Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yumpin'-yiminy, by Golly... I think BD is right for once! :o)~ I last used the 135/2.8 to do some happy snaps of my 2 1/2 year old grand-daughter playing in the sprinkler, and was surprised at how good the shots turned out- I was afraid that trying to keep an active ruggratt in focus would be tough, but it was surprisingly easy, or at least- easier than I had anticipated. Granted the 135 Elmar is a lightweight package, and in adequate light it is tack sharp and plenty fast, but in a shady backyard, the 2.8 gave a slight edge, and was not all that bad. Granted, I was using the M7 on auto, so one variable I didn't have to worry about! Dan ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 4:14 PM Subject: RE: [Leica] M 135 Opinions/Comments/Anecdotes/Cautions > Oh blah, blah blah, Buzz -;-) An APO it ain't, but it also ain't no > pooch. Heavy, yes, but it makes using a 135 on an M practical with those > eyes. And soft? Compared to an APO? Yup. But it's more than good enough > for gummint work. In fact, I'd say it's one of the real bargins in Leica > lensdom, given that it can be picked up for under $500. > > B. D. > A contrarian to the end. :-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of > Buzz Hausner > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 4:06 PM > To: 'Leica Users Group' > Subject: RE: [Leica] M 135 Opinions/Comments/Anecdotes/Cautions > > > The 135mm f/2.8 is the ultimate Leica pooch. Even with the eyes it > isn't easy to focus and, when it is in focus, you'll notice the image is > a tad soft and lacks good contrast. The best deal in Leica 135's are > late production 135 f/4.0's. Exceptionally sharp by anybody's > standards, a wee package when compared to the 2.8, and really quite > inexpensive by Leica measures. Caveat emptor; framing with any 135 on > an M camera is an art which must be learned from experience. > > Buzz Hausner > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+buzz=bethhardiman.com@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+buzz=bethhardiman.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of > Gregory Rubenstein > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 3:45 PM > To: lug@leica-users.org > Subject: [Leica] M 135 Opinions/Comments/Anecdotes/Cautions > > > Group: > > Will soon buy an M 135 mm and would like users' > opinions/comments/anecdotes/cautions about the 3.4 APO and old glass > (such > as the 2.8). Have read Erwin Puts material, but would like some hands-on > > input closer to the photo world I inhabit. Lean toward a new 3.4 simply > 'cuz > I've had wretched luck over the years with anything used; must admit, > however, that I am tempted by the extra stop and significant price > differential of the old glass. > > On- and off-list user replies welcome. > > Thanks. > > Greg Rubenstein > gcr910@msn.com > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get rid of annoying pop-up ads with the new MSN Toolbar - FREE! > http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >