M240 + Telyt 3.4 135mm experiences?

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey all,

 

Shied away from the un-coded tele on the M9 and was only comfortable up to 75mm. For the kind of shooting I would like a longer reach it would easily suit the EVF work flow of the M240. Most likely tripod mounted.

 

Does anyone have any comments, experience, examples of the two together?

 

Much appreciated.

[Advertisement]

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

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello dwbell,

 

A 135mm F4 Tele-Elmar on a .91X M3 on a tripod produces a really nice image.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[bocaburger]

135/4.5 Hektor LTM+adap, 135/4 Elmar and 135/4 Tele-Elmar on M9 no problems at all. Hektor and Elmar were perfect from the word go (pure luck I suppose), Tele-Elmar made one unsuccessful trip to a repair guy who did nothing for it, and then I undertook milling down the landing where the optical cell seats in the focusing mount and now it's perfect. I have used the frame lines unaided, with a 1.25X magnifier, and also one of the shoe-mounted Leitz bright-line finders (which are very bright and more magnification than the in-camera finder). I've also used the Tele-Elmar head with the short focus mount on a Visoflex-III. Personally I prefer any of those options to an EVF, particularly the last-generation Oly one used on the 240, but your assessment may be different than mine.

[k-hawinkler]

Hey all,

 

Shied away from the un-coded tele on the M9 and was only comfortable up to 75mm. For the kind of shooting I would like a longer reach it would easily suit the EVF work flow of the M240. Most likely tripod mounted.

 

Does anyone have any comments, experience, examples of the two together?

 

Much appreciated.

 

 

Hi,

 

I can't help you with the 135 on M - but with the TE 135/4 on M9 and D800E.

 

2011.02.10 Bandelier from above - winklers' Photos

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/165871-bandelier.html

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/272579-hairy-woodpecker-female.html

 

I have several copies of the TE 135/4. Never felt the need to get the Telyt 135/3.4.

A superb TE 135/4 only is about $500. Production era - 1965-1998 < 28,300 lenses.

 

Before spending a small fortune on the Telyt 135/3.4 I would give the TE 135/4 a try-out.

It's one of my favorite lenses on M9, D3, and now D800E.

[Guest roey]

I have both. The APO Telyt 135 is amazing. I use it with the optical view finder on the M240. Closed down to f/5.6 it renders a lot of detail. I also believe it makes for a good portrait tele lens wide open, but I haven't used it often enough for that to have a more firm opinion.

[Guest tanks]

Good question. Don't have the Telyt 3.4 135mm, but I have the Tele Elmar 135 f/4 and will test it out soon on the M.

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Appreciate the feedback. Quick fire reply;

 

Anyone have a side by side pic of the f/4 and f/3.4 next to each other? In terms of 'size in the bag' I mean?

[jaapv]

The barrel of last version of the 4.0 is identical to the 3.4

[viramati]

here is one with it on the M. minimum focus distance EVF wide open

Position Relax | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[luigi bertolotti]

Appreciate the feedback. Quick fire reply;

 

Anyone have a side by side pic of the f/4 and f/3.4 next to each other? In terms of 'size in the bag' I mean?

 

'Size in the bag' is almost identical... same length... the 'classic' f/4 (not the rare last version quoted by Jaap) has a bit larger focus ring diameter and a bit slimmer front diameter, lacking the built in hood (surely a plus of the Apo Telyt)

[jaapv]

But the click-on hood is much better than the extendable hood and can be stowed over the front part of the lens.

 

Here is the Tele-Elmar as a portrait lens:

 

 

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!

[lct]

I have both. The APO Telyt 135 is amazing. I use it with the optical view finder on the M240...

How easy or difficult do you feel it to focus at full aperture on the M240? I mean with the rangefinder of course. Do you feel the need to use a magnifier?

[dwbell]

But the click-on hood is much better than the extendable hood and can be stowed over the front part of the lens.

