M240 + Telyt 3.4 135mm experiences?

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks K-H, thanks Peter. Appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

 

I've had some people PM me answers too, one individual shared some simply stunning portrait examples of, I think, their children. They are mouth wateringly good, I was blown away.

 

Incidental they were also superb skin tone-wise. Actually, they are outright the finest quality files I've seem from the M240 to date - including my own efforts.

 

I'm tempted to go Telyt 3.4!

 

Can anyone clarify why it is considered 'unsupported' and listed on Leica Berlin as for M3-M7 only? Is it a black sheep? Will it be replaced?

[lct]

...

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.

...

Not the same beasts indeed.

M-135/3.4 vs R-180/3.4

Length: 105 vs 135 mm

Largest diameter: 59 vs 68 mm

Weight: 450 vs 750 g

[lct]

…

Can anyone clarify why it is considered 'unsupported' and listed on Leica Berlin as for M3-M7 only? Is it a black sheep? Will it be replaced?

...

Leica Store Berlin: Leica APO-Telyt-M 3,4/135mm : Details

Leica Meister's list needs to be updated apparently.

AFAIK the 135/3.4 was considered unsupported on M8 and M9 because at full aperture it was out of the accuracy range of the former's rangefinder and was still difficult to focus on the latter so Leica did not find it necessary to code the lens.

It is not the case with the M240 any more so the latest samples are now coded.

Never heard of any replacement so far.

[lct]

Might mean that Leica Meister have not the coded version in stock as well.

[menos I M6]

…

Can anyone clarify why it is considered 'unsupported' and listed on Leica Berlin as for M3-M7 only? Is it a black sheep? Will it be replaced?

 

The 135/3.4 APO Telyt has a curious story.

Upon it's introduction it was possibly the highest performing 135mm tele lens there is certainly the best ever made 135mm rangefinder lens).

 

When Leica started to sell digital RF cameras and they collected there first experiences from users in the market with the now different need for even higher precision in calibration and care when shooting such long, fast lenses on a mechanical RF, they reacting in a very typical German Engineering way.

 

They went very conservative and simply stopped recommending to use one of their finest lenses on digital cameras and wherever you read their recommendations of use regarding this lens, you will curiously find, that it is recommended by Leica to use this lens best stopped down.

 

This is not, as it is in any way badly performing wide open, but to circumvent any potential misalignment of the cameras RF or the lenses manufacturing tolerances.

 

The APO Telyt since then has been given the most classic step fatherly care, one could imagine, having been refused a 6-bit code for years, etc …

 

 

Simply put: it is one of the finest telephoto lenses there is, not just for rangefinder cameras, but "there is".

Older samples of the lens, manufactured before Leica production has potentially shifted to more strict calibration tolerances of the lens might or might not need a re-calibration from a skilled technician (not necessarily Leica Solms, as other qualified shops work on this lens as well).

 

Newer samples, with or without 6-bit coding might or might also need attention as of focussing issues, as this lens indeed exposes EVERY tiny deviation from an ideal RF calibration on the body, it is used on.

 

If somebody has any issues, focussing this lens consistently, it is one or a combination of these points involved:

 

- user error

- camera bodies RF is misaligned

- lens is not perfectly calibrated

 

The best way to start to understand the implications of focussing this lens is to study DOF charts, optimised for digital high res sensors with the 135/3.4.

The visible DOF when using a M Monochrome or M240 blow ups is REALLY slim.

 

 

In any case, there are some users, who simply love their 135/3.4 APO, I am one of them.

It is my favourite tele lens of them all (and I also shoot Nikon and Mamiya long lenses).

 

I keep my digital M bodies maintained and make sure, RF's are always calibrated to spec.

For framing help, I use a 1.4x magnifier (it indeed helps only framing, but does not aid in focussing, as it does rob contrast and distorts the focussing optics just enough to equal out any potential benefit from it's magnification, as the precise eye position with the magnifier attached is extremely important).

 

Make sure, for critical focussing wide open:

 

- your eyesight is good or well corrected

- your body has had sufficient water supply

- you are not tired

- you didn't drink excessive coffee or are on medication, influencing eyes and dexterity

- you didn't strain your eyes before shooting (work on a computer all day long, …)

- you are in a relaxed and happy mood

- you train regularly - focussing these lenses is a perishable skill and must be trained regularly

 

size:

M8.2 + Hexanon 21-35 and M3 + 135 APO-Telyt by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

on a M8.2 with ND filter and wide open aperture:

 

IMSA Performance Matmut - Porsche 911 GT3 RSR - 2011 Le Mans 24h by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

on a M9 (I guess no ND and stopped down here):

 

BMW Motorsport - BMW M3 GT - 2011 Le Mans 24h by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

the last year of the Peugeot works team at Le Mans:

 

Peugeot Sport Total - Peugeot 908 − 2011 Le Mans 24h - color version by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

[menos I M6]

and how a full frame on the M8.2 looks like at minimum focus wide open aperture (I have few of these, as I used my APO mainly for motorsports shooting, while I prefer 35 − 50mm otherwise):

 

"morning light" by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

In my opinion, the APO-Telyt is among the handful of Leica's very finest lenses on any M mount camera.

