Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Share #1 Posted January 8, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have to shoot a large panorama of the entire ‘’Lumpy Ridge’’ which overshadows Estes Park. Yesterday I did a test with a zoom to gather the best focal length and the degree of rotation needed. 140mm worked best… but I want to use my Leica for the shot when the light and sky are dramatic. I have two 135 lenses to use with the Visoflex: A f4.5 Hektor and a f2.8 Elmarit: which would you use? Thank you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2012 Posted January 8, 2012 Hi Washington, Take a look here Which 135mm would be best for the job?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gvaliquette Posted January 8, 2012 Share #2 Posted January 8, 2012 Do you really have to ask? Unless there has to be some "old" look to it, the Elmarit is the tool for the job. Given what I do have, I would use my 135mm Tele-Elmar Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #3 Posted January 8, 2012 Yes I have to ask. My question was a simple one. If I had my choice I’d use the 70-200, f2.8 on my MkIII Ds like I did yesterday…. but as I said, I want to use my Leica. I simply asked a question that I expected to be answered by those familiar with the the Leica lenses I have. Not to be told what I should have…. or ‘’do I have to ask’’. You are rude. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 8, 2012 Share #4 Posted January 8, 2012 I have to shoot a large panorama of the entire ‘’Lumpy Ridge’’ which overshadowsEstes Park. Yesterday I did a test with a zoom to gather the best focal length and the degree of rotation needed. 140mm worked best… but I want to use my Leica for the shot when the light and sky are dramatic. I have two 135 lenses to use with the Visoflex: A f4.5 Hektor and a f2.8 Elmarit: which would you use? Thank you. Rip, I would use the f2.8 Elmarit stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8. Best K-H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #5 Posted January 8, 2012 Thanks K-H, I kinda figured so too….. but as I have used both lenses I never really evaluated them. So, I ask guys like you who have. The test pano was really sweet….. it will be interesting to see how the Leica compares. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted January 8, 2012 Share #6 Posted January 8, 2012 Hello Rip, Why don't you use them both, on a tripod, w/ cable release & w/ a lens shade. I would suggest trying 5.6, 8, 11, & even 16 & then telling us the answer to your question. It might be most instructive for all of us. As I remember both of these lenses are somewhat susceptible to flare. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #7 Posted January 8, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Michael, Yes…. that is exactly what I am going to do! Once everything is set up a lens change is no big deal. And, I would like to see for myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #8 Posted January 8, 2012 Ok, when the light on Lumpy Ridge is right….. I’m ready. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/170087-which-135mm-would-be-best-for-the-job/?do=findComment&comment=1891687'>More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 8, 2012 Share #9 Posted January 8, 2012 Your 2.8/135 Elmarit head lens is from a V1 or V2 ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #10 Posted January 8, 2012 I don’t know…. how do you tell? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2012 Share #11 Posted January 8, 2012 You should use the Hektor if you want to do anIR panorama - it is the best IR lens I know. Otherwise I would prefer the Elmarit - but as you want lots of detail, the ApoTelyt would be even better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 8, 2012 Share #12 Posted January 8, 2012 I don’t know…. how do you tell? Thanks. By your serial number I believe: 1976 2,761,101-2,809,400 1977 2,809,401-2,880,600 1978 2,880,601-2,967,250 v1 (1963-1977) v2 (1977-1998) K-H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #13 Posted January 8, 2012 The number is 2223751….. early one it seems. It came with eyes if that means anything. Directly on the camera, mechanical linkage focus was impossible even after sending it to a real expert for adjustment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 8, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 8, 2012 The number is 2223751….. early one it seems.It came with eyes if that means anything. Directly on the camera, mechanical linkage focus was impossible even after sending it to a real expert for adjustment. Your lens is from 1966, so v1. Mine is from 1979, has eyes as well, so v2. K-H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 8, 2012 Share #15 Posted January 8, 2012 The number is 2223751….. early one it seems.It came with eyes if that means anything. Directly on the camera, mechanical linkage focus was impossible even after sending it to a real expert for adjustment. It looks like a V1 due to the 2 piece hood, but some V2 wears this 2 piece one, the V2's have better lens It is really strange that it does not focus with the original M mount I used different 2.8/135 lens & Version I & II on M8s and they focused very well, even at full aperture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 8, 2012 Author Share #16 Posted January 8, 2012 See, with huge prints pin-point detail is not necessary as the print is viewed at a distance. Printing is a whole different ball game than viewing up close on a backlit monitor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted January 8, 2012 Share #17 Posted January 8, 2012 Hello Rip, All 135/2.8's have eyes just as all 135/4's & 135/4.5's do not. Optically the earlier model has a concave rear element when viewed from the back. Knurled dimple w/ smooth peak focussing ring. Goggles attached w/ screws. The later model has a convex rear element. A continuously knurled focussing ring w/ no dimples & no peaks. The goggles on the later version are part of a single large casting. No screws. Some intermediate lenses, as is often the case w/ Leitz/Leica & many other manufacturers of many things in many fields, are a mix. Like late M3's w/o collars on the lens release button or like 2d optical version optics in some 1st version 50/1.4 mounts. 1 reason your 11829 lens might not focus on your camera is it is possible the lens head & mount are different. It was possible @ that time to simply buy the 11828 bellows mount lens head or the 11827 lens head w/ focussing mount for use on a Visoflex or SL(w/ the proper adapter) & then later buy the 14129 "M" focussing mount separately. The same as you could do w/ the 90/2 of the time. Both the 135 & the 90 required return to Leitz for fitting & adjusting before use if the focussing mount was added. Don't forget those little #'s under "Canada". They are there for a reason, you know. See if the end of 1 of the #'s engraved/scratched on the inside of the disconnected lens head by itself - The focal length of the lens head in 1/10ths of a millimeter - matches the number engraved under "Canada" on the outside of the separate focussing mount. Also see if the serial # engraved/taped/scratched inside the focussing mount matches the serial # on the outside of the lens head. If these #'s don't all match & maybe even if they do the lens might need adjustment by Leica or someone else who knows how. BTW: #2656667 in 1975 is the beginning of the new optical series. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 8, 2012 Share #18 Posted January 8, 2012 Hi Michael, Could you please give the source for: BTW: #2656667 in 1975 is the beginning of the new optical series. Thanks, K-H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted January 8, 2012 Share #19 Posted January 8, 2012 Hello K-H, Leica Illustrated Guide III, Lager, p36. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted January 9, 2012 Author Share #20 Posted January 9, 2012 Michael, On my lends head and eye-mount there is none of the markings you describe. The lens, with eyes was gone over by a first class pro. However, this is all a moot point for me as I don’t like using this lens directly on the M-9 body. Thanks for the help! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.