stephengv Posted April 27, 2017 Share #1 Posted April 27, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm planning to buy a 135 Elmar (1960 to 1965) model. I already read Ken Rockwell's review. Is this lens really worth it? I'm planing to use it for Landscapes using my Leica M. Thanks. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 27, 2017 Posted April 27, 2017 Hi stephengv, Take a look here 135 Elmar, worth it?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jip Posted April 27, 2017 Share #2 Posted April 27, 2017 Don't read Ken Rockwell for his opinion just numbers... his opinions are all over the place. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebf Posted April 27, 2017 Share #3 Posted April 27, 2017 I have this lens: Crazy sharp, a pain to focus, a little lacking on contrast (nothing that can't be fixed in post)... I love it. It's not my main lens, but whenever I use it, I feel really satisfied. I think it's worth it 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 27, 2017 Author Share #4 Posted April 27, 2017 I have this lens: Crazy sharp, a pain to focus, a little lacking on contrast (nothing that can't be fixed in post)... I love it. It's not my main lens, but whenever I use it, I feel really satisfied. I think it's worth it Do you have some sample pictures? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted April 27, 2017 Share #5 Posted April 27, 2017 Ken Rockwell reading is helpful to find out how the lens looks like, some specifications and this is it. Yes, lens worth of $100. And another $100 or so for VF magnifier. Without it, it is like framing interior of the room by looking through the key hole. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted April 27, 2017 Share #6 Posted April 27, 2017 Be aware that this lens can be problematic. I've had three, none of which would focus accurately. I ended up with the E46 version (not the apo) which is spot on on focus with the rangefinder. If you trawl through posts here on the forum you will find a lot of information about the E39 versions and their focus woes - some can be spot on I'm sure but none of the 3 I had were. If you just want to use it for landscapes then it might be viable to have one adjusted for infinity focus even if it is then out for closer work. My experience is that its a very good lens - I have a 30" x 20" off mine which lacks little in technical terms - but you either focus it using live view or live with its inconsistencies if you are not lucky enough to get one which focuses correctly. The E46 seems to be a better mechanical design - clearly there was a reason for the redesign. And you get what you pay for - the E39 version is a nice lens optically, but its low price indicates a lack of popularity and there is a reason for this. Just my opinions based on some of my experience and a number of posts here anyway. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted April 27, 2017 Share #7 Posted April 27, 2017 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) pgk... I think you wrote about the TELE Elmar 135 f4 (which has the E39 and the later E46 version) : Stephen did refer his question to the "non tele" Elmar 135 f4, made both in SM and BM, which is styled similar to the last Hektor 135 f 4,5 (chrome with vulcanite - E39 filter Mount - same hood). Anyway... I have both (the non tele is a SM with adapter) and as for my experience rendering is similar... with a bit more contrast from the Tele : the main difference is in Handling... the focusing barrel of the Tele is much more next to the flange, and this makes the action ergonomically different : personally, in recent times I tend to appreciate more the old "no tele" for this reason... and fact is that it looks to me more consistent in focus. As for carrying : the Tele is shorter, so it looks, generally, more compact, even if the "non tele" has the tripod attachment (double thread, and not a stupid device) ; about carrying... it's the reason for I don't use so much my Tele Elmarit 135 f 2,8 : the goggles make it a lot bulky in any bag... in its original case is well protected, but of course doesn't avoid the problem of dimensions... but is definitely the BEST about focusing and overall rendering.... I have a very late item (last year of production) and wasn't for its size, I would Always use it as my 135. Edited April 27, 2017 by luigi bertolotti 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted April 27, 2017 Share #8 Posted April 27, 2017 (edited) If OP is planning to shoot landscapes then focusing issues don't matter with LV/EVF. I use tele-elmar and very satisfied whenever I use it. Recently my use has gone down since it is not closest focusing lens (I guess all other Leica M 135's will have same issue). This makes closeup shots of flowers etc problematic. I have started to use non-Leica adapted manual focus 135mm lenses. If one is willing to focus using LV/EVF then there are many out there with different handling characteristics/sizes. In general I have yet to come across a bad 135mm manual focus lens in terms of sharpness. After some work in PP they all look same. Therefore go with the cheapest one that you like from handling/looks perspective and focus using LV/EVF. Edited April 27, 2017 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 27, 2017 Share #9 Posted April 27, 2017 Is it worth it? If your budget is not hurt, them buy it and decide for yourself. I got a very clean 135mm Hektor with lens shade and cap for $35. It has a certain character that is useful. . 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 27, 2017 Share #10 Posted April 27, 2017 My copy of the Elmar 135/4 (# 11850) has no focus problem. It is a bit soft at f/4 but is plenty sharp above. Only con is its physical length but it is a very light 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271885-135-elmar-worth-it/?do=findComment&comment=3263942'>More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted April 28, 2017 Share #11 Posted April 28, 2017 (edited) I've had both the M and screw mount versions and always been impressed with them, although they look sort of funny in today's world. If I'm using an M body these days I usually grab the Tele-Elmar, if I'm using a Barnack, it's the Elmar. Just don't overpay for one. Edited April 28, 2017 by spydrxx Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 28, 2017 Author Share #12 Posted April 28, 2017 pgk... I think you wrote about the TELE Elmar 135 f4 (which has the E39 and the later E46 version) : Stephen did refer his question to the "non tele" Elmar 135 f4, made both in SM and BM, which is styled similar to the last Hektor 135 f 4,5 (chrome with vulcanite - E39 filter Mount - same hood). Anyway... I have both (the non tele is a SM with adapter) and as for my experience rendering is similar... with a bit more contrast from the Tele : the main difference is in Handling... the focusing barrel of the Tele is much more next to the flange, and this makes the action ergonomically different : personally, in recent times I tend to appreciate more the old "no tele" for this reason... and fact is that it looks to me more consistent in focus. As for carrying : the Tele is shorter, so it looks, generally, more compact, even if the "non tele" has the tripod attachment (double thread, and not a stupid device) ; about carrying... it's the reason for I don't use so much my Tele Elmarit 135 f 2,8 : the goggles make it a lot bulky in any bag... in its original case is well protected, but of course doesn't avoid the problem of dimensions... but is definitely the BEST about focusing and overall rendering.... I have a very late item (last year of production) and wasn't for its size, I would Always use it as my 135. Thank you! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 28, 2017 Author Share #13 Posted April 28, 2017 If OP is planning to shoot landscapes then focusing issues don't matter with LV/EVF. I use tele-elmar and very satisfied whenever I use it. Recently my use has gone down since it is not closest focusing lens (I guess all other Leica M 135's will have same issue). This makes closeup shots of flowers etc problematic. I have started to use non-Leica adapted manual focus 135mm lenses. If one is willing to focus using LV/EVF then there are many out there with different handling characteristics/sizes. In general I have yet to come across a bad 135mm manual focus lens in terms of sharpness. After some work in PP they all look same. Therefore go with the cheapest one that you like from handling/looks perspective and focus using LV/EVF. Thank you Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 28, 2017 Author Share #14 Posted April 28, 2017 My copy of the Elmar 135/4 (# 11850) has no focus problem. It is a bit soft at f/4 but is plenty sharp above. Only con is its physical length but it is a very light lens. 21032014pic111_si.jpg How much did you got yours? do you have some sample pics? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 28, 2017 Author Share #15 Posted April 28, 2017 I've had both the M and screw mount versions and always been impressed with them, although they look sort of funny in today's world. If I'm using an M body these days I usually grab the Tele-Elmar, if I'm using a Barnack, it's the Elmar. Just don't overpay for one Do you have sample pics? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 28, 2017 Share #16 Posted April 28, 2017 How much did you got yours? do you have some sample pics? Got it last century in the film days. Nothing handy sorry but you will find sample pics on the web. https://www.flickr.com/photos/32681588@N03/11319987943 https://www.flickr.com/photos/32681588@N03/11608770895 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musotographer Posted April 28, 2017 Share #17 Posted April 28, 2017 Though I didn't use it much I was always pleasantly surprised by the quality of what it produced - it's definitely a bargain. I did come to find the Tele-Elmar much more user-friendly though, primarily for the rather shorter focus throw, so I have just sold the Elmar - I think it went for about £125. This is an approx 50% crop, on an M9P, at f4. 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! 12 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271885-135-elmar-worth-it/?do=findComment&comment=3264450'>More sharing options...
Glasauge Posted April 28, 2017 Share #18 Posted April 28, 2017 some examples non tele elmar 135 f4 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! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271885-135-elmar-worth-it/?do=findComment&comment=3264505'>More sharing options...
Glasauge Posted April 28, 2017 Share #19 Posted April 28, 2017 "sports" 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! 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271885-135-elmar-worth-it/?do=findComment&comment=3264511'>More sharing options...
stephengv Posted April 29, 2017 Author Share #20 Posted April 29, 2017 I found one online for around $230, is that a good deal? Thanks Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.