135 APO Telyt + M8.2 - frame lines

[menos]

I got a new 135 Telyt and already love this lens!

The only tiny bit of help, I miss with this lens, is to bring up at least the 90mm frame lines constantly for easier centering and framing.

Does anybody have tips for:

a) modifying the lens/ camera for bringing up 90mm frames or
b) having the M8.2/ M9 modified and 135mm frames added?

 

[menos]

Thanks for the tip, I will give it a try.

I do not plan, to mess with external finders with the 135.
As I plan, to use it mostly wide open, I consider framing and properly focussing more a hassle with the finder.

 

[Roger Hicks]

What I do with my 135/4.0 Tele-Elmar is to over turn the lens when I mount it, that is I hold down the release button and push it past the locking notch on the lens. This brings up the 90mm marks. For subject beyond about 50 feet distance I extrapolate half way between the 90mm marks and the outer edges of the rangefinder patch.

I don't know of any 180mm exernal finders, I think there is a zoom finder that reaches 200mm, but I would have to believe that parallax would eat one's lunch with an external finder. I do OK using the 90mm marks.

I also use the Leica 1.4x VF magnifier when shooting the 135/4.0.

Tewe. Which has (manual) compensation for both parallax and field-of-view changes with focus distance, from 35mm to 200mm. Wonderful finders, which I'd use without hesitation if I didn't prefer the 135/2.8 Elmarit.

Cheers,

R.

 

[menos]

Roger - this is interesting - I had the urge of a 135mm lens on the M8.2 after I shot the Shanghai F1 GP this year and tried the M with 90mm lens.

I found a 135 Elmarit, tried it and found:
1) it weights and sizes like a medium sized refrigerator on the M (the 50s type with heavy doors, not the new plastic, lightweight models)
2) it is awful, to peek through that tunnel and not seeing the rest of the world (better of course for more precise focussing than any other 135 with naked viewfinder)

After this one day experiment, I mentally gave up on anything longer than 90mm on the M … until I tried the 135 APO - WHAT A GEM!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger - this is interesting - I had the urge of a 135mm lens on the M8.2 after I shot the Shanghai F1 GP this year and tried the M with 90mm lens.

I found a 135 Elmarit, tried it and found:
1) it weights and sizes like a medium sized refrigerator on the M (the 50s type with heavy doors, not the new plastic, lightweight models)
2) it is awful, to peek through that tunnel and not seeing the rest of the world (better of course for more precise focussing than any other 135 with naked viewfinder)

After this one day experiment, I mentally gave up on anything longer than 90mm on the M … until I tried the 135 APO - WHAT A GEM!

I sold my original 135/2.8 for pretty much the reasons you describe - then bought another because I liked it so much on the M8! (A friend loaned it to me and I bought it off him).

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ben Z]

A few tips on using a 135 on an M8.

1. Using the 90mm framelines (by turning the lens past the lock stop) works passably well on an original M8. Once I upgraded my framelines to M8.2 specs, the 90mm lines are now much too generous to be usable with the 135. The only way to do it is to imagine the left and right border as an imaginary line drawn vertically from the ends of the upper and lower lines; and similarly, the upper and lower border as between imaginary lines drawn horizontally between the right and left lines. (Sounds more complicated than it is).

2. In addition to the TEWE 35-200 finder (I have one), if you happen to wear glasses there's another option, an old Canon rangefinder 135mm/13.5cm finder. It's tiny (about the size of a half a roll of TUMS) and has adjustable parallax correction. The eye relief is short, so when it touches your glasses you'll be able to see a part of the view that very closely matches the 180mm effective crop.

3. With both of the above finders, there is one problem. Both were designed for older cameras where the distance from the top plate to the lens mount was less than the M8, and (evidently) whose accessory shoes sit directly above the lens axis (the M8's is offset). Given the very narrow angle of coverage at the 180mm FOV, the built-in parallax adjustment isn't accurate, and of course can't compensate for the horizontal offset.

Fortunately the discrepancy is a constant, so a few experimental shots with chimping, and you will get a feel for how much you'll need to off-center your composition.

