Fast telephoto lenses on the Leica.

[Lax Jought]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They should be fine- I know M240 users that have posted pictures with them. At F4, they out-resolve the M Monochrom. I have used them on the M8, M9, and M Monochrom. I have also used them on u43 mirrorless. Telephoto lenses do not have the vignetting issues that wide-angle lenses have with Digital sensors.

 

The modern Zeiss m-Mount 85/2 is about 8x the price of the Nikkors.

 

I'll check them out but I will be using these lenses wide open, I need fast lenses.  I probably won't be using them at f/4.  I've found that the Zeiss lenses produce amazing IQ, maybe they are worth the price.

[Lax Jought]

The Canon 85/1.5 and 100/2 are great, but there also the relatively inexpensive 135/2.8 Leitz which is pretty good for concert work, much cheaper than either, and way way easier to find, since only 2000 85/1.5s were made and something like 3k 100/2 Canon. There are three version, all similar, but of course the later ones would be a bit more desirable. Yes it comes with the goggles They made alot of these over the years, so they can be found pretty easy, and it's heavy, so no one uses it, except me LOL I love the thing. It is far superior in low light to the 135/3.4, which I have and love, but that lens is not for low light. Some people can stand ISO at a high setting, not me, and the Sony A7 is no exception. I hate it already at ISO 800 LOL. Now, the A7S is another story.

 

I am liking the photos that you're able to get.  I'd be happy with that under the circumstances but I know I'd better hit the focus spot on or it's not going to work.  I was wondering what the goggles are but I'm glad you posted a photo of them, I think I know what they are now.  The weight of the lens isn't too much of a problem for me with the Leica.  I don't like it as much when heavy lenses are attached to heavy DSLRs.

 

I just saw the news today about the A7sII, I'm starting to think I might just get that camera at some point to use with a Canon telephoto lens to complement an M240 which will be my main camera, but right now the Canon 85 and 100 is sound really good to try on my M8. 

 

I already found that thread on RFF, I'm amazed by what menos is able to do with the M8 in that context!

Edited September 11, 2015 by Lax Jought

[Advertisement]

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

[Lax Jought]

On the 135/2.8, when I was going to get one about 9 years ago, a conversation with Malcolm Taylor, the UK Leica lens guru, put me off. He explained that a lot of the lenses have separation problems between the lens elements.

 

That is a pity, a 135 lens would've been great.  I need them when photographing in a large concert hall, I have to be far away from the action on stage. 

[Lax Jought]

I picked up a V2 135/2.8 Tele-Elmarit in a trade. Glass is perfect. On the M8: I use a 1.25x magnifier in addition to the goggles.

Focus requires more care than the 105/2.5 Nikkor and 100/2 Canon. You need to keep your eye centered for the goggles. This is a big, heavy lens. I like it for the close-focus ability, have not tried it at the skating rink in low-light. This lens goes in the $300~$400 range for one near mint. The version I have uses 55mm filters and series VII filters. 

 

The Canon 100/2 or Nikkor 8.5cm F2 - probably the best to look at that can be found at a reasonable price. I paid $400 for the Canon and $300 for the Nikkor. The Canon- big. The Nikkor uses 48mm filters but the original shade is made to hold Series VII filters. The Canon uses 58mm filters. It is much bigger than the Nikkor.

 

Love that photo of the deer there.  I don't mind a heavy lens if it's paired with the Leica.  I've never used the goggles before so I can't comment on that, but I'm very good with extreme rangefinder focusing so I think I should be ok.  The price looks good to me too...

Edited September 11, 2015 by Lax Jought

[Lax Jought]

I've read all about RF base being overstretched at 135. But I shoot alot at 135, and I have 4 or 5 the M9 can shoot, so I can make up my own mind In my experience it's a matter of learning your lenses. If you read the thread about Menos shooting LeMans, he practiced with the 100/2 for weeks.

Yes, the googles are very strange at first with this lens, not least for framing. Shoot 100 shots in various scenarios, chimping as you go, and it's fine. Easier for me than the 100/2 WO. It's heavy so I like a grip. I pretend I have a speed graphic

 

I was going to remark the 100/2 is hard to find but:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CLAd-Minty-Super-Rare-Canon-100mm-f2-L-Mount-LTM-L39-Leica-Screw-Mount-/141765194707?hash=item2101dd33d3

 

 

 

I am really liking the photos you're able to get out of those lenses, especially the deer(?) in the snow.  I can definitely work with the IQ. 

 

I mentioned earlier I have a vintage 1956 elmarit 90mm f/2.8, the IQ from this lens is amazing, I love it.  I wish it was a bit faster because I have been using it on the Sony A7 and sometimes it's still a bit too dark to use this lens.

 

I'm sure I will have to practice like menos but I am also confident I will be fine with it, I'm used to photographing with the M8 in difficult light situations.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Lax Jought

[wlaidlaw]

Hi Wilson, that f/1.2 Contax 85mm sounds perfect!  Sad to hear that the f/1.4 has better IQ but f/1.4 is no slouch either.  I'll keep an eye out for the f/1.4, IQ is important to me.

 

But more importantly, the Zeiss 85mm f/2 sounds good also.  I don't know what the wobble issue can be either.  The closest thing I can imagine is how the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.1 wobbles a bit because its screws need to be tightened regularly or they will gradually become loose and the lens will 'wobble'.

I suspect the Contax f1.2 Anniversary lenses both the 55mm and 85mm were both "aren't we clever lenses" made by Zeiss to garner headlines and to lighten collectors wallets. I haven't tried the 55/1.2 but the 85/1.2 had noticeable softness (maybe coma and/or CA) at the outer edges until about f2. The f1.4 is noticeably sharper in the corners at f1.4 than the f1.2 is at f1.4. However I can't complain, as I managed to sell the f1.2 at three times what I bought it for in Contax UK's closing down sale, to a Japanese collector. If I needed a fast 85 to use on my M240 (I don't), the Contax is the lens I would go for. I sold all my Contax lenses when I got rid of all my Contax film cameras (139, RX, RTS2 and G2). I have re-bought the 28-85 Vario Sonnar and 300/4 plus 600/6.3 Tele-Tessars. Of course these are all useless on the M8 and M9, as they cannot be focussed. The 85/1.4 is a high contrast lens so will spark up the focus peaking well on the 240. 

 

Wilson

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

If somebody knows how to rewrite the firmware like the Magic Lantern guys did for the Canon DSLRs so that the M8 can switch on and go straight into raw mode, that would be awesome. 

No idea what you're talking about.  My M8 and every Canon DSLR I've ever owned, if I set them to raw stayed in raw.  Every time they were switched on they were in raw. 

[Lax Jought]

No idea what you're talking about.  My M8 and every Canon DSLR I've ever owned, if I set them to raw stayed in raw.  Every time they were switched on they were in raw. 

 

 

Magic Lantern is a firmware hack developed by some individuals in the Canon DSLR filmmaking community which works in tandem with the Canon DSLR's firmware. 

 

In summary, it still allows normal stills photography but it completely opens up the video function.  So whereas the normal video function produces highly compressed footage that includes artifacts which distort the image, with Magic Lantern installed the DSLR will produce raw uncompressed video footage.  This allows you maximum flexibility to post-process the footage in the same way as you post-process a raw file for a stills photo.  This ultimately transforms the DSLR into a very powerful filmmaking tool that rivals the quality of far more expensive filmmaking cameras.

 

When Magic Lantern was first released, it exploded in popularity in the DSLR/indie filmmaking community.  Here's Magic Lantern's wiki page:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Lantern_%28firmware%29

 

So as I was saying, if somebody developed an equivalent of Magic Lantern for the M8 to allow direct access to uncompressed rawDNG, that would be great.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Lax Jought

[uhoh7]

I am really liking the photos you're able to get out of those lenses, especially the deer(?) in the snow.

They are elk

 

TY for kind words. Would love to see some of your shots, throw us some links

 

The A7r2 has + and -. As you probably know these cameras have a thick sensor cover and really only fulfill full potential with native glass, which in turn is limited. The r2 ISO performance is not exceptional by the latest DSLR standards, and the lossy Sony RAWs make it yet harder.

 

Now for low light, the A7S truly is a marvel. Prices are down and one can be had under 2k. Low MP but incredible ISO performance.

 

Stock, these cameras are not M lens fans, but for 4-500USD, depending on the model, Kolari will replace the sensor cover with a thinner one. Then you are cooking with gas!!

 

My second body to M9 is the original A7 with this mod and it can shoot all the Ms I really care about very well: ZM18, SEM 21, 28 Cron etc. That body is very cheap used, 700 or even less, and add the mod, which is 400 for the original, and you have a great versatile M body partner, which is better high ISO than M9 (about same as 240), can AF, and will shoot ANY lens.

 

For long shots at events I use this camera with a Nikon AIS 180/2.8 ED. This is a fantastic lens and under 300USD.

 

 

DSC00217 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

 

DSC00234 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

The downside of original A7 and A7r is a loud shutter. Starting with the A7S there is a quiet mode.

 

The absolute ultimate low light body today would be a A7S.mod. With that camera you would not even need fast glass, and you would have unprecedented DOF in dim light, since you can stop right down. Downside is low MP count, about the same as M8. Many samples on flickr.

Edited September 20, 2015 by jaapv

[hiepphotog]

I suspect the Contax f1.2 Anniversary lenses both the 55mm and 85mm were both "aren't we clever lenses" made by Zeiss to garner headlines and to lighten collectors wallets. I haven't tried the 55/1.2 but the 85/1.2 had noticeable softness (maybe coma and/or CA) at the outer edges until about f2. The f1.4 is noticeably sharper in the corners at f1.4 than the f1.2 is at f1.4. However I can't complain, as I managed to sell the f1.2 at three times what I bought it for in Contax UK's closing down sale, to a Japanese collector. If I needed a fast 85 to use on my M240 (I don't), the Contax is the lens I would go for. I sold all my Contax lenses when I got rid of all my Contax film cameras (139, RX, RTS2 and G2). I have re-bought the 28-85 Vario Sonnar and 300/4 plus 600/6.3 Tele-Tessars. Of course these are all useless on the M8 and M9, as they cannot be focussed. The 85/1.4 is a high contrast lens so will spark up the focus peaking well on the 240. 

 

Wilson

 

Wilson, you probably had a dud copy then. My Contax 85/1.2 60 Jahre are sharp from corner to corner even at WO (of course with a little bit of SA). Certainly it's sharper than the Lux 50 ASPH. Stopping down, it's probably among my sharpest lenses. The 55/1.2 Jahre is no slouch either. I doubt any 50/1.2 during that time would be able to stand against it; the Canon 55/1.2 Aspherical may but stopping down that lens has way more field curvature (didn't have them both at the same time). Stopping down, it is more consistent than the Lux 50 ASPH as well. I sold them both recently because I no longer shoot DSLR, but I still look for an alternative to these two.

 

A couple from the 85/1.2 60 Jahre

 

 

 

Corner Crop at f/1.2: I doubt many modern lenses can do this at WO

 

Edited September 11, 2015 by hiepphotog

[CheshireCat]

Hi Wilson, that f/1.2 Contax 85mm sounds perfect!

 

If you don't need RF coupling, then there are plenty of options.

[wlaidlaw]

Wilson, you probably had a dud copy then. My Contax 85/1.2 60 Jahre are sharp from corner to corner even at WO (of course with a little bit of SA). Certainly it's sharper than the Lux 50 ASPH. Stopping down, it's probably among my sharpest lenses. The 55/1.2 Jahre is no slouch either. I doubt any 50/1.2 during that time would be able to stand against it; the Canon 55/1.2 Aspherical may but stopping down that lens has way more field curvature (didn't have them both at the same time). Stopping down, it is more consistent than the Lux 50 ASPH as well. I sold them both recently because I no longer shoot DSLR, but I still look for an alternative to these two.

 

A couple from the 85/1.2 60 Jahre

 

 

Corner Crop at f/1.2: I doubt many modern lenses can do this at WO

 

 

Since my 85/1.2 was Contax UK's own "show" lens, I would doubt there was anything wrong with it. Your last image does show a very soft corner in the crop above. However I don't know how much of this is due to OOF and how much to the lens. I am not saying the 1.2 is a bad lens but IMHO it is not as good as the f1.4 version which is exceptional, particularly the later MMJ versions and will cost a buyer about 25% or less of the f1.2 price. I would class the f1.2 lens with the f1.0 Noctilux as a great technical achievement and excellent for specialist use but for most purposes the 1.4 is a

better answer. A bit like the f1.4 75 Summilux compared with the f2 75 APO Summicron. 

