Ronazle Posted May 12, 2018 Share #161 Posted May 12, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think many would like to buy the 135 mm APO Telyt M but when it comes to the cash outlay another lens will take precedence; this of course results in a sales problem. Said problem is antagonized by the fact that the non-APO predecessors, especially the Tele-Elmar are really excellent and available at bargain prices. It appears that digital has sort of killed the new 135mm market. Golly gee, what am I to do with my really long lenses? Regards, Ron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 12, 2018 Posted May 12, 2018 Hi Ronazle, Take a look here Farewell to the 135 APO-Telyt-M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted May 12, 2018 Share #162 Posted May 12, 2018 [...] It appears that digital has sort of killed the new 135mm market. [...] Pretty well the opposite for me. 135mm lenses did sell hardly in the film days and mine had little use then but now i can use them on mirrorless cameras which rejuvenates those lenses IMHO. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted May 12, 2018 Share #163 Posted May 12, 2018 (edited) Pretty well the opposite for me. 135mm lenses did sell hardly in the film days and mine had little use then but now i can use them on mirrorless cameras which rejuvenates those lenses IMHO. Indeed - bought a Sony A6500 (APS-C) earlier this year and the combination of excellent EVF, focus-peaking and IBIS make the 135 APO very easy to use (and equiv to 202mm). 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! Edited May 12, 2018 by Keith (M) 2 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/284290-farewell-to-the-135-apo-telyt-m/?do=findComment&comment=3517478'>More sharing options...
pico Posted May 12, 2018 Share #164 Posted May 12, 2018 [...] The biggest barrier was Mrs Gobert. It’s her money as well.... My mate and I have an arrangement. What is her's is her's. What's mine is her's, too. Seriously. I signed over my estate minus debt (which is zero). It makes life so simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 12, 2018 Share #165 Posted May 12, 2018 [...] Golly gee, what am I to do with my really long lenses? Pretty sure there are superb things to show in Texas. Or little things like those new fig leaves in Normandy (CL, 135/3.4). 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobert Posted May 12, 2018 Share #166 Posted May 12, 2018 My mate and I have an arrangement. What is her's is her's. What's mine is her's, too. Seriously. I signed over my estate minus debt (which is zero). It makes life so simple. I always convince her. Let’s start the search for the SEM 18! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphlex Posted May 12, 2018 Share #167 Posted May 12, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) The bottom line is the bottom line. It does not matter how "good" a product is - it only matters that it sells enough that it makes enough profit, at the price it can sell at. Or at the very least is a "killer app lens" that enhances sales and profits of cameras or other gear. Leica 135's have always been on the bubble (subject to elimination). The 90TE "thin" was conceived in 1972 as a lens that, with a 1.5x converter, could replace the 135 lenses. The only thing that prevented the 135 going the way of the dinosaur 45 years ago was the 90 + 1.5x image quality was too poor. 1.5x converter for an M camera? Was it ever produced? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2018 Share #168 Posted May 12, 2018 No. The only one known is the Komura 2x conveter. Works better than expected, but still not superior to cropping. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronazle Posted May 13, 2018 Share #169 Posted May 13, 2018 I will clarify slightly. When we were shooting Super XX that had really large grain the use of a good telephoto was far, far superior to cropping. All one has to do to verify this early usage is to look at the remaining number(s) of Elmar telephotos in the 135mm configuration. Qualitative increases in film quality (i.e., finegrain) contributed to the decreased need for a 135mm on a rangefinder camera; digital resolution, in my opinion, is essentially a further extension thereof inre to the 135mm. Leica going to a shorter base rangefinder did nothing to improve the situation (early M v. present M). My comment on really long lenses was hyperbole. Regards, Ron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted May 13, 2018 Share #170 Posted May 13, 2018 (edited) Erwin Puts has contributed a lot and has often given his work freely. I have valued, benefited and found a lot of interest in his writing, as have many others. To try and start a witch hunt over this is pathetic. 100% agreement over here. I'm not sure what the cause of this gaffe was, but I'm willing to chalk it up to being a mistake and let it go at that. It seems to me that it is small minded to revel in feasting on the miscues of others. Edited May 13, 2018 by Herr Barnack 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted May 13, 2018 Share #171 Posted May 13, 2018 I'm not sure what the cause of this gaffe was, but I'm willing to chalk it up to being a mistake and let it go at that. Agreed. But whatever the reason was for the story, it does raise the question of the economic viability of the 135mm focal length as an M lens. Older versions are very cheap (and far from bad lenses), newer versions are still available in the very low hundreds (of €, £ or $). Used E46 versions of the pre-APO are very reasonably priced for a Leica M lens and the APOs themselves don't seem to appear on the used market in large numbers. Is this focal length simply not an economic viability at the high new price for an APO I wonder, or will the market support small, periodic batches? Has anyone here actually bought a 135mm M lens new? