CL with M135 f/4 version 1

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own a Q and CL. When the Q2 came out, I was a bit startled by the very bold nature of the IQ. It seemed to shout too loudly at me. I realize that a lot of early photos reflect the enthusiasm of the owners to get stuff posted quickly and perhaps dramatically. Things have settled down a bit. Still, it got me refocusing on how far along in the digital look Leica is moving with the bigger sensor, and, frankly, I'm even looking at my photos from the fabulous Q a little more critically now.

I use both manual (Leica and Nikon) and TL lenses on the CL. The other day, I took a chance on ebay on a M135 f/4 version 1 for an absurdly low price. When it arrived, I looked at the appearance and thought: that's a lottery ticket that didn't win. But I went out today, and wow, I'm so very pleased with the way it draws. I love the clear, sharp (but not overly so), way it renders colors. 

BTW, I just discovered a nice write up on this lens.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/02/18/a-lens-reborn-–-the-leica-135-mm-f4-tele-elmar-review-on-the-leica-m9-by-ashwin-rao/

Both of these are cropped around 200%

 

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 April 15, 2019 by bags27

[bags27]

and both of these around 400% (I missed focus on the redtail; drat!)

 

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!

[wda]

The first pair  - excellent. The second pair - out of focus showing how demanding this focal length is. I have two old Leica 135mm and find I need to maintain a shutter speed of 1/500th of faster to  defeat camera shake. But, like you, I find the results outstandingly good and useful for appropriate subjects and situations. Hardly a walk-about focal length.

[bags27]

Just now, wda said:

The first pair  - excellent. The second pair - out of focus showing how demanding this focal length is. I have two old Leica 135mm and find I need to maintain a shutter speed of 1/500th of faster to  defeat camera shake. But, like you, I find the results outstandingly good and useful for appropriate subjects and situations. Hardly a walk-about focal length.

Thanks. You nailed it on the shutter speed. After the hawk flew away, I checked my settings and realized that I was shooting too slow, so it must have been shake rather than focus per se.

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I have a beat 90 mm Elmarit, it produces nice pictures. It has been my experience with Leica lenses even the ones beat up on the outside produce excellent pictures. 

Tom

[ramarren]

5 hours ago, wda said:

The first pair  - excellent. The second pair - out of focus showing how demanding this focal length is. I have two old Leica 135mm and find I need to maintain a shutter speed of 1/500th of faster to  defeat camera shake. But, like you, I find the results outstandingly good and useful for appropriate subjects and situations. Hardly a walk-about focal length.

Yes, a 135mm lens on APS-C format nets the FoV equivalent of a 200mm lens on FF, so the usual rule of thumb applies: 1/200 second is a minimum rule as the slowest shutter speed for hand-foldability. I usually set 1/250 to 1/500 second as my minimum, but then I've always been particularly steady handed and can occasionally get away with 1/125 or so.

(I have two 135s: an Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8 (ca 1973) and a Hektor 135mm f/4.5 (ca 1960). The latter certainly provides a lovely vintage look, the R135 has a much more modern look to its rendering. Both do a great job; I don't use them terribly much, however, because this narrow a field of view is something I only want now and then. And I almost always use them both fitted to a tripod.)