Paulus Posted May 11, 2015 Share #1 Posted May 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Interesting thought at : Still I ask myself, should Leica make a 135 Lens which is way beyond the rangefinder range, just because it has a EVF? Please share your pros and cons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Hi Paulus, Take a look here Should Leica make an 2,0/ 135 APO, because it's possible on the Leica M 240/246 now?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted May 11, 2015 Share #2 Posted May 11, 2015 Pros - very few as far as I can see. Cons: 1. A really fast Summilux type 135 would have such a razor-thin DOF that it would become extremely hard to use (compare the 90 APO ASPH) 2. It would be huge and heavy lens (again compare the 90 AA) 3.. There is the excellent Apo Telyt 3.4/135 already, which can be used with the RF as well 4. There are a great number of excellent (heritage)SLR lenses and zooms out there that can be used simply with an adapter. In the end, however,Leica will decide. If I were Leica I would consider reviving the 80-200 first, if they would be interested at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted May 11, 2015 Share #3 Posted May 11, 2015 A 135/2.0 APO does sound interesting, but as Jaap points out, a lens of this kind would have several issues. The current 90/2.0 APO has a 55mm filter thread; the proposed 135/2.0 APO would have a 60mm or larger filter thread. It would be the equivalent of carrying around two 0.95 Noctilux lenses. Given that, I would opt for the current 135/3.4 APO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted May 11, 2015 Share #4 Posted May 11, 2015 In the meantime, while waiting for Leica to make a 135/2 APO Summicron, and/or saving up for what it would cost (maybe $8-10K) if anyone is seriously in need of a 135/2 for their M, Canon and Nikon currently offer them (Nikon's is a DC, defocus control, design) which cost around a grand and could be adapted to the M. For anyone unwilling to use those lenses despite their recognition among professionals as superb performers, Zeiss also currently makes one in Nikon F mount costing about 2 grand which could also be adapted to the M. Like Jaap I would love to see a revived 80-200/4, provided it was significantly smaller than the R version, which it could be since an auto diaphragm is not needed. Something with an e-49 filter perhaps. And made in the far east, as the R version was, to keep cost down under $2K. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted May 11, 2015 Share #5 Posted May 11, 2015 F3.4 is only one and a half stop. With current ISO capability of a M240 and M246 the F3.4 is far better to use indoors than F2.8 or F2.0 on the M9 or M8 M8 had difficulties with ISO 640 and up, and still I managed to shoot in caves with barely some lighting with my trusty Summicron F2.0 So put your M on ISO 2500 and shoot at F3,4, should be no problem with a CMOS sensor, I think. A F2.0 135 would be huge anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 11, 2015 Share #6 Posted May 11, 2015 What I am going to do: get an Olympus OM 75-150 and try that out. The lenses cost next to nothing. What I recall from the past is that the optical quality is excellent with the exception of strong pincushion distortion, which is not a problem nowadays. And it weighs rather nothing too... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo63 Posted May 11, 2015 Share #7 Posted May 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) What I am going to do: get an Olympus OM 75-150 and try that out. The lenses cost next to nothing. What I recall from the past is that the optical quality is excellent with the exception of strong pincushion distortion, which is not a problem nowadays. And it weighs rather nothing too... I have a "UNITOR" brand OM mount 75-150 f3.9 sitting here with my M and an OM-M adapter. Its seems to be a cheap lens, and has a bit of a "dreamy" look to it. there doesn't appear to be any fungus, but the elements certainly look dusty. i only recently got the adapter from Ebay - i really need to have a bit more of a play with it, in better light. the Olympus 28f2.8 i got with it is brilliant though - very sharp Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted May 11, 2015 Share #8 Posted May 11, 2015 While reading this I remember the difference between the R APO 180/3/4 and the R APO 180/2.0, both of which I owned. That 180/2.0 was a beautiful lens, but it was SO much bigger than the 180/3.4. So I also imagine a 135/2.0 in relation to the current 135/3.4 to be similar and just a bit too much in size. I decided to sell both of the above lenses and opted to keep my lovely R APO 180/2.8 which produces superb images with the APO 2x extender which I very much enjoy on my M240 (and soon will enjoy on the M246), Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted May 11, 2015 Share #9 Posted May 11, 2015 What I am going to do: get an Olympus OM 75-150 and try that out. The lenses cost next to nothing. What I recall from the past is that the optical quality is excellent with the exception of strong pincushion distortion, which is not a problem nowadays. And it weighs rather nothing too... Wow I checked prices and those lenses are about the same price as an off-brand OM-M adapter to use it with I'm tempted! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted May 11, 2015 Share #10 Posted May 11, 2015 I'll get it at once and certainly sell my my 90 Summicron and 135 apo-telyt for it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 11, 2015 Share #11 Posted May 11, 2015 What I am going to do: get an Olympus OM 75-150 and try that out. The lenses cost next to nothing. What I recall from the past is that the optical quality is excellent with the exception of strong pincushion distortion, which is not a problem nowadays. And it weighs rather nothing too... Or the 100-200. Both are great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted May 11, 2015 Share #12 Posted May 11, 2015 I have shot the excellent Zeiss ZF.2 135mm APO Sonnar on my M240. The lens is brilliant, but just about as unwieldy as the APO Summicron-R 180mm was on an R body. In my hands, the APO Sonnar delivered noticeably more contrast and 3D at f/3.4 than my APO Telyt did at f/5.6. Its attachment size, BTW, was 77mm! I am not sure what an appealing composition would be at f/2 on a 135mm, however, and I should confess that even a 90mm lens seems very long and tends to compress the image to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 11, 2015 Share #13 Posted May 11, 2015 Leica decision to make lenses that go beyond the current limitations of the rangefinder (both in aperture and focal length / zooming) imho depends only by their (possible ?) decision to pursue a FF platform centered on EVF : so... not NOW... About this matter... I'd be very curios to see pics taken with the Summicron 180 on M240... but haven't yet seen one... there must be not so many around (Summicron 180 is one of my "Win Lottery" buying... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 11, 2015 Share #14 Posted May 11, 2015 Or the 100-200. Both are great. I have fond memories of Zuiko lenses in general. The OM2 was the first modern camera I owned, coming from an Exa II. Olympus lenses were top notch, right up there with the Asahi Pentax Super Takumars. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 11, 2015 Share #15 Posted May 11, 2015 I still have a couple lenses and bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted May 12, 2015 Share #16 Posted May 12, 2015 I have fond memories of Zuiko lenses in general. The OM2 was the first modern camera I owned, coming from an Exa II. Olympus lenses were top notch, right up there with the Asahi Pentax Super Takumars. My first modern camera was a Pentax Spotmatic and I agree the Takumars (Super Multi Coated in particular) were superb lenses. The screw mount was a little fiddly though, and I succumbed to a Nikon FTn in a few years. Not that the rack-it-back-and-forth aperture indexing was all that great though I did (do) own an Exakta 500 also, being a leftie I found it very comfortable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 12, 2015 Share #17 Posted May 12, 2015 I loved Zuiko lenses on my OM-3Ti and OM-4Ti…but no desire to re-purchase to adapt to my M. While I own the EVF, I enjoy the camera for the RF experience, and 90 is tops for me. But I wouldn't be surprised to see a new Leica zoom at some point…although I'd rather see one somewhere between 28 and 90, as a convenient travel lens….maybe a more modern bi- or tri-elmar with zoom capability like the WATE. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted May 12, 2015 Share #18 Posted May 12, 2015 The Zeiss 135mm/2 Apo-Sonnar is a wonderful lens, but quite large and heavy. I use mine on my D800E, and it is just hand-holdable, but better with a monopod or tripod for support. I think it would be inadvisable to use on a Leica M, or for Leica to produce a competitor, unless it were for a new R-Digital camera, or in Nikon F or Canon EOS mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted May 12, 2015 Share #19 Posted May 12, 2015 I have tried using the Zeiss 135/2 APO on the M; with the EVF of course. That lens is arguably the best 135 on the market. The lens is huge and heavy, but that was not a problem for me. The real showstopper was Leica's obsolete EVF driven by an inadequate firmware. The lens is back on my 5D2 with ML firmware + Zacuto finder. Amazing results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tthorne Posted May 12, 2015 Share #20 Posted May 12, 2015 3.. There is the excellent Apo Telyt 3.4/135 already, which can be used with the RF as well I have tried this lens out and I really loved the way it renders images. I found it spectacular. I have the EVF but I prefer not to use it and I was able to focus fairly well on the RF, but consistently accurate with the 1.4 magnifier. Anyhow, I think the 3.4 max aperture is pretty smart for this local length, as no doubt that little extra DOF is practical and very useful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.