135 lens for Epson R-D1?

[photolady]

I have been using my R-D1 for about a year and love it. I have the 28,35 and 50mm Leica Summicron lenses.
I am considering getting a longer lens- like the 135 and wondered if anyone is using one and what recommendations you would have. photolady1🙂

 

[saxshooter]

You would have a very very hard time focusing the 135 on the Epson RD-1 due to the short rangefinder base length.

Some people have some success with 90mm lenses.

As to framing, auxiliary finders never worked well for me for the 90mm. A lot of people estimate the coverage using the 50mm frame lines.

 

[Flinor]

I've had success using a 90 f4 with an external 135 viewinder. On one occasion (air show and the RD-1 and an M5 were the cameras I happened to have with me) I used a 135 on the RD-1. It gave me the equivalent of approximately a 202. I had no external viewfinder so just centered my subject and shot everything at infinity. I actually got a couple of usable frames but would never call it a success and would only try again under the same sort of circumstances when I had no choice. If you need a long lens get an SLR for those occasions.

 

[RichC]

I use a 90 mm (~ 135 mm) lens without problems, but dislike using external viewfinders, which I find slow and inaccurate.

For framing, I use the 50 mm framelines, and draw imaginary diagonals connecting the ends of the framelines: the diagonal centres = the corners of the 90 mm frame. See my website: http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_04.htm

I think using a 135 mm lens (~ 200 mm) is pushing the envelope:

First, it'll be hard to focus accurately as the R-D1's rangefinder mechanism can only cope in theory with f/6.7 or smaller for 135 mm lenses (see http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_05.htm).

Secondly, the view will be difficult to estimate in the R-D1's viewfinder because of (a) its small size and (b) the significant change in the field of view as the point of focus moves from near to far (analogous to moving your eye nearer/further to a keyhole).

An external viewfinder will be more accurate, but finding one that matches the R-D1, the 135 mm lens and adjusts correctly for parallax will be a pain, and even then the change in the field of view when focusing won't be accounted for.

Personally, I'd only consider using a 135 mm on the R-D1 as a telephoto lens, and would be generous with framing for safety's sake. I'd also keep very close tabs on my depth of field when it's getting shallow owing to the f/6.7 limit.

 

[RML]

I've used a 135mm lens on occasions but while focusing is often hit and miss, framing is even more difficult to do right. I'd recommend you use a (d)SLR for the longer lenses.

 

[jim_buchanan]

You would have a very very hard time focusing the 135 on the Epson RD-1 due to the short rangefinder base length.

You would have a very very hard time focusing the 135 on the Epson RD-1 due to the R-D1 backlash.

You also would have to learn to frame adequately.

My ranking from worstest to worst is:

Backlash
Baselength
Framing

I've had success using my 135mm Tele-Elmar. While I agree with the above comments, I would not want to discourage you from the experience of actually shotting with one.

Only the 135/3.4 is better than a late Tele-Elmar, optically. Focus accuracy becomes a challenge at the close to medium distances, but infinity down to 50ft is OK.

All photography is setting driven. One doesn't use an R-D1 for macro, normally. Shooting air shows is an excellent application, as is any moving sport photography for the 135mm (207mm). Mostly infinity focus, and once the frame is known, one can see the action come into the frame.

In fact, I like my Tele-Elmar so much I have a Canon version for closer focusing! When I get my R-D1 back from the shop for that backlash and rangefinder problem, I think I'll run some tests with the 135mm on both cameras ...