have played with some of this. It made the RF camera amazingly versatile, but SLR cameras developed with time to become far more practical, and all this stuff was gradually discontinued. The Visoflex III and the Reprovit copying gear held out longest, into the 1970's. A Reprovit II is still very useful, is some ways handier for heavy duty than a SLR on a copy stand.  The old man from the Age of the NF Summicron  Thank you Old Man My biggest 'gimp' with this is those accessories are now expensive... It makes collecting... rather expensive Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 29, 2011 Share #36  Posted September 29, 2011 Sorry, the head of my 135 4.0 does come off. I am holding it configured for my D700 in my hand as I type. The last 135 3.5 or whatever the stop is does not come off.  The last version of the 4.0 had a simillar barrel to the 3.4. The older version (recognizable by the separate hood) had a detachable head. So had the Hektor 4.5 but it had a different thread. The hektor is surprisingly light and is an outstandingly good IR lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sauceboat Posted December 29, 2011 Share #37 Â Posted December 29, 2011 Do the goggles on the 135mm 2.8 Elmarit attach to the M6 TTL correctly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted December 29, 2011 Share #38 Â Posted December 29, 2011 I' ve just weighed my DSLR kit I have packed for next week - 12.65 Kg.... Â Hi Jaap, Â 12.65kg of DSLR Â Isn't this one of the reasons we use a Leica, or will it really not do the job? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted December 29, 2011 Share #39 Â Posted December 29, 2011 135 4.0 tele Elmar is 90% of the $2000 APO for much cheaper plus the head comes off for viso work if you ever get there. Â 90 2.8 Elmar for around $500 and 90 is more useful than 135. Head comes off for viso work also. I did not say tele Elmar. Different lens. Â A clean 135 Hector is quite good at F6.3 or smaller. Most are filthy inside so take care. Â Forgot the 90 3.5 CV APO. Quite nice and you need the screw to bayonet adapter, not a cheapo knock off either. Leitz or CV only Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted December 29, 2011 Share #40  Posted December 29, 2011 You are calling a 135mm in that little biddy (you’re lucky if the mechanical linkage is accurate) viewfinder a telephoto? Yeah, I guess it is…… but not for me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.