135mm Elmarit-M Lens with Goggles

[playspace]

Does anybody know if the "goggles" can be removed?
Can this lens be used on an M8?
This is the 2nd version with the built in lens hood.
See picture:

 

[kzphoto]

IIRC, the goggles are for a .72 finder. The lens might not focus right on your M8. If you own the lens, I'd try it out! See what happens.

 

[playspace]

135mm Elmarit with goggles

135mm Elmarit with goggles

I am actually trying to sell this lens and a potential buyer asked
a] if the goggles can be removed?
b] if the goggles would work on his M8
seems like you are predicting they might not work on the M8 - which makes the other question even more important - can they be removed?
Thanks,
Bob

 

[kzphoto]

Again, Google is your friend:

http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00SQEx

 

[Roger Hicks]

No, you can't pull the goggles off. They are needed for accuracy of focusing. Also, the lens brings up the 90mm frame.

Yes, it works very well indeed on an M8. After years of not having one, I bought another because I liked it so well on the M8.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Cron]

I agree, no problems with my M8 when using it

 

[awilder]

It's the 2nd version of the 135/2.8, optically a little better and with beefed up mounting of the goggles. As mentioned before, the goggles are keyed to the 90 frame lines regardless of finder magