Leica 350mm Telyt-R f:4.8 telephoto lens

[pnwyankee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How would this telephoto lens perform on my SL?

So far I have only used my 24-90 zoom on my SL

Don't see the need for anything wider than the 24-90, but having a 350mm would be enjoyable

Thanks.

[thighslapper]

.... just the same as on most other Leica cameras .... 

I have several Telyts of this vintage and although they produce good images colours tend to a be a bit washed out and they are less contrasty compared to current multi-coated and better corrected lenses...... and this is much more obvious when used wide open. You can compensate for most of this in processing though. 

By all means give it a go ..... although the R adapter is going to cost you almost as much as the lens ..... .

At least you can sell it on at minimal loss if it fails to live up to expectations. 

[caissa]

I like the 350mm very much, it has the shape of a classic tele lens including a shade. Unfortunately it is a bit slow to focus and not as sharp and contrasty as the current 90-280, as it is no apo construction.

Best you give it a try. By the way the 250 has an even nicer shape.   👍

[Arbo68]

I would not advice to buy this lens based on my experiances using it on a M240 - as said before contrast/shapness is not comparable with current lens designs. But more annoying is the fact of not having a fixed "infinity" point at the focussing ring. I was shooting photos of the moon lately and it was extreemly hard to focus on the craters. The focus ring had still some way to hit the end-point. If the moon is not "infinite" what else? End of galaxy?

Edited July 18, 2019 by Arbo68

[BernardC]

10 minutes ago, Arbo68 said:

The focus ring had still some way to hit the end-point.

Most long lenses don't have fixed infinity points. That's because a hard stop would only be correct at one temperature.

[Peter Branch]

I had one of these lenses for a short time and used it on an R6.  I found the IQ heavily centre weighted with the corners noticeably soft.  Vigneting was a problem on film which the SL, or alternatively Lightroom/Photoshop, can probably correct.  The difficulty was that the fall off in illumination was not gradual but rather like looking through a tunnel.

I understand from conversations with Leica at the time that it was a design rather hastily put into production to meet a deadline to supply press photographers with a long lens for an Olympic Games.  They believed that sports photographers were quite happy with centre weighting, indeed some preferred it provided the colours were saturated.   

[gvaliquette]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought this lens quite a few years ago to use on my R9 with color slide film on an African safari and was happy with it at the time.  Then I got the APO-Telyt 280mm f4.0.  The difference in quality is quite obvious when one looks at photos side by side, but the results of the 350 are not bad by itself and it was quite usable.  If you don't need the utmost quality in a long lens for occasional use, or if you want to see if you will enjoy using such long lenses, the 350 is not a bad choice and it is quite cheap.

The APO-Telyt 280/4.0, on the other hand, is optically unsurpassed.  Puts describes it as "diffraction-limited" and the MTF curves confirm that.  Combined with the 1.4X and/or 2.0X APO-Extender(s), (and a good beanbag), it provides the ultimate safari tele solution.

Guy