4. Remembering it's effectively a 180mm lens, to get shots sharp enough to bring out the best these lenses have to offer, you have to be mindful of your shutter speed and camera holding technique (if not using a tripod).

 

[Bill Blackwell]

The 135 FL is a Leica M stepchild... I believe the company would love to disown it!

You have two solutions on the M8/M8.2:

1. You can have the lens modified to bring up 90mm framelines (something you’ll want to undo if you ever upgrade to an M9); or

2. Use the frameline preview selector when framing your shot.

I recently had an extended discussion with my local Leica reps on the 135 and its relationship with digital M cameras. There is no six-bit code designed for the 135 FL (accepting the 135mm Elmarit-M with the goggles, which brings up the enlarged 90mm framelines) because they cannot focus within Leica tolerances. In fact they recommend you back off two stops to ensure accurate focusing.

I tried using the goggled 135 on my M8 for a short period of time and found it to be too heavy to be practical. Try lugging that lens around for more than ~45 minutes!

 

[menos]

I sold my original 135/2.8 for pretty much the reasons you describe - then bought another because I liked it so much on the M8! (A friend loaned it to me and I bought it off him).

Cheers,

R.

Roger, I think, it lies in the nature of things, we have to rebuy items, we sold priorily 😀 (and like the item the more).

A few tips on using a 135 on an M8.
…

Ben, thanks for the extensive writeup!
I tried the overturning, as well as bringing up the 90mm line manually.
I like judging the frame from the focus patch, than from the 90mm frame more.

I dont plan, to use a finder with lenses, I will not use with small apertures and preset focus.
I love the 15mm with the Frankenfinder on either digital or film, but use the finder entirely without focussing through the rangefinder.

I found, the long lens, to give surprising low shutter speeds for still shooting - I plan, to extensively test the lens for motor sports with panning shots and will see, how well I can come around.
For my first shots, I reserved, to go down for safety of 1/125, which works well.
The biggest enemy here is the slow f3.4 aperture of the lens, which will produce some nice grain 🙂

The 135 FL is a Leica M stepchild... I believe the company would love to disown it!
…

I recently had an extended discussion with my local Leica reps on the 135 and its relationship with digital M cameras. There is no six-bit code designed for the 135 FL (accepting the 135mm Elmarit-M with the goggles, which brings up the enlarged 90mm framelines) because they cannot focus within Leica tolerances. In fact they recommend you back off two stops to ensure accurate focusing.

I tried using the goggled 135 on my M8 for a short period of time and found it to be too heavy to be practical. Try lugging that lens around for more than ~45 minutes!

I did not know about the 135 being not sold with 6bit coding.
I bought a non coded new lens and discounted the price over the missing 6bit coding. I guess, that made me look weird 😎

I think, I have seen advertised pre owned samples with coding - I guess, they have been made afterwards then.

When shooting racing, I happen, to lug around a D3 with Nikon telephotos, a second camera with normal or wide the whole day for 2 or 3 successive days commonly.

I don't complain about the weight of lenses much.
What I think about the 135 Elmarit though is, that it fits a Leica M as a pancake fits sunglasses - it looks and feels weird, while obstructing your view on the world a bit.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The 135 FL is a Leica M stepchild... I believe the company would love to disown it!

Dear Bill,

Not so much a stepchild as the oldest child: the 135/4,5 Elmar was introduced in 1930, before rangefinder coupling. The 35/3,5 appeared at roughly the same time but may not have been available as soon; the same is true of the 90/4.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Tom Niblick]

I replied to this thread on another forum, but this might need repeating. I picked up a 135 Elmarit a few weeks ago for a little over $300. The glass is perfect but the paint is a little scuffed. No big deal.

The first shots were razor sharp and the lens, while heavy, balances nicely. I'm using this lens on my M8 and my M4.

The main reason I bought this lens was that I need to photograph tour boats for work. I normally shoot this kind of shot with my D2X and a 80-200. But I wanted to try using my M8 more, so the 135 is the only way to go.

The view through the viewfinder does take a little getting used to but it sure makes seeing the subject easier.

