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: [Leica] 135mm Elmar v Tele-Elmar
From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 14:27:41 -0500

At 04:30 PM 12/1/97 GMT, Jeremy Kime wrote:
>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.

Well, there's a slight bit of a difference:  the Elmar isn't a telephoto,
and thus IS 135mm long from front to back.  The Tele-Elmar is 107mm long, a
difference of one inch.

The Tele-Elmar, though, is optically better than the Elmar.  I'm not saying
the Elmar is bad, just that the Tele-Elmar is somewhat better in general
use.  (That is, the Tele-Elmar is noticeably sharper and has better colour
saturation, at the least, than does the Elmar.)

Marc


msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!