 

Wilson

[hiepphotog]

Since my 85/1.2 was Contax UK's own "show" lens, I would doubt there was anything wrong with it. Your last image does show a very soft corner in the crop above. However I don't know how much of this is due to OOF and how much to the lens. I am not saying the 1.2 is a bad lens but IMHO it is not as good as the f1.4 version which is exceptional, particularly the later MMJ versions and will cost a buyer about 25% or less of the f1.2 price. I would class the f1.2 lens with the f1.0 Noctilux as a great technical achievement and excellent for specialist use but for most purposes the 1.4 is a

better answer. A bit like the f1.4 75 Summilux compared with the f2 75 APO Summicron. 

 

Wilson

 

This is a slanted infinity test shot so the corners and center are on the same plane of focus. I am not sure I would call this crop soft. None of the current Leica Lux would yield as sharp corner (most likely much softer) at WO.

Edited September 12, 2015 by hiepphotog

[menos I M6]

@Lax Jought:

At some point over the last years my main focus on vintage lenses was trying out as many of the old super fast telephoto rangefinder lenses as I could get my hands on.

 

I have used (and still own most of these) anything from a 7.3cm f1.9 Hektor through a 8.5cm 1.5 Nikkor LTM through the 135/2.8 goggle to the latest 135/3.4 APO Telyt.

 

With that knowledge and a few dry cabinets full of vintage lenses here is my advice in 2015:

 

best bang for the buck:

- both in terms of speed and reach + a still respectable optical performance: 100/2 Canon LTM (there is no other rangefinder coupled lens you can get for this kind of money to be fully functional on a Leica M rangefinder camera (be prepared: you very likely have to get it fine calibrated for best performance)

 

highest speed vs reach at highest possible image quality:

- no, it's not the 75 Summilux we all love and want, its the 8.5 f1.5 Nikkor LTM (rare collectors item, hence very difficult to find and mostly expensive)

 

highest possible image quality on a Leica RF with longest reach:

- 135/3.4 APO Telyt (second best and much more affordable: 135/4)

 

most versatile (but at a cost):

- 75 Summilux

- at any rate one of the greatest lenses ever made, period

- you buy one and keep using it for all kinds of purposes, yet it’s true best is as a traditional portrait lens

- performs magical wide open and simply astonishing stopped down

 

 

Now my advice: if a 100/2 Canon LTM for it's comparatively low price is not good enough (because: low contrast wide open, because still too short, because too long focus throw for a modern taste, …), here is my SECOND BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK:

 

- second hand Nikon D700 + 180/2.8 Nikkor ED AiS can be had both for under 1000 USD (much cheaper than any super fast rangefinder exotic telephoto, much longer in reach and running circles around the high ISO of the M8, while providing similar image quality with it's slightly softer 12MP vs the super sharp 10MP of the M8.

 

 

Here is a reason why you want the Canon 100/2 LTM together with your M8:

- you want to keep using the Leica M rangefinder camera because you just love to use RF cameras

- because the M8 + 100/2 Canon LTM still is such a lightweight, small yet powerful combo (if you know your way around the limitations in low light

 

Here is why you should use an SLR and a telephoto instead:

- focussing accuracy with super fast telephoto lenses on a RF camera is a means of perfectly calibrated lenses and bodies + training that focussing over and over and over and over (it took me a few years before being able to shoot motorsports or anything moving wide-open with these long and fast lenses)

- the longer reach you need, the cheaper that glass is for an SLR vs a Leica rangefinder:

 

85/1.4 Nikkor Ai-S SLR lens: ~500-600 USD

85/1.5 Nikkor LTM rangefinder: ~1600-2100 USD

 

180/2.8 Nikkor ED AiS SLR lens (one of the greatest telephoto lenses ever made): ~300-400 USD

135/4 Leica rangefinder: ~1000-1400 USD (latest version)

 

 

Long manual focus SLR lenses (even the specific samples with renowned, fantastic optics) are nowadays simply dirt cheap. You can even adapt them to your Sony camera with ease.

 

The reason to check out the exotic fast long glass for rangefinder cameras lies really in two points:

 

- you want to use a rangefinder camera at all costs

- the urge of using something exotic

 

It's not because these lenses make a lot of sense on a rangefinder camera.

