menos I M6 Posted July 21, 2011 Share #81 Posted July 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is the beauty of older LTM tele lenses - just fit a 90mm adapter, which automatically brings up the 90mm frame lines. I use my Canon 100 f2 LTM and Nikkor 105 f2.5 LTM coded as 90/2 APO, to distinguish it from my pre ASPH 90/2 and use the 90mm frames. The Leica M is made for handheld telephoto photography btw: "IMSA Performance Matmut - Porsche 911 GT3 RSR - 2011 Le Mans 24h" bigger on flickr M8.2 | 135 APO-Telyt "yellow 500" bigger on flickr M8.2 | 135 APO-Telyt There are endless wonderful telephoto options for the Leica M. most of them still very affordable, as it is common nonsense, that tele lenses are difficult to use on a M (hence the awkward discussions about which tripod best to use with them). One can dive into the wonderful market of classic long lenses in LTM mount (my current personal favorite is the Canon 100/2, while I plan, to complete my Nikkor set with chrome 80/2 and 135/3.5 lightsabres + the odd Summarex or Carl Zeiss). If one is more the type, who prefers, to skip the b******t and just move directly to best, no compromise … go for the APO-Telyt. It is a no nonsense lens with current most modern mount, quick but precise focus, best optics. It is everything, all classic 135/3.5 lenses are in a maximum optimized, modern package. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 21, 2011 Posted July 21, 2011 Hi menos I M6, Take a look here 135mm Lens on M8?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nikkor AIS Posted July 21, 2011 Share #82 Posted July 21, 2011 Really great shots Dirk. As far as the 135 3.5 your right, it has everything except the cool looking googles and of course the 2.8 aperture:p. I also agree about the comments about telephoto photography with the leica M system. While I was sceptical at first, Now I am sold on the 135 2.8 Elmarit. 135 2.8 Elmarit on Leica M8 Gregory Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted July 21, 2011 Share #83 Posted July 21, 2011 Really great shots Dirk. As far as the 135 3.5 your right, it has everything except the cool looking googles and of course the 2.8 aperture:p. Gregory, this is a great bird shot with the M ;-) I too bought a 135 Elmarit once. I sold it after one day of intense use. What many people, who see the specs of the Elmarit first think is, whoah - such a fast long lens for the M is actually even a lot more impressive with the APO-Telyt. It packs a higher quality with just 1/2 stop less aperture in such a much more compact and better usable lens than the humongous Elmarit, that everyone should have one, who needs a 135mm. The APO-Telyt feels like a longer version of the 90 f2.8 Elmarit-M - very similar handling, similar integrated hood (I love this compared to the older lens designs, many of which are more bulky without their extra hood, than the very compact APO). The predecessor of the APO is reported, to be very close in performance and looks handling wise very similar. Unfortunately, these days, as prices are jacking up, the price difference between them is not as huge, as it used to be. I am very happy, I got a APO in time, new before the last "price update" and won't give it away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telyt2003 Posted July 21, 2011 Share #84 Posted July 21, 2011 (...)The Leica M is made for handheld telephoto photography btw: (...) There are endless wonderful telephoto options for the Leica M. most of them still very affordable, as it is common nonsense, that tele lenses are difficult to use on a M (hence the awkward discussions about which tripod best to use with them). One can dive into the wonderful market of classic long lenses in LTM mount (my current personal favorite is the Canon 100/2, (...) If one is more the type, who prefers, to skip the b******t and just move directly to best, no compromise … go for the APO-Telyt. It is a no nonsense lens with current most modern mount, quick but precise focus, best optics. It is everything, all classic 135/3.5 lenses are in a maximum optimized, modern package. Hello Dirk, fully agree with the essence of all your above cited statements (perhaps, I would phrase them slightly different ). Like your panning images! Thanks for the hint to the Canon 100/2. On the "awkward" tripod "discussion" : I cannot imagine many situations where I would use a 135 mm lens with a tripod or monopod, as already stated above (actually I cannot remember to ever have used a tripod with a 135 mm or whatever lens - except spotting scopes, and even monopods I normally only use with focal lengths past 500 mm), but I ... (...)sometimes use a Novoflex Pistock-C with adapter plate PLATTE-U, or the much smaller collapsible shoulder supports which were formerly