Re: [Leica] Technique

["Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>]

And the 135 mm f:2.8 is very good optically, too. With the goggles
viewfinder image is decent, too. But is was so big and heavy I hardly e=
ver
used it - so I sold it - at a loss but no regrets. I have the 90 mm
Summicron which in my opinion is a Very Good Lens indeed - much better =
than
the 90 mm Tele-Elmarit I also used to have.=20
Raimo
photos at http:/personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- ----------
> From: TEAShea@aol.com
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Technique
> Date: 01. hein=E4kuuta 1998 16:29
>=20
> << How come nobody writes about the 135 lens? Is is worth considering=
 >>
> This is a great question.  You are right - no one talked much about t=
his
lens.
> They don't talk about its optical performance or about using it.  Mor=
e
Leica M
> users seem to be oriented toward the shorter end of the focal length
range.  A
> 135 mm lens is a favorite length of mine.  I find it wonderful for ve=
ry
tight
> head portraits, which I generally prefer.  I also like the length for
many
> scenes.
>=20
> Optically it seems fine although I don't know if it is outstanding.  =
I
have
> not done any detailed comparisons.  I can say that prints up to 8 x 1=
0
look
> very fine.  For what it is worth, CDI gave it three stars. =20
>=20
> The 135 4.0 balances well on an M.  It is not too heavy.  I find the =
lens
> useful on an M.  However, even with the HM, the image size is pretty
small.
> Focusing is not too difficult but requires care. =20
>=20
> One interesting thing about this lens is the coatings.  When looking =
at
the
> front element of all of the other Leica lenses (as with almost all
present day
> lenses), one sees multi-color reflections caused by the different coa=
ting
> layers on the lens elements.  In this lens, one sees only white
reflections. =20
>=20
> It would be interesting to see what others think of this lens.  There=
 has
been
> a rumor of a new 135 3.4 coming sometime down the road.