 

Here is the Tele-Elmar as a portrait lens:

 

 

[ATTACH]392721[/ATTACH]

 

That's a lovely portrait Jaap. Dappled warm light on the face with cooler blue shade light acting as a rim on the shoulder. Engaged expression with a secondary interest (focal) point. Lovely catch lights. Really nice. Tough to print well maybe?

[dwbell]

How easy or difficult do you feel it to focus at full aperture on the M240? I mean with the rangefinder of course. Do you feel the need to use a magnifier?

 

Yeah, this is a good question. Have the improvements (whatever they are, but I notice them too!) of the M240 RF focusing made the 135 wide open more accessible? As stated I'm probably going to be tripod mounted and have the time to EVF it, but I would be interested to know too.

[Peter H]

Have you considered R lenses such as the 180 APOTelyt 3.4? Very reasonable prices for extraordinary performance if it suits your subject matter.

[dwbell]

Have you considered R lenses such as the 180 APOTelyt 3.4? Very reasonable prices for extraordinary performance if it suits your subject matter.

 

I have no knowledge what-so-ever about R lenses. Are they not 'bigger'?

 

My use for the 135 would be compressing elements in travel / landscape with possibly the odd portrait (135 on my canon system is a go to for that, but for some reason I tend to 75 with a DRF?). I would use it I guess 10% of the time, with 35 & 75 accounting for 55% and 35% respectively? I guess I'm saying it needs to be pretty small and "out of the way"? Are R lenses not generally larger?

 

To be honest it will be a direct toss up between cropping the 75 cron down, as I do now, for no additional weight / gear.

[jaapv]

The Apo-Telyt R 180/3.4 is a bit bigger than the M 135, but not dramatically so. A very good - and relatively affordable- lens.

[k-hawinkler]

I have no knowledge what-so-ever about R lenses. Are they not 'bigger'?

 

My use for the 135 would be compressing elements in travel / landscape with possibly the odd portrait (135 on my canon system is a go to for that, but for some reason I tend to 75 with a DRF?). I would use it I guess 10% of the time, with 35 & 75 accounting for 55% and 35% respectively? I guess I'm saying it needs to be pretty small and "out of the way"? Are R lenses not generally larger?

 

To be honest it will be a direct toss up between cropping the 75 cron down, as I do now, for no additional weight / gear.

 

 

I have both the TE 135/4 and the APO 180/3.4. Very different lenses.

 

Here is a portrait, shot with TE 135/4 on Nikon D300. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/199288-dr-melvin-l-prueitt.html

 

The older TE 135/4 have the advantage that the lens head is designed to be undcrewed and used in a short focus mount with a Visoflex. Of course, with an adapter one can also use the lens head with short focus mount on, for eaxample, a Nikon body.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest roey]

How easy or difficult do you feel it to focus at full aperture on the M240? I mean with the rangefinder of course. Do you feel the need to use a magnifier?

I use a 1.4 magnifier with every lens that is longer than 35mm. If I have enough light focusing is not too hard. It works a lot better on the M240 than on the M9, but that might be because the latter is out of adjustment.

[Peter H]

I have no knowledge what-so-ever about R lenses. Are they not 'bigger'?

 

My use for the 135 would be compressing elements in travel / landscape with possibly the odd portrait (135 on my canon system is a go to for that, but for some reason I tend to 75 with a DRF?). I would use it I guess 10% of the time, with 35 & 75 accounting for 55% and 35% respectively? I guess I'm saying it needs to be pretty small and "out of the way"? Are R lenses not generally larger?

 

To be honest it will be a direct toss up between cropping the 75 cron down, as I do now, for no additional weight / gear.

 

OK, it doesn't sound as though the APO-Telyt R180 is for you, probably, although its a lens I would highly recommend on performance grounds.

 

Whilst it is relatively small and light for a top-quality SLR lens, it is probably a bit too large and heavy for your purposes.