offered by BRAUN (...) A Pistock(-C) also is a relatively small shoulder support. I can recommend giving it, or the BRAUN shoulder supports, a try. I would still consider this hand held photography. And (...) I often carry a monopod with attached ball head and Pistock-C for use with really long lenses. When not in use, it is carried slung diagonally over the right shoulder in such a way that I can rest my left ellbow on the monopod/Pistock to my left side. THIS stabilises photos with whatever focal length very efficiently. (...) The trick with the resting left ellbow, however, makes any other support quite obsolete, because it works (with the M) whereever you are, if you move or stand still, and for sure also with panning ... Surely I agree that the Apo-Telyt 135/3,4 is one of the smartest lenses for the M system. I see it in a line with the Summilx-Asph 50/1,4, the Apo-Summicron-Asph 75/2, and the Summarit 90/2,5 (or the Apo-Summicron 90/2), and finally the Apo-Telyt 135/3,4, with respect to 'geometric spreading' (?, in German: "natürliche Spreizung") of the focal length, and necessarily also the aperture. In other words, it represents, as the other lenses in this line-up (category), an ideal compromise/balance of optical quality, 'speed', size, weight and handling. Best regards, Telyt2003 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 21, 2011 Share #85 Posted July 21, 2011 If you are considering aesthetics, the Tele-Elmarit 135/f4 removable head lens that I have, must be one of the ugliest Leica lenses ever made. With its tiny 39mm filter front, it just looks wrong and I have to admit that its reversible click-on hood is not the most convenient but better than the modern screw reversible hood on my 75 Summarit. On the M8, I now use it mostly with a Viso but it works well on the M9 with its 135 frame. I leave a 1.15x magnifier on my M9 all the time but it is a bit marginal for accurate focusing on the 135 at f4, so I tend to restrict the 135 on the M9 to sunny days, when I can stop down to f8 or so to compensate for my inaccurate focusing. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2011 Share #86 Posted July 21, 2011 The old Hektor 135 is one of the best IR lenses around - very sharp Just put on an 092 filter on the M8 and be amazed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted July 23, 2011 Share #87 Posted July 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) at the edge of our canal , this afternoon ... the advantage of the tele is that I did not wake up 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! M8 Apo Telyt 1:3,4/135mm (without tripod) Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! M8 Apo Telyt 1:3,4/135mm (without tripod) Best Henry ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/75225-135mm-lens-on-m8/?do=findComment&comment=1743501'>More sharing options...
JeTexas Posted July 29, 2011 Share #88 Posted July 29, 2011 Here are two shots I got with the $100 Hektor on the M8 while in Rio last week. L1014359 by ffacker, on Flickr L1014567 by ffacker, on Flickr I was worried it was going to be very disappointing after the Canada balsam discussion, but it turned out to be quite nice. I used it much more than my 90mm Elmarit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patman Posted July 30, 2011 Share #89 Posted July 30, 2011 I have the 135 f2.8 w/eyes and the 135 Hector. Both lenses look factory new with no signs of lens deterioration. Judge for your self, the Cat tails was with the Hector and the other 2 with the Elmar. 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! 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/75225-135mm-lens-on-m8/?do=findComment&comment=1750987'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 30, 2011 Share #90 Posted July 30, 2011 Please restrain yourselves with image-posting. Illustrations of technical points are OK, but demonstrations of photographical prowess must be moved to the photoforums. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted July 30, 2011 Share #91 Posted July 30, 2011 Dear jaapv - post #90 - but surely these pictures are lens specific and therefore technical rather than 'photo-prowess' ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 30, 2011 Share #92 Posted July 30, 2011 They have not been moved but it is a thin line, all photographs are lens-specific hence my post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patman Posted July 30, 2011 Share #93 Posted July 30, 2011 Please restrain yourselves with image-posting. Illustrations of technical points are OK, but demonstrations of photographical prowess must be moved to the photoforums. Sorry if I broke a rule, It took me about 30 minutes to dig out these shots made with the 135mm lens. I thought hey would be useful