 

This thread reminds me, I have to take mine out more (it always was my first rate motorsports lens until 2012, when I decided to make a point by using a 50 year old Canon RF lens instead … which did just as well, but way better in low light @ f2)

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Great write up, very informative. Thanks for taking the time Dirk.

[jaapv]

Leica Store Berlin: Leica APO-Telyt-M 3,4/135mm : Details

Leica Meister's list needs to be updated apparently.

AFAIK the 135/3.4 was considered unsupported on M8 and M9 because at full aperture it was out of the accuracy range of the former's rangefinder and was still difficult to focus on the latter so Leica did not find it necessary to code the lens.

It is not the case with the M240 any more so the latest samples are now coded.

Never heard of any replacement so far.

 

It was coded for the M9 already, albeit a bit tardy. The M9 has 135 framelines.

 

Thank you, Dirk, for the best summary of the 135 Apo I have read on this forum.

[dwbell]

The M9 has 135 framelines.

 

As does the M240 - right?

 

Thank you, Dirk, for the best summary of the 135 Apo I have read on this forum.

 

Seconded. Or +1 as you kids say these days.....

[bocaburger]

In very controlled testing and with intense scrutiny I could manage to discern the subtle differences between the APO Telyt and Tele-Elmar, although only my serious-gearhead-photographer friends could see it without me pointing it out. In practical shooting at least in my hands those advantages went to waste. As it were I sold my APO and retained the Tele-Elmar (and a significant pile of cash ) , primarily due to the latter's ability to be used with a short focusing mount. That lets me use it on a Visoflex, but also with an M-to-R adapter and an R-to-EOS adapter on my 5D.

[menos I M6]

In very controlled testing and with intense scrutiny I could manage to discern the subtle differences between the APO Telyt and Tele-Elmar, although only my serious-gearhead-photographer friends could see it without me pointing it out. In practical shooting at least in my hands those advantages went to waste. As it were I sold my APO and retained the Tele-Elmar (and a significant pile of cash ) , primarily due to the latter's ability to be used with a short focusing mount. That lets me use it on a Visoflex, but also with an M-to-R adapter and an R-to-EOS adapter on my 5D.

 

I would be interested how both lenses fair in comparisons regarding colour variations as CA, as I found older telephoto lenses often suffering from such issues, while the APO does not.

 

This would be unlikely very obvious in small JPGs but get's serious, once one has to start cropping (which when using the 135mm focal length, I often have to refer to on the M).

 

Do both lenses have the same focus throw or is there also a difference? I prefer long lenses with a longer focus throw, as for a much better precision for focussing critically and find the APO often a touch too fast in focus throw.

[Berlinman]

I use the 4/135 with my M with the EVF. Focussing works well and the pictures are perfect. I found this combination has the optimal balance between quality and price. The only negative point ist, that You can't update the 4/135 with a 6-bit code.

[k-hawinkler]

I use the 4/135 with my M with the EVF. Focussing works well and the pictures are perfect. I found this combination has the optimal balance between quality and price. The only negative point ist, that You can't update the 4/135 with a 6-bit code.

 

Oh, why not?

I think some folks have done that, no?

[algrove]

Leica will not do it, but others I have heard will do it.

 

***OP, would you still like a photo of the APO 135.3.4 M, the APO Telyt-R 180/3.4 R and the 135/4 Tele-Elmar-M. I own all three and have an M240.

[suey11]

Leica will not do it, but others I have heard will do it.

 

***OP, would you still like a photo of the APO 135.3.4 M, the APO Telyt-R 180/3.4 R and the 135/4 Tele-Elmar-M. I own all three and have an M240.

 

If he doesn't I would like to see photos of them please.

[algrove]

OK, here goes.

 

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!

 

 

[dwbell]

That's fantastic and exactly what I was looking for. Thanks a lot for taking the time to do that, I'm sure it'll be useful to a wider audience than just me.

 

Thank you.

[tom0511]

I am on my second 135/3.4...had one years ago, sold it because I was not using it much and found it difficult to focus on the M8.

Then 3 years ago bought another one (used) which I had to send in for service for substantiel cost but which now works very good.

 

I am not using it often but I still think it is nice to have one Tele lens in the M-lens kit.

Just yesterday I have used it when I went to the zoo on my new M (together with a 1.4x loupe). The results look very good. I find the lens also great for compressed landscape subjects. It is also -IMO-a nice compromise between speed and size.

I read many times that the 135/4.0 is nearly as good for less money. And f3.4 vs f4.0 doesnt make such a difference.

Anyways, I am happy to have a 135mm in my kit, even though I would usually rather grab my DSLR when I need focal length longer than 90mm.

[Paul J]

Would be nice to see a 135mm Summicron at some point, now we have an EVF to work with.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mmradman]

Would be nice to see a 135mm Summicron at some point, now we have an EVF to work with.

 

How about APO Sonnar 135mm f2, for instance Nikon F mount lens could be used via F-M adapter from Novoflex etc. It is similar in weight & heft to R APO Elmarit 180mm. New lens at £1600 is cheaper than typical S/H APO Telyt.