Focusing 135mm Lens

[Guest tanks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

Just received a Tele-Elmar 135mm f/4 E46 lens today. Immediately I started testing it in order to get used to it.

 

I did put a 1.35 magnifier on my MM. My observations so far is that in close to mid distances focusing is not much of an issue.

 

However, between 15m - 20m it gets much tougher. The image below was taken around <20m at 320 ISO, f5.6 and 1/125s. I pre-focused on the pole, and made a slight adjustment to account for bikers going a few feet beyond it. I also included the crop of just the bikers.

 

Any hints and suggestions on focusing this lens is appreciated.

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!

[adan]

In your shot, the bikers look pretty much in focus - they are blurred mostly due to camera shake and their own movement (camera shake visible in the double images of the leafy ground cover, foreground - subject movement visible in double images of spokes, arms, legs, sunglasses, you name it.)

 

I can count the links in the bike chains and the teeth on the sprockets (so long as I divide by two ) which is how I know the focus was about as good as it gets.

 

Shutter speed for action like this needs to be 1/1000 or higher. And I've noticed the 135 TE needs a higher shutter speed then expected in most situations, to prevent camera/lens shake. Possibly because it hangs out so far and is relatively heavy for an M lens.

 

With a 135 on an M, I generally don't go below 1/250, prefer 1/500, and if I MUST go slower, take extra special care to tuck my elbows in tight and s-q-u-e-e-z-e off the shot. That was true even on film, and with the extra clarity of digital, is even more necessary.

________

 

Now - that being said: Yes, rangefinders often have a "dead zone" in focusing in longer distances.

 

At infinity, focus is easy (assuming lens is calibrated) - set lens to infinity and you are fine for things truly at optical infinity (focal length x 1000 or more).

 

At close distances, the RF base (distance between the windows x finder magnification) is a larger proportion of the subject distance (a fatter triangle for triangulation) and focusing is also not too difficult.

 

But in between about 150x focal length and infinity, the triangle gets too skinny for precision focusing. I first encountered this with the Contax G AF cameras (which used triangulation up to a point). They could measure a specific distance out to about 8 meters (26 feet) - and anything beyond that was "infinity." Which was insufficient precision for a 90 @ f/2.8 - I got lots of OOF shots at 50 feet, 100 feet, etc.

 

For shorter lenses (50 and wider) the DoF is so great at any available aperture (even f/0.95), and the M RF accuracy is such overkill, that the problem goes away.

[jaapv]

Don't forget that longer focal length does imply more risk of motion blur. This shot is a good example.

[Guest camera man]

The 135 lens is not good for hand held operation, its a tripod job. I sold my 135 APO for that reason.

[Photoskeptic]

I had the same lens on an M6TTL w/.85 finder. No problems. Very sharp lens. I think I paid $400 for mine and it was in excellent condition (of course that was around ten years ago). Never did use it on a tripod so I can't comment on that particular use.

You might want to check the thread on the 135 APO 3.4 as there is more info on the TE.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Tanks,

 

As per Andy above:

 

Generally, with longer lenses: You rarely gain in sharpness or depth of field what you lose in camera shake by shooting at a slower shutter speed than a MINIMUM of 1/twice the focal length. Faster shutter speeds are even better.

 

The Tele-Elmar is a lens which essentially produces equally fine images at all apertures. Except: F4 might not be quite as good as smaller apertures. Except: See paragragraph just above.

 

You might consider a small sturdy table tripod with large ball head & cable release.

 

Against my chest it gives me + 1 stop of stability at any shutter speed.

 

Against a wall, tree, rock, on the inside frame of a doorway, on a car with the engine off or even on a table it gives you all the stops of stability you need & makes smaller apertures enjoyable.

 

Don't forget to use a lens shade. More for protection against inadvertant impact or damage than for flare control.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Bill W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently received my 135 APO which I had coded by Leica. I have found it to be a lot easier to focus that expected and very sharp handheld. I use a 1.4 magnifier. A lot of issues concerning handheld might be user error. I know it happens to me. It takes practice and what the heck, while you are practicing, you are taking pictures.

[SteveYork]

Narrower depth of field on a 135 too.

[philipus]

This has got to be camera shake combined with a - for an "action" shot and with a 135mm lens - too slow shutter speed. The general rule is to use a shutter speed of at least the focal length's equivalent.

 

At f5.6 and 20m a 135mm lens will have a DOF area of several metres so these cyclists were likely within the DOF.

 

To increase chances of sharp images in a situation like this, use higher ISO to be able to use 1/1000 at, say, f8 to further stretch out the DOF and "capture" the subject.

 

You could also play around with panning which, if done well, will result very sharp subjects (but, of course, with a stretched and smoothened background).

 

My 1938 Hektor 13,5cm can be tricky to focus between 20m and infinity, even though it has markings for 30, 50 and 100m before the infinity symbol. Still, even when used wide open (f4.5) it will at 20m have a DOF of about 6m so for most applications it is possible to get (for me) acceptably sharp images.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Again Tanks,

 

It would appear that your plane of sharpest focus is about 2/3 of the way from the sign to the people on the bicycles.

 

Longer lenses are harder to learn to use. They require more practice & more mental calculations before you take any pictures.

 

A lens like a Tele-Elmar allows you to reach into a scene & abstract a part of it in a somewhat more isolated manner than a 90mm lens or shorter. With a pleasant slightly compressed effect.

 

Nice photo, by the way.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[jaapv]

The 135 lens is not good for hand held operation, its a tripod job. I sold my 135 APO for that reason.

I can't agree with that one. I habitually shoot 400 mm lenses handheld. DMR, Vario-Elmar 105-280 @ 280 + 1.4x extender. Handheld.

Just one of hundreds, if not thousands...

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!

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Jaap,

 

I agree with you.

 

Nice photo.

 

I can routinely take perfectly sharp photos with a 250mm lens handheld with no support. It just takes practice.

 

My suggestion of a tripod, etc, simply extends the available parameters.

 

The key to sharp well focussed photos, like in target shooting, is: Practice, Practice, Practice.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[philipus]

Nice photo Jaap. What ISO did you shoot the monkey at?

[jaapv]

ISO 800, 1/60 th, f 6.8 EXIF didn't register the extender, but got the aperture right.

[Photoskeptic]

jaap, I don't want to take this too far off-topic, but that is one cool monkey!

[Bill W]

jaap..not that it is THAT sharp but I think that monkey has a little astigmatism in his left eye.

[adan]

The key to sharp well focussed photos, like in target shooting, is: Practice, Practice, Practice.

 

Attributed variously to Gary Player, Arnold Palmer, and Lee Trevino: "It's the funniest thing. The more I practice, the luckier I get!"