so as to see the resolution of these 2 lenses which is what I thought the other photos in this thread were doing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scsambrook Posted July 30, 2011 Share #94 Posted July 30, 2011 Hi Patman ! I think you're okay - see jaapv's post #92 - lens specific and so no problem. I certainly found your post useful and interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted July 31, 2011 Share #95 Posted July 31, 2011 I am thinking of buying a Canon 135mm black or Nikkor, for my M8 but I have doubts... What adapter should I buy the 28-90 or 50-135? My preference is for the Canon black but I do not know if there are problems with approach. Can anyone show some test photos? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 31, 2011 Share #96 Posted July 31, 2011 I would buy the 28/90 adapter. If your M8 is an M8-U or M8-2 with the upgraded frame lines, the 135 is about 2/3 of the frame size. If you have got the older less accurate frame lines of an original M8, you are actually better off, as the frame for 90mm is too small and a 135 is about 85% of the size of the inside of the frame. I don't know much about the Canon but their longer lenses from 50mm upwards have always had a good reputation. The Nikkor is essentially an upgraded pre-war Zeiss Sonnar 135/f4 (the licence was granted during the war), made a bit faster from the f4 of the Sonnar. IMHO that and the Olympia Sonnar 180 were the best pre-war long lenses and are still good today. The Nikkor is supposed to be an improvement on the pre-war Sonnar due to more modern coatings etc. The Zeiss Sonnar was available in LTM pre-war but post war the LTM Zeiss 135mm lens was the slightly cheaper Triotar, with the Sonnar only being available in Contax bayonet mount. Another good 135 lens available in LTM for pennies is the Russian Kazan Jupiter 11. Maybe the best made and most consistent of all the Jupiter series lenses. I am going to get one of these for my Contax RF, as they were also made in this mount. There - that's helped you with your choice hasn't it! Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted July 31, 2011 Share #97 Posted July 31, 2011 BTW there is an LTM Jupiter 11 135/f4 going on Fleabay at the moment for £1.24! Jupiter - 11 135mm f/4 Lens .. M39 Mount ... | eBay Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maccaco Posted August 1, 2011 Share #98 Posted August 1, 2011 I would buy the 28/90 adapter. If your M8 is an M8-U or M8-2 with the upgraded frame lines, the 135 is about 2/3 of the frame size. If you have got the older less accurate frame lines of an original M8, you are actually better off, as the frame for 90mm is too small and a 135 is about 85% of the size of the inside of the frame. I don't know much about the Canon but their longer lenses from 50mm upwards have always had a good reputation. The Nikkor is essentially an upgraded pre-war Zeiss Sonnar 135/f4 (the licence was granted during the war), made a bit faster from the f4 of the Sonnar. IMHO that and the Olympia Sonnar 180 were the best pre-war long lenses and are still good today. The Nikkor is supposed to be an improvement on the pre-war Sonnar due to more modern coatings etc. The Zeiss Sonnar was available in LTM pre-war but post war the LTM Zeiss 135mm lens was the slightly cheaper Triotar, with the Sonnar only being available in Contax bayonet mount. Another good 135 lens available in LTM for pennies is the Russian Kazan Jupiter 11. Maybe the best made and most consistent of all the Jupiter series lenses. I am going to get one of these for my Contax RF, as they were also made in this mount. There - that's helped you with your choice hasn't it! Wilson Thank you. interesting and relevant information for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted August 2, 2011 Share #99 Posted August 2, 2011 A review and sample images from the Leica 4/135 Tele-Elmar-M Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbon_dragon Posted August 5, 2011 Share #100 Posted August 5, 2011 The 135/2.8 with goggles is a brute of a lens. It's made of the same materials as my normal chrome Leica lenses, but at that size, the weight is stunning (and not in a good way). As a result I don't carry it much. But the quality is very good and it's easy to focus and when mounted to something like an M camera it balances well. And it's cheap cheap cheap for Leica. So it's a cost effective solution, if heavy. I should also say that I also have an old Contax (Kyocera) body with a 135mm lens made by Kyocera with Zeiss optics. THAT lens is about the same weight and size. So it's not REALLY that the lens is ridiculously heavy, it's really that it's SO much heavier and bigger than the typical Leica M lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.