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted May 13, 2018 Share #172 Posted May 13, 2018 (edited) ...Has anyone here actually bought a 135mm M lens new? I would if I had an extra $4K on hand. In his posts about using the 135/3.4 APO, onasj has certainly made a compelling case for the Telyt-M: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/284325-nba-eastern-conference-semifinals-playoff-game-with-the-m10-135-apo-rip/ Edited May 13, 2018 by Herr Barnack Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted May 13, 2018 Share #173 Posted May 13, 2018 My none-APO E46 135mm lens produces extremely good images though and I don't think that I would change it unless I really needed to use this focal length wide open. If I really did a 135mm f/2 and dSLR body would be as/more competent for much less money. Hence my query. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 13, 2018 Share #174 Posted May 13, 2018 Has anyone here actually bought a 135mm M lens new? Somebody must have. Otherwise they would not be available second-hand. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musotographer Posted May 13, 2018 Share #175 Posted May 13, 2018 Slightly tangentially - I've started using my Tele Elmar-M 135 f4 for portraits quite a lot and really like it. Does anyone have experience of it AND the Elmarit-R 135 f2.8 with it's extra stop wide open, and can that extra stop with it's shallower plane of focus make much difference to the drawing of a portrait? I usually use the EVF in this context, so it really doesn't matter that the R demands using Live View only. Thanks..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobert Posted May 27, 2018 Share #176 Posted May 27, 2018 (edited) Yesterday I’ve “tested” my new APO telyt on landing parachuters /skydivers. I have to admit that I am quite enthousiastic. I just did a quick check on the results on the PC. Focussing is 100% score. Composing is somewhat more difficult with that small frame. But here, the big advantage of a RF comes around the corner: seeing the subject entering the frame. It’s just rethinking compared with a big DSLR tele. I’m quite pleased. Edited May 27, 2018 by Gobert 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 27, 2018 Share #177 Posted May 27, 2018 Slightly tangentially - I've started using my Tele Elmar-M 135 f4 for portraits quite a lot and really like it. Does anyone have experience of it AND the Elmarit-R 135 f2.8 with it's extra stop wide open, and can that extra stop with it's shallower plane of focus make much difference to the drawing of a portrait? I usually use the EVF in this context, so it really doesn't matter that the R demands using Live View only. Thanks..... It depends on the kind of portrait. I had the goggled M version, but that should not make a difference. The lens draws a bit softer in general, and is considerably lower contrast wide open, The OOF rendering is quite soft too. For portraits that may be an advantage, for me it was a reason to sell the lens ASAP. i like bite, as I can always add softness and low contrast in postprocessing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 27, 2018 Share #178 Posted May 27, 2018 Interesting comparo here: https://www.apotelyt.com/photo-lens/leica-m-135mm-options My R & M Elmarits 135/2.8 are softer at full aperture than my M 135/3.4 apo but at f/5.6 and on i can hardly see significant differences i must say. Same for my Elmar 135/4 from the sixties which is a true bargain by comparison. I have no experience with the Tele-Elmar 135/4 though. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregm61 Posted May 28, 2018 Share #179 Posted May 28, 2018 Agreed. But whatever the reason was for the story, it does raise the question of the economic viability of the 135mm focal length as an M lens. Older versions are very cheap (and far from bad lenses), newer versions are still available in the very low hundreds (of €, £ or $). Used E46 versions of the pre-APO are very reasonably priced for a Leica M lens and the APOs themselves don't seem to appear on the used market in large numbers. Is this focal length simply not an economic viability at the high new price for an APO I wonder, or will the market support small, periodic batches? Has anyone here actually bought a 135mm M lens new? I just did.....today. Got the last new one Adorama currently had, and B&H has been showing "more coming" for a little while now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregm61 Posted May 30, 2018 Share #180 Posted May 30, 2018 Well, brand new APO Telyt arrived from Adorama. Didn't know what to expect, figuring the lens was probably a low volume seller and this could possibly have been on Adorama's shelf for a while. Low and behold, the date on the outer box is 2/28/2018, serial number 4640061 so it is a very, very recent construction item. Initial impressions are, I am quite impressed. Aperture action is that light, almost click-less "feel" (some will like, others not) very similar to the 75mm f2 APO Summicron. Focus is beautiful and the first few snaps with an M262 fitted with the 1.4x magnifier, manual focus at 5, 10 feet and infinity looks spot on. Marked "62" to the right of the infinity and feet/meters mark, so it's actually rated as 136.2mm. Now I just need to get out and shoot the heck out of it. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now