Telephoto options (non-Q2)

[kmonroe99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I normally use a Q2 but would like to have another option for shooting mid-range telephoto ( 90<mid-range<200). I prefer primes; lighter weight lens/body is better. This for landscapes, mostly non-macro.  I know in L-mount, Sigma has the 105 and 135. I think way back in the film days I had a Pentax 180mm that I really liked, but it looks like 135 is now the most common for all mounts. Suggestions?

[lct]

On what body?

[Advertisement]

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

[kmonroe99]

29 minutes ago, lct said:

On what body?

Sorry, SL2 or other L mount.  Adapted lenses OK.

[frame-it]

Af or MF only?

[kmonroe99]

4 minutes ago, frame-it said:

Af or MF only?

Either

[frame-it]

plenty of lovely R lenses available, and you can check the R lens image thread / vintage lenses on the SL thread

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/R_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

Edited August 27, 2022 by frame-it

[kmonroe99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, frame-it said:

plenty of lovely R lenses available, and you can check the R lens image thread / vintage lenses on the SL thread

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/R_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

Would I use R to L adaptor or a stack with R --> M and M--> L ?

[frame-it]

3 minutes ago, kmonroe99 said:

Would I use R to L adaptor or a stack with R --> M and M--> L ?

i stack R>M+M>T and have never had any vignetting issues, but upto you if you wanna buy the R>L.

you can also have a look at the delicious Takumar lenses, if you want character

https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Pentax-Takumar-M42-Screwmount-Telephoto-Primes-c24.html

 

another fav of mine is the Zenit TAIR11a 135mm with its 20 aperture blades.

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by frame-it

[Rdf]

If you are open to another system, the OM-1 with a 12-100 (24-200 equivalent) lens produces nice images (for a micro four thirds system), good weather sealing, and relatively small. Of course it’s a compromise with Leica. 

[lct]

1 hour ago, kmonroe99 said:

Sorry, SL2 or other L mount.  Adapted lenses OK.

Huge choice then. You may wish to be more specific. FWIW my own lenses are MF Leica (M 135/2.8, M 135/3.4 apo, R 135/2.8, R 180/3.4 apo) and AF Nikon (180/2.8). 135/2.8's are the same lens optically so better choose the R version on mirrorless cameras as the M version has goggles for M cameras. Both apos are superb but the M 135/3.4 is more expensive and the R 180/3.4 has a 2.5m MFD. The Nikon is second to none but i don't know if it can be adapted on L-mount cameras.

[darylgo]

135/4 tele-elmar is a beautiful lens.  Small, inexpensive and good copies are not difficult to find. 
180/3.4R as suggested is small and light, good imaging. 

If you buy an R lens the Leica copy of the R-L Mount is quite expensive, the Novoflex is about a fifth the price and well made without giving up important features.  One adapter is more convenient than stacking the two Leica adapters and will render better image quality given that one adapter will introduce issues when critically examined.  

The Leica M-L adapter is well worth the difference in cost as its well made and has functions other don’t.  
 

[MFT-Lehrling]

Leica R-Mount: 135mm F2.8 II Great for landscape, if not shot fully open, not too expensive.
(Zoom: 80-200mm F4.0 i realy enjoyed this lens, it is not that big for a zoom lens and excellent for landscape. I prefered this one over carrying 2 different Prime telephoto lenses.)

EF-Mount: 
Canon 135mm F2.0 not too expensive, good perfomance and AF is for landscape acceptable. 
(Zeiss Milvus 135mm F2.0 yes, heavy and manual, but the handling and feeling puts most R-Lenses to shame...)

The negative aspect of Leica R-Mount or DSLR- designed lenses (EF-& F- Mount) is the size of the adapter. Even small lenses become considerably long. That could be quite annoying, if you want a small package.
If the weight is not the prime concern, i would pick the sigma DG HSM 135 f1.8. It is a shame that there is no compact DG DN Sigma Tele-Prime for L-Mount, since the 135 1.8 is a DSLR-constructed prime and there for quite big. 

[kmonroe99]

1 hour ago, MFT-Lehrling said:

Leica R-Mount: 135mm F2.8 II Great for landscape, if not shot fully open, not too expensive.
(Zoom: 80-200mm F4.0 i realy enjoyed this lens, it is not that big for a zoom lens and excellent for landscape. I prefered this one over carrying 2 different Prime telephoto lenses.)

EF-Mount: 
Canon 135mm F2.0 not too expensive, good perfomance and AF is for landscape acceptable. 
(Zeiss Milvus 135mm F2.0 yes, heavy and manual, but the handling and feeling puts most R-Lenses to shame...)

The negative aspect of Leica R-Mount or DSLR- designed lenses (EF-& F- Mount) is the size of the adapter. Even small lenses become considerably long. That could be quite annoying, if you want a small package.
If the weight is not the prime concern, i would pick the sigma DG HSM 135 f1.8. It is a shame that there is no compact DG DN Sigma Tele-Prime for L-Mount, since the 135 1.8 is a DSLR-constructed prime and there for quite big. 

"It is a shame that there is no compact DG DN Sigma Tele-Prime for L-Mount" - Definitely agree!