135 focal length

[back alley]

ok, by now most of you must be aware that i've been trying to sell my 135/3.5 lens.

not very much interest.

so, does everyone already have a 135 that they are happy with or is it just a very unpopular focal length these days?

besides being an obvious way of bringing attention to my sale...i'm actually wondering about the answer to my question.

joe

 

[Kim Coxon]

Hi Joe,
I have the Canon 135 as well. Although I may clear some of the other Canon lenses, I will probably keep that one. No I don't use it that often, you are getting into SLR range there. However, my thoughts are that if I go away and only take an RF, I may need it. It gives a very good performance and for the amount of use it is going to get, I certainly don't want to pay Leica prices. All the more so as you have the hood etc.

Kim

 

[RObert Budding]

I've always really liked the 135mm focal lenght. I still have a Zeiss Sonnar that I used on my Contax IIIa. Stunning lens and very inexpensive. I've sold the camera but still have the lens. One of these days I'll auction it off.

 

[Ken Ford]

I like the 135 focal length, but to me it's not appropriate for a .72 M. One exception I'd consider would be a goggled 135/2.8 plus a 1.25x eyepiece magnifier.

To be honest, I find even the 90mm framelines in an M to be barely usable.

 

[wlewisiii]

As noted before, I have plenty of interest in the lens as it would be a huge step up from my Steinheil 135/4.5 which is, at it's best, only adequate. I like the focal length and want to find a cheap 135 finder for the CL and the one I have.

So, find me a legal way to come up with a few hundred US shy of selling my 7, and I'll be glad to help your ZM 50/2 fund 😀

William

 

[Solinar]

Joe, I have a beautiful 135 Elmar, but hardly use it. When I do I prefer a tripod, as I only feel comfortable using 3 shutter speeds with a 135.

 

[peter_n]

Joe I have two, an f4 Tele-Elmar and an f4 Jupiter-11, both cracking lenses. The TE is a bit on the heavy side so the J-11 comes along on trips. Love the focal length! 🙂

 

[VictorM.]

I have an ltm Hektor and 135mm brightline finder I rarely use.

 

[raid]

Joe: I used to neglect my 135mm lenses until last year when I used a Nikkor 135mm/3.5 lens for photos of my children during a trip to the Smokies. The results surprised me and since then I like this focal length. Framing is more challenging with some rangefinder cameras, but the quality of the photos are great. I now have a Canon 135mm/3.5, a Nikkor 135mm/3.5 and a Leitz Hektor 135mm/4.5. Why are you trying to sell your lens? Have you used it and you did not like the results or did the lens just sit there?

 

[back alley]

it just sits here.
i tried it when i got it and found it to be pretty sharp but it never leaves the house.

 

[MP/CLE]

I think your issue with the 135 is a personal one... it will never be a normal lens, either short or long, but it is one of those lenses that when you need it its there and nothing else will do the job. Mine is the 3.4 leica and I didn't use it for ever until I was looking at yachts, then landscapes, then beaches, all of a sudden its the only lens I'm using. I'm now shooting closer subjects so the 135 isn't in my bag, but as soon as I have an opportunity I'll pull it back into the bag.

I must tell you, though, I have a problem selling anything I have, so I wouldn't sell the 135 or any other lens I have unless I was suffering some financial cataclism.

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

I have a Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f4 uncoated that I like but rarely shoot. Should dust it off this week and burn some film in the Contax IIa.

I think I'm done buying 35mm equipment and accessories. I think.

Wayne

 

[doubs43]

Joe, just a quick mental count shows that I have at least six LTM 135's. I keep one of them in my bag at all times. At the moment it's a pre-war uncoated Hektor that resides in my bag. If I add in my SLR 135's in M42, Nikon and Exakta mounts, we're talking more than 15.

I use other lenses more often but there are times when only a 135 will do and then I have one. Before you sell your Canon 135, think about the lenses you've sold and then bought again because you realized you missed them. Keep this one....... you won't regret it. 🙂

Walker

 

[ZeissFan]

I have a coated Carl Zeiss Sonnar that is extremely sharp. One of the better bargains for the Zeiss Ikon Contax rangefinder. I use it often.

 

[jlw]

ok, by now most of you must be aware that i've been trying to sell my 135/3.5 lens.

not very much interest.

In my case it's not a lack of interest -- just that I had to pay a big tax bill last month and am short on disposable income. I'd love to have a nice, clean Canon 135, especially since I already have the pin-type Lumi-Field finder needed to use it on my VI-T.

If you had been trying to sell it a month or two before, or a month or two from now, I probably would be, or have been, a lot more interested. The price sounds great to me, especially with the hood.

 

[back alley]

it may be around in a month or 2.
i'm in no rush and there is little interest in it now.

i think i would use a 90 more.

joe

 

[raid]

The 135mm lens gives you a much closer perspective than a 90mm lens does. Try it out in one roll and see if you like it or not.

 

[back alley]

i know what it looks like and i like it ok, but i prefer the 75 to 90 look better.

truth is i don't have much interest in things that are too far away from me.
i had my time as a concert shooter for the edm folk music festival, nearly 20 years, and now i just like being close.

joe

 

[BJ Bignell]

I have a 135, and it's a decent lens, but I don't use it much. Actually, I haven't used it for almost a year, but there are other reasons for that. The problems with my 135 are (a) it's very heavy, (b) I have no 135 framelines on the Bessa R, and (c) the Bessa can't accurately focus the lens past 20m.

(a) is a big problem for day-to-day use, but if you know you're going somewhere that you need the length, it's worth the effort.
(b) is not really a big problem. I use the focussing patch of the R as the framelines, plus a little extra, and actually have had nice results.
(c) is not really a big problem if you shoot portraits (use close focus), or if you're certain that whatever you're shooting is at least 300m away (use infinity focus and depth-of-field).

 

[RObert Budding]

I like the 135 focal length, but to me it's not appropriate for a .72 M. One exception I'd consider would be a goggled 135/2.8 plus a 1.25x eyepiece magnifier.

To be honest, I find even the 90mm framelines in an M to be barely usable.

I wouldn't shoot a 135mm without a external finder . I have a Zeiss 85/135 torpedo finder that works really well. You can even dial in a correction for parallax. Another item that I need ot sell when I get around to it - remnants of a system that I no longer own!