Using Elmarit M 135mm f/2.8 without goggles

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Sandy Wijaya said:

Thanks for sharing your experiences... indeed 2.8 = bulky and quite a cheap price. Depends on the need though, I have browsed the Elmar M 135mm, nice lens... but then again my need will be on for f/2.8  

Have you seen the same R 135mm cheaper, but need R to M adapter ?

If not done, this would be my solution in your place.

I see that is your also 😉.

 

Edited August 20, 2022 by a.noctilux

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

I'm not good at comparing lenses of different apertures but the Elmarit-M 135/2.8 is a very good lens indeed and so is the Elmarit-R 135/2.8 which is optically the same lens as mentioned above but it cannot be used in RF mode as you know. Only con to me both M and R 135/2.8 feel bulky and heavy on M cameras, reason why i prefer the Apo-Telyt-M 135/3.4 there but it is a more expensive lens obviously. See technical data herewith if you don't know the lens already.

Apo-Telyt-M 135 mm Technical Data_en.pdf

[Sandy Wijaya]

4 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

Have you seen the same R 135mm cheaper, but need R to M adapter ?

If not done, this would be my solution in your place.

I see that is your also 😉.

 

Yeap, that's my current 135mm lens..  I'm thinking if i switched to Elmarit-M 135mm might be a good option or not... thanks anyway! 

[Sandy Wijaya]

4 hours ago, lct said:

I'm not good at comparing lenses of different apertures but the Elmarit-M 135/2.8 is a very good lens indeed and so is the Elmarit-R 135/2.8 which is optically the same lens as mentioned above but it cannot be used in RF mode as you know. Only con to me both M and R 135/2.8 feel bulky and heavy on M cameras, reason why i prefer the Apo-Telyt-M 135/3.4 there but it is a more expensive lens obviously. See technical data herewith if you don't know the lens already.

Apo-Telyt-M 135 mm Technical Data_en.pdf 156.74 kB · 2 downloads

Well noted for the same optics between Elmarit M and R...  
thanks for including Apo-Telyt 135mm... will check the data...

Cheers! 

[lct]

2 minutes ago, Sandy Wijaya said:

I'm thinking if i switched to Elmarit-M 135mm might be a good option or not...

Obvious . If you want to use a 135/2.8 lens in LV mode keep your R 135/2.8 as is. If you want to use it in RF mode, you need an M 135/2.8 with goggles because without them you could not focus accurately. Finally if you want to use the lens in both RF and LV modes, get the same M 135/2.8, keep the goggles, put an EVF in your hot shoe and enjoy this monster. Just kidding but not that much as it is exactly what i'm doing with a 90/4 and macro adapter, this way i can use it in RF or LV mode at will.

[Sandy Wijaya]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

Obvious . If you want to use a 135/2.8 lens in LV mode keep your R 135/2.8 as is. If you want to use it in RF mode, you need an M 135/2.8 with goggles because without them you could not focus accurately. Finally if you want to use the lens in both RF and LV modes, get the same M 135/2.8, keep the goggles, put an EVF in your hot shoe and enjoy this monster. Just kidding but not that much as it is exactly what i'm doing with a 90/4 and macro adapter, this way i can use it in RF or LV mode at will.

Elmarit-M 135mm seemed very logical choice... hahaha!

thanks to all of you, lads! very helpful... 

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another route to use the M135mm exists, the shortmount (for optical Visoflex, film M ).

I do use the equivalent with Tele-Elmar 135mm ( optical cell only 11852 + 16464 focus ring + Visoflex III or 41mm ring 😃 on digital M using LV ).

inspirations thread here

Theorical for use with 2.8/135 optical cell called 11828, needing 16462 focus mount, plus 41mm ring to replace Visoflex III.

 

Have fun in this infinite combinations from Leitz/Leica.

 

 

[charlesphoto99]

21 hours ago, Sandy Wijaya said:

Thanks for sharing your experiences... indeed 2.8 = bulky and quite a cheap price. Depends on the need though, I have browsed the Elmar M 135mm, nice lens... but then again my need will be on for f/2.8  

There is no need for a 2.8 tele lens with modern digital bodies. You'll get a lot more bang for your buck (and less frustration - read up about calibrating the Elmarit's goggles first) if you go for a decent Tele-Elmar and just raise your iso a stop. The depth of field difference on a 135 between 2.8 and f4 is minimal. And the only good lens is one that you actually have with you - and I can guarantee the 2.8 will end up sitting at home whereas the Tele-Elmar or APO is easily included in the kit bag, or even used as a walk around lens like I've been doing with my APO the last couple of years. 

[panoramer]

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!

Leica M10-R BP and the Elmarit-M 1:2.8/135 mm with goggles and the new Leica Visoflex-2 (freehand)

[photofreak]

On 8/20/2022 at 3:09 PM, jaapv said:

Of course they can be removed but the focusing through the rangefinder will be unusable. Better to buy the cheaper R version and use it on a simple adapter.  You save the hassle and won’t have an amputated lend. The optics of M and R are identical. Version 2 is better than version 1 

 I got mine 2,8 135mm from evilbuy today. I choose it for 9 aperture blades and one step above 4 135mm Tele- Elmarit which I have too and use it on Sony 7 RII... Removed bayonet on one screw on side googles hold on place.... So if "of course then may be removed"  I would like to know how... 🙂

[lct]

It is either "of course they can be removed" or "of course they cannot" 😉 depending of the variant of the lens. On some of them like mine and possibly yours the goggles are not detachable, on others they are:

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 9, 2024 by lct

[UliWer]

Can you tell whether the second photo shows the second version of the Elmarit (which should have a serial number higher than 2788 650), or was the construction of the „goggles“ already changed for the first version? My 2621566 is like your example in the first photo.

[Biotar]

found screwed one (2nd image) 222736x

edit: and 1957262, 2151910

Edited May 10, 2024 by Biotar

[UliWer]

So the fixature with two big screws seems to be the first variant already changed during the production time of the first version.

[lct]

9 hours ago, UliWer said:

So the fixature with two big screws seems to be the first variant already changed during the production time of the first version.

It seems that the serial numbers of the lenses fitted with the two big screws are between 1,957,001 (v1) and 2,152,220 (v2). This is a mere deduction from a dozen or so copies though.

[norm_snyder]

On 5/10/2024 at 7:37 AM, UliWer said:

So the fixature with two big screws seems to be the first variant already changed during the production time of the first version.

The earliest version 1 has the two larger screws and goggles can be removed, as I did, to use on my CL digital, where it was quite usable with an M to L mount adapter.  It is not the same optically as version two, which has less fringing in contrasty conditions.    I got rid of both, in favor of a 180 f4 R lens with M adapter, focused with Visoflex on my M10 and M10M.  Since I was carrying all that weight, I opted for one stop slower and more reach.  For an adapter, I use the Novoflex R to M adapter which has 6 bit coding pits to bring up the R lens menu on the M10.