apo summicron-M 90mm asph versus apo-telyt-M 3,4 /135 mm

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My question is if there are people who have used their Apo summicron-M 2/90mm asph and apo-telyt-M 3,4 135 mm for several years on a M6/MP or M9

Which one do they prefer and , very important, why?

 

 

Thank you for participating!

[giordano]

Prefer for what?

[algrove]

I have used both, but not for "several years".

[Paulus]

Prefer for what?

 

Ergonomically speaking. About performance much is already spoken. They are both excellent. I'm interested in how easy it is to use them.

[giordano]

Framing and focusing is easier with the 90mm.

[Doc Henry]

My question is if there are people who have used their Apo summicron-M 2/90mm asph and apo-telyt-M 3,4 135 mm for several years on a M6/MP or M9

Which one do they prefer and , very important, why?

Thank you for participating!

Paulus,

Yes me and I agree with Giordano

With Apo Telyt 135 mm asph some examples here :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/185501-bob-poppies.html

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/182877-love-poppies-always-poppies.html

.... and with 90 Apo summicron asph, for example here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/195779-rose-i-love-open-thread-2.html

Henry

[Double Negative]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't have those two lenses, but rather the Elmarit-M 2,8/90 and Tele-Elmar-M 4/135. I don't necessarily prefer one or the other and use whatever focal length I need.

 

The 90mm is a little easier to frame with using the stock viewfinder and more bodies have 90mm framelines. For example, the M8 has 90 but not 135. Though that's not a big deal - I use a Leica SHOOC finder with the 135mm as it offers a 1x (1:1) view for framing. I have no problems focusing either focal length on the M7 or M8/M9. Though I do often use a 1.15x magnifier. Some day I suppose I'd like to try a 1.4x magnifier.

 

Any of Leica's later 90/135mm lenses are excellent. Though I'm happy with my lenses, I might at some point go for the APO-Summicron-M 90 for the extra stop in speed.

[Paulus]

I have had the Elmarit-M 90mm and thesummicron apo 2/90mm asph. My question is, if it's worth while to buy a apo-telyt M instead of the 90mm's.

[giordano]

Absolutely not, unless you need the longer focal length.

[Double Negative]

Exactly - it's "worthwhile" if you need the reach and/or speed.

 

IQ-wise, again, they're all about as good as it gets, really.

[thighslapper]

I have both and don't use them much....... both because of size and in particular weight as far as the 90/2 is concerned.

 

Focussing with the 135 was no problem but I had endless problems with the 90.

 

Now I stick to the 90/4 macro which weighs nothing, takes up no space and consistently turns in perfectly focussed and balanced images....

 

No point having a lens if it's inconvenient to carry with you and difficult to use ........

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Everybody,

 

The 2 lenses photograph differently.

 

A 90 is a lens for cutting out unwanted foreground, sides & top. As such it pretty much keeps the same perspective & feeling of a 50 while abstacting a subject from within a scene & somewhat enlarging it. It can be the easier lens to work w/.

 

This is why I often tell people who want to learn photograpy to begin w/ a 90 & not use any other lens until they have mastered it. It's an angle of view that often worked for Rembrant as well as many others throughout the history of painting.

 

A 135 is different. It only gives you a piece of the scene you are viewing. It makes you choose what to include & what not to include. It has a slight, but definite, ammount of image compression. It makes you work harder to capture a different scene than what a 90 sees.

 

A lot of what both lenses do is similar in many situations & either will often work equally well.

 

Sometimes their effect will be different because they are taking different pictures.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[algrove]

Ergonomically speaking. About performance much is already spoken. They are both excellent. I'm interested in how easy it is to use them.

 

For me after 30,000 images, but not in a few years, but in 6 months the 90 I prefer but only due to my hit rate. It draws beautifully.

 

Buy the 90 first.

[UliWer]

Just trying to sum up:

 

The 90mm apo.asph and the 135mm Apo-Telyt are both supreme lenses. Contrast and resolution could hardly be bettered. (The 90mm Elmarit as well as the Summarit or the last version of the 135mm Elmar, which I didn't try seem to be almost as good, but only almost...).

 

Both are rather heavy lenses for the M: the 90mmAA because of it's high opening, the Apo-Telyt because of it's length. Both show some flare in critical light, though less than e.g. a 50 Summicron. (May be the Elmarit/Summarit/Elmar versions are less sensitive for flare.)

