Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/01

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Kilar 135/3,8
From: jeremy.kime@bbc.co.uk (Jeremy Kime)
Date: 01 Dec 97 16:30:00 GMT

Hans,
the Leica/Leitz 135s are vastly underated. Here in Britain you can pick up 
an Hektor, or an Elmar if you're lucky, for 100UKP, c $165USD with good 
glass but maybe poor externals. There's no other Leica lens I can think of 
which gets sold so cheap! I gather that the 135 use to be the size which 
people judged a company's performance by, sounds wierd to me, but I've had 
one of each, kept the Elmar (F4 instead of F4.5) and even sold a Tele-Elmar 
having had one of those. The Tele-Elmar's size was barely any different and 
it was decidely heavier, and in normal use I could never see the difference 
on my 12x16 b/w prints.

Jem K
 ----------
Hans wrote

Thanks to both Marc and Jermy for the Kilar info.
Well, I was thinking of getting a 135 mm lens for my M:s, but I guess I will
go for an Elmar (or Hector), as they are fitted without reflex housings. I
use the 135 very little, so an oldtimer will do fine.
I was just curious to know what the Kilar was.
/Hans