A M8 and a 135 Elmarit sure weighs a whole lot less than the Nikon and, since it is only an occasional use lens, it will spend most of its life on a studio shelf.

BTW, Stan Tamarkin has several more in the $300-$350 price range.

Tom

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Tom,

A good point about absolute vs. relative sizes + weights. And the viewfinder

Yes, I have a 135/2.3 Series 1 for my Nikons.

I'll sacrifice the 2/3 stop for the weight saving.

Hell, the 135/2,8 is lighter, smaller and more convenient than the Pentax SV + 135/3.5 Takumar. And a lot sharper than the Pentax SV + 135/1,8 Porst.

Cheers,

R.

 

[menos]

I have found all things, I did not like about the big Elmarit cancelled in the APO Telyt.
For the higher price it costs, I will make sure, to get the best out of it.

It surely is much more often in my bag, than "the fridge" - basically everyday now.
I found focussing without magnifier not too difficult with still subjects.
For the occasion, a 1.4 magnifier resides at all times in my bag.

The Elmarit, for what it is really is a steal for this price - if somebody lives with the weight.
I find the focussing of the Telyt better too. The Elmarit's focus action is slower and much more damped (almost sticky), which needs additionally to the weight also more strength, to operate.

For me, not a pleasant mode of use, which is why I gave up on it after a day.

 

[Tom Niblick]

Menos,

You are right about the long throw on the focus. And the beast is a bit "sticky". But, like I said, for a lens that finds itself in my bag only a few times each month, $300 trumps $3000 despite the ergonomics of the newer lens. The rest of the time my 90 Elmarit M does a great job on my M8.

Tom

 

[menos]

Tom I really love the latest 90 Elmarit-M, which was my bridge into Leica M teles.

I have mine for about a year now, started, to use it more, since I made a few photos at the Chinese F1 GP this year.

As I wished for more speed, than f2.8, I got a 90 Cron pre ASPH a few weeks ago, which I love as well (but in fact, more different two lenses with the same focal length can not be).

I even think about getting a 90 APO down the road, which would be quite crazy.

The Telyt, I basically only got interest, as it has such a high reputation as a 135, that it fitted in theory my bill of finding more reach for motor sport during daylight the best.

That this lens indeed is so light, compact and easy to handle (which I was totally unprepared for before actually trying one), made my buying decision even for the new price rather quick in the shop.

I am looking forward, using this lens for the intended purpose ;-)

I will see in two weeks or so ;-)
I basically decided between one big messenger bag with Nikon D3 + 300 f2.8 VR + 50 f1.4 + M8.2 + 28 Cron or getting the Telyt, skip the Nikon part weighting in with 5kg and get the M7 with Tri-X for the night.

I am happy with the lighter bag and hope it turns out to not be just blurry shots ;-)
If it will be just blurry shots, I am fine too, as I enjoyed the weekend with the nicest orchestra on earth in the form of quite a few 6, 8 and 10 cylinders, racing the day and the night ;-)

Hope, the weather is good, as I will not prep specifically for rain.

 

[Tom Niblick]

Menos,
Do You use a focus magnifier? I have a mega pearls 1.33 which does help with longer lenses.

Yes, the 135 on a M8 does a good job on sports shots. I've done some kite surfer shots where this focal length was about perfect. However, when it comes to big wave surfing even a crop sensor D2X and a 400 mm is not enough. It all depends on what you're shooting and how far away the action is.

When I shoot boats, I'm on a chase boat. I can get close enough for the 135. The 90, however, is a bit short. When the whales arrive in the fall, it will be back to the Nikon and long lenses since I can not get the chase boat any closer than 100 yards. Breeding and calving humpbacks get a bit nervous around motors. Using sails makes them curious and they're liable to pop up unexpectedly. A zoom helps.

Tom

 

[menos]

Tom, I used the Telyt now in Le Mans - with and without 1.4 magnifier.

I just loved this lens!

A few first quick shots are up on my site already:

"Ford GT 40"

"just before Dunlop bridge"

"blue flag for the Saleen" (only one here, that was shot with a 35mm)

"having survived the night"