 

Both are "slow" in handling, as the focus throw is long, which some people look upon as an disadvantage - I think it's an advantage. For both are difficult to focus. With a long throw you may focus more precisely. Though here also the difference starts: as you may achieve an exact focussing if you are careful with the 90mm even at f/2 it's a hit and miss trial to do so at f/3.4 with the 135mm. Leica says that you should use the 135mm stopped down to f/5.6 to achieve good focus, though many users in this forum say you can use the 135mm fully opened - and there are good results shown here in other threads. But it is a fact that the M rangefinder with 135mm is beyond it's range where it works comfortably. There are pros and cons for the eyepiece magnifier - I'd recommend to use it for both lenses and for sure with 135mm.

 

The other big difference is shaking: with 135mm you need very short shutter times for good results - especially with the M9. The Apo-Telyt will show it's full potential (which is enormous) only on a tripod. With 90mm you are not completely safe, but the bigger opening of the lens gives you much more security. If you compare the results of 90mm and 135mm at 1/180 sec you'll immediately see the difference: if you are not extremely shake-resistant anything longer than 1/250 does not work with 135mm.

 

The most evident difference between both focal lengths may be seen in the viewfinder: the field of view for 90mm is small, for 135mm it is just tiny.

(The least important difference: the Apo-Telyt cannot be coded - though you don't need the coding for your photos, just if you like them in your EXIF).

 

So for practical use 90mm will give you much more - though I'd never give away the Apo-Telyt.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Again Paulus,

 

In regard to range/viewfinders: Try putting an AA or 3.4 on an M3 - An M3, whatever else it is, is a camera designed for a 90. No slouch w/ a 135 either.

 

Also: Keep in mind - Altho a 90 is often easier to use in situations where either a 90 or 135 will do as well & more speed is certainly an advantage there are other parameters: What does the 1 lens do better than the other the times the other is not sufficient? Which lenses are you using it w/? How do you see the World? & more.

 

Plus: There is such a thing as a tripod. Also: There are small sturdy table tripods w/ soft cushioned non-marking feet & large ball heads. They don't take much space & you can put or brace them in 1,000's of places if you stop to look & practice on occasion. Don't forget cable releases.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[edelknipser]

after using the 90 mm several times and the 135 not so often, i think the 90 mm is much more versatile, even due to its faster speed. At the end it is rather difficult to find the correct "sight" for a 135 mm photo with the m finder - i feel very distracted by the "huge" field OUTSIDE the actual picture.. and will give it away possibly

 

 

My question is if there are people who have used their Apo summicron-M 2/90mm asph and apo-telyt-M 3,4 135 mm for several years on a M6/MP or M9

Which one do they prefer and , very important, why?

 

 

Thank you for participating

[Washington]

For anything over 90mm I use a Visoflex.

[algrove]

Just trying to sum up:

 

The 90mm apo.asph and the 135mm Apo-Telyt are both supreme lenses. Contrast and resolution could hardly be bettered. (The 90mm Elmarit as well as the Summarit or the last version of the 135mm Elmar, which I didn't try seem to be almost as good, but only almost...).

 

Both are rather heavy lenses for the M: the 90mmAA because of it's high opening, the Apo-Telyt because of it's length. Both show some flare in critical light, though less than e.g. a 50 Summicron. (May be the Elmarit/Summarit/Elmar versions are less sensitive for flare.)

 

Both are "slow" in handling, as the focus throw is long, which some people look upon as an disadvantage - I think it's an advantage. For both are difficult to focus. With a long throw you may focus more precisely. Though here also the difference starts: as you may achieve an exact focussing if you are careful with the 90mm even at f/2 it's a hit and miss trial to do so at f/3.4 with the 135mm. Leica says that you should use the 135mm stopped down to f/5.6 to achieve good focus, though many users in this forum say you can use the 135mm fully opened - and there are good results shown here in other threads. But it is a fact that the M rangefinder with 135mm is beyond it's range where it works comfortably. There are pros and cons for the eyepiece magnifier - I'd recommend to use it for both lenses and for sure with 135mm.

 

The other big difference is shaking: with 135mm you need very short shutter times for good results - especially with the M9. The Apo-Telyt will show it's full potential (which is enormous) only on a tripod. With 90mm you are not completely safe, but the bigger opening of the lens gives you much more security. If you compare the results of 90mm and 135mm at 1/180 sec you'll immediately see the difference: if you are not extremely shake-resistant anything longer than 1/250 does not work with 135mm.

 

The most evident difference between both focal lengths may be seen in the viewfinder: the field of view for 90mm is small, for 135mm it is just tiny.

(The least important difference: the Apo-Telyt cannot be coded - though you don't need the coding for your photos, just if you like them in your EXIF).

 

So for practical use 90mm will give you much more - though I'd never give away the Apo-Telyt.

 

Excellent post.

 

I take only on exception-I have the 135 APO coded and it works on my M9 as of the firmware update before this last one. Don't have the firmware numbers at my finger tips.