Personally I simply find it a lot easier to manually focus a rangefinder camera vs an SLR and I love the small package these cameras present vs a SLR and of course to a certain extend some of that exotic glass has something special to it one just has to try at least once (like that 75 Summilux or a 8.5cm Car Zeiss Jena Sonnar or a 8.5cm 1.5 Nikkor). It's an expensive hobby though.

 

The M8 is still a very capable camera. I used my M8.2 for a few years as my main camera and coped with it's low light weakness just with faster glass and slower shutter speeds - it was working.

My motor sports shots from then had a certain look I wanted then - you surely can produce an entire different look (even full color and clean, low noise shots if you like).

The only thing my motor sports shots from then can present now is that it is definitely possible to shoot in very low light at very slow shutter speeds (1/15 - 1/60) with super fast long rangefinder lenses if you are dedicated.

 

In closure, let me point you to another gem that can be had for silly little money with possibly the very best optical performance for the money and at this range:

105/2.5 Nikkor LTM - a marvel of a lens, which helped Nikon to center stage in the industry back in the 50's and 60's.

 

One of my personal favorite shots with the M8.2 and 100/2 Canon LTM:

 

Le Mans 24h 2012 - no.43 Extreme Limite Aric - Norma MP2000 - Judd by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

The 100/2 Canon LTM and the 135/3.4 APO Telyt are my two favorite motor sports lenses on the Leica M - the 100mm for the fast aperture and still compact package and light weight (compare that to a SLR lens) and the APO-Telyt for the ultimate image quality of any 135mm lens there is (you can get a nice modern full frame DSLR + 135mm lens for the price of the APO-Telyt though which makes this lens something for the truly rangefinder dedicated person).

[menos I M6]

That is a pity, a 135 lens would've been great.  I need them when photographing in a large concert hall, I have to be far away from the action on stage. 

This sounds like perfect territory for a 135/3.4 APO (or 135/4 considering funds and needs to shoot these on a Leica M).

For the price though a high performance manual focus 135 or 180mm SLR lens coupled with a silent mirrorless camera sounds equally intriguing.

If a modern SLR with a shutter not louder than the M8 is considered, my dream combo would be a Nikon DSLR (like a D7200 or alike) and the 180/2.8 ED AiS lens - a mighty combo.

 

They are elk

 

TY for kind words. Would love to see some of your shots, throw us some links

 

The A7r2 has + and -. As you probably know these cameras have a thick sensor cover and really only fulfill full potential with native glass, which in turn is limited. The r2 ISO performance is not exceptional by the latest DSLR standards, and the lossy Sony RAWs make it yet harder.

 

Now for low light, the A7S truly is a marvel. Prices are down and one can be had under 2k. Low MP but incredible ISO performance.

 

Stock, these cameras are not M lens fans, but for 4-500USD, depending on the model, Kolari will replace the sensor cover with a thinner one. Then you are cooking with gas!!

 

My second body to M9 is the original A7 with this mod and it can shoot all the Ms I really care about very well: ZM18, SEM 21, 28 Cron etc. That body is very cheap used, 700 or even less, and add the mod, which is 400 for the original, and you have a great versatile M body partner, which is better high ISO than M9 (about same as 240), can AF, and will shoot ANY lens.

 

For long shots at events I use this camera with a Nikon AIS 180/2.8 ED. This is a fantastic lens and under 300USD.

 

 

DSC00217 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

 

DSC00234 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

The downside of original A7 and A7r is a loud shutter. Starting with the A7S there is a quiet mode.

 

The absolute ultimate low light body today would be a A7S.mod. With that camera you would not even need fast glass, and you would have unprecedented DOF in dim light, since you can stop right down. Downside is low MP count, about the same as M8. Many samples on flickr.

 

Ahh - someone else proposing that Nikkor.

For people who do not know it - it really is THE telephoto lens together with Nikons famous 300/2.8 that was the sharpest weapon in professional photographers bag for telephoto shots. It is a monster of a lens, yet surprisingly small (especially the AiS version (later internal focus versions with Autofocus grew substantially in size).

The 180/2.8 ED AiS lens is a design from the late 70's / early 80's and it is absolutely astonishing that this very lens even today is hardly outperformed by Nikon's finest 70-200. It was THAT good back then.

