Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/01/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens
From: raimo.m.korhonen at uusikaupunki.fi (Raimo K)
Date: Sat Jan 5 03:18:01 2008
References: <575320.19742.qm@web32606.mail.mud.yahoo.com><00af01c84f72$0d7b0050$b5c19253@Korhonen> <000001c84f82$23b22780$6401a8c0@asus930>

I, too have the 4/135 Tele-Elmar and it is really good - but I do not use it 
much.
All the best!
Raimo K
Personal photography homepage at:
http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "G Hopkinson" <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au>
To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2008 12:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens


> Yes Raimo, of course you are correct. Nevertheless, the Tele Elmar f4 135
> performs so well that is reported/regarded as very near
> the f3.4 APO version. I think that is what David was indicating.
> I have one as well as its earlier incarnation and I consider it to be a
> superb lens, especially as it can be got for a fraction of
> the APO Telyt's price.
>
> Cheers, Geoff
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Subject: Re: [Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens
>
> APO means apochromatic correction of the lens, there are no apochromatic
> elements.
> All the best!
> Raimo K
> Personal photography homepage at:
> http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> Subject: Re: [Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens
>
>
>>I have used the 135/2.8 Elmarit R lens long time ago as one of my very
>>first R lenses with satisfaction.  I remember it performed pretty well.  I
>>once used the M version with blurriness and later heard about fine-tuning
>>on each M body you use.  Other than that, I would say optically it is a
>>good performer as far as I experienced.
>>  For M, I would recommend the Tele-Elmar which is a stellar performer.
>> It
>> is so close to F3.4 APO version that it is considered to have an APO
>> element as many of you already know.
>>
>>  Best Wishes,
>>  David
>>
>> Buzz Hausner <buzz.hausner@verizon.net> wrote:
>>  Hey, they're cheap enough; you bought one, so you can decide for
>> yourself
>> if
>> the lens is any good. I think all of the 135 Elmarits had the same
>> optical
>> formula, but I could be mistaken about that. Even so, I have used
>> Expressions I and II and in my opinion they were both miserable. I don't
>> know anything about the R series lenses, but I would never acquire an M
>> lens
>> based on someone's evaluation of an R lens of similar focal length and
>> f-stop.
>>
>> What is your unstated purpose for needing this lens? It might make a good
>> portrait lens if you could solve the framing problem. I for one would be
>> reluctant to use it as a paperweight because the edges of the lens mount
>> could etch fine paper.
>>
>> Buzz
>>
>>
>> On 1/4/08 3:29 PM, "Michiel Fokkema" wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for all your reactions.
>>> I can't imagine it is that bad.
>>> I've read quit a few positive reactions on the net also.
>>> Doug Herr for instance says it is a fine lens. Yes the tele elmar is
>>> better.
>>> I was interested in the difference between version 1/2 and 3. I have a
>>> version 2 R lens and am hoping the version M 1/2 will be close.
>>> I now have bought a version 1 for a very low price and hope it will
>>> serve its purpose. Otherwise it will make a fine paperweight:-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Michiel Fokkema
>>>
>>> buzz.hausner@verizon.net wrote:
>>>> Well, if one considers a lens with exceedingly low contrast, soft edge
>>>> definition, and relatively low color separation to be "okay" then, yes,
>>>> the
>>>> 135 f/2.8 is merely clumsy. Make no mistake, in addition to these
>>>> issues
>>>> regarding image quality, it is a big, heavy lens which is virtually
>>>> impossible to frame and a bitch...remember, I said it was a pooch...to
>>>> focus,
>>>> especially with those eyes. One could call it "clumsy," but that is
>>>> being
>>>> kind.
>>>>
>>>> Buzz
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try
>> it
>> now.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



In reply to: Message from iilbz at yahoo.com (DL) ([Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens)
Message from raimo.m.korhonen at uusikaupunki.fi (Raimo K) ([Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens)
Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] The Tele elmarit 135 Is So A Real Pooch of a Lens)