Test shot w/ old 135/2.8

[Skippy Sanchez]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Twenty years ago I sold a 135mm 2.8 Elmarit (the one with goggles) along with my M4s & half a dozen other lenses. After learning from my mistake & reinvesting in Leicas & glass, I just acquired another 1969-vintage 135mm 2.8 Elmarit.

 

Here's a shot of one of my wife's tulips during an unseasonal snowfall today, focused as closely as possible at 2.8.

 

At an efffective length of about 180mm, this is gonna be one nice lens.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[carstenw]

There are actually two goggled versions, one with a ribbed focusing ring (which I also have):

 

Objectif LEICA Elmarit 135 mm f/2,8 (1963-1973)

 

and a later one with better contrast wide open with a normal focusing ring:

 

Objectif LEICA Elmarit 135 mm f/2,8 (1973-1997)

 

From the year, I presume you have the first version. My focus ring is smooth, if a bit heavy to operate.

[DaveEP]

I also have the one with goggles - which are a pain because I have to remove the M8 grip to get it on/off - and is probably the reason I will buy the newer APO version in the end.

 

However, the focus ring on mine is also extemely tight. Is this normal on the 135, or is this something I should have looked at?

[brucek]

How good (or bad) is the framing accuracy with this lens?

[jaapv]

You don't have to buy an expensive apo. I too had the 135/2.8 first version. Nice lens, but I owned an Apo before that and that rather spoilt me, so I was not happy with the 2.8. I bought a 4.0/135 now and quality wise it is darn close to the apo, and a whole lot cheaper.

 

 

I also have the one with goggles - which are a pain because I have to remove the M8 grip to get it on/off - and is probably the reason I will buy the newer APO version in the end.

 

However, the focus ring on mine is also extemely tight. Is this normal on the 135, or is this something I should have looked at?

[DaveEP]

How good (or bad) is the framing accuracy with this lens?

 

It's as good or bad as any other Rangefinder lens I have

[gravastar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also have the one with goggles - which are a pain because I have to remove the M8 grip to get it on/off - and is probably the reason I will buy the newer APO version in the end.

 

However, the focus ring on mine is also extemely tight. Is this normal on the 135, or is this something I should have looked at?

Ah, someone else with tight focusing. I've just purchased a used second version (with slotted not scalloped focus ring). I assumed the lens wanted the focus helical cleaning and regreased. I asked Leica UK about this and they told me they don't have the tools, the lens has to go to Solms with unknown turn-around time However, a third party has said they could probably fix it for me without too much delay.

 

Although the goggles make it somewhat unwieldy, optically I like the results and it's equivalent to a fast 180mm on the M8. One thing I will do is to make rectangular and cylindrical cardboard sleeves, blackened on the inside, for the front of the goggles. I'm finding as I mount and unmount the lens my fingers touch and smear the glass in the goggles - that can make focussing difficult unless they're kept very clean.

 

If the rangefiner images don't align with the goggles attached it's possible to adjust the goggles to correct this, BUT the adjustment mechanism must be released before attempting to turn the realignment screws else you can crack the optics.

 

Bob.

[Skippy Sanchez]

....From the year, I presume you have the first version. My focus ring is smooth, if a bit heavy to operate.

 

Yup, it's the same one, which is the same as the one I had 20 years ago. And I agree, the focus is a bit on the 'heavy' side, but smooth as silk nonetheless.

 

I recall my old one was too loose, and when hanging from the neckstrap or shoulder gravity would cause the lens barrel to extend to the close-focus end. It was more of a pain in the ass than being a tad too tight, that's for sure.

 

-skippy

[brucek]

It's as good or bad as any other Rangefinder lens I have

 

I guess I wasn't clear. Sorry.

 

But the M8 doesn't have any frame lines at all for the 135, and I have never seen the lens under discussion so I have no idea if the goggles have suitable frame lines or not. Do they? And if so are they at least kinda-sorta accurate for use with the M8?

 

Thanks.

[gravastar]

I guess I wasn't clear. Sorry.

 

But the M8 doesn't have any frame lines at all for the 135, and I have never seen the lens under discussion so I have no idea if the goggles have suitable frame lines or not. Do they? And if so are they at least kinda-sorta accurate for use with the M8?

 

Thanks.

The goggles magnify the image entering the viewfinder so the area covered by the 135mm lens is the same as the 90mm frame in the finder. The lens pulls up the 90mm frame in the finder. The extra magnification due to the goggles has the effect of increasing the range finder base length, hence focus accuracy, so it's similar to the requirements of a 90mm which is a supported combination on the M8.

 

Bob.