I would say it is a bit like Nikon's 135/3.4 APO Telyt if not a bit longer ;-) a fantastic lens and everyone should have one.

[jaques]

it may not be that fast but I really love my tele-elmarit:

 

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!

[Lax Jought]

Hi menos, thanks for dropping by!  Good to hear from a fellow M8 user, especially with your car racing photos.

 

I have my eye on the Canon 100m f/2 which should come to about 130mm on the M8.  I think I have decided that any photographic situation that the M8 can't handle at 130mm f/2, I will buy a Sony A7sII to help me with the extreme circumstances. 

 

My plan is to buy an M240 or M9 next year as my main camera, with the M8 as a backup or as a 2nd camera with another lens on it. The reason I was thinking telephoto is because for a rangefinder with limited telephoto options, the M8 is the only one that can extend the length due to its crop sensor.  But of course unfortunately its ISO isn't that great for use in low light.

 

I do have a Canon 7D which I use as a backup camera but I don't really enjoy using it, although I am forced to use it especially where I need its silent shutter function at a quiet music concert or stage play, or on a film set for example.

 

I really prefer the rangefinders because I manually focus much faster and more accurately than an autofocus on a DSLR especially in low light situations.  The 7D is no slouch and in good lighting conditions it works well.  A lot of my photography occurs in difficult light though, and that's where the 7D suffers with its autofocus, it has even greater difficulty if the subject of the photo is moving or if there's flashing lights on a stage.  In that kind of situation, I am forced to switch to live-view and manually focus using the little screen.

 

There are other aesthetic reasons why I like the rangefinder, I have found that they are not as intimidating for people than if I was to point a big black DSLR at them.  This is particularly true for non-photographers who have no idea what the Leica is, they see an 'old' camera and think it's 'cute', it's not a camera that is not usually associated with paparazzis.

 

 

 

@Lax Jought:

At some point over the last years my main focus on vintage lenses was trying out as many of the old super fast telephoto rangefinder lenses as I could get my hands on.

 

I have used (and still own most of these) anything from a 7.3cm f1.9 Hektor through a 8.5cm 1.5 Nikkor LTM through the 135/2.8 goggle to the latest 135/3.4 APO Telyt.

 

With that knowledge and a few dry cabinets full of vintage lenses here is my advice in 2015:

 

best bang for the buck:

- both in terms of speed and reach + a still respectable optical performance: 100/2 Canon LTM (there is no other rangefinder coupled lens you can get for this kind of money to be fully functional on a Leica M rangefinder camera (be prepared: you very likely have to get it fine calibrated for best performance)

 

 

[fiftyonepointsix]

i used the M8 yesterday in Raw mode, left it turned on for 4 hours straight with one battery. Was down to "1-Bar" by the end, but could still take photos.

[uhoh7]

Ahh - someone else proposing that Nikkor.

For people who do not know it - it really is THE telephoto lens together with Nikons famous 300/2.8 that was the sharpest weapon in professional photographers bag for telephoto shots. It is a monster of a lens, yet surprisingly small (especially the AiS version (later internal focus versions with Autofocus grew substantially in size).

The 180/2.8 ED AiS lens is a design from the late 70's / early 80's and it is absolutely astonishing that this very lens even today is hardly outperformed by Nikon's finest 70-200. It was THAT good back then.

I would say it is a bit like Nikon's 135/3.4 APO Telyt if not a bit longer ;-) a fantastic lens and everyone should have one.

Menos, you are a dangerous influence

 

I had a weak moment today and bought this beast for my A7.mod:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/281799278883?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

 

It has the wrong nameplate LOL, but seems pretty clean, and the price was decent. 300/2.8 ED AI-S IF, oh yeah!

 

Research suggests it's near the same league as the 180, we'll see

 

You can tell these were real front line lenses, many copies with all sorts of battle wounds. A real clean one is still worth over a grand. Mine looks rough enough, I won't be inclined to baby it

Edited September 21, 2015 by uhoh7

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

I did not read all the thread sorry but don't forget that the M8 is a crop camera so its focus accuracy is limited with fast tele lenses. Don't expect high hit rates at full aperture with 135/3.4, 90/2 or 75/1.4 lenses if you don't use a magnifier. My own limits w/o magnifier or goggles are 135/5.6, 90/2.8 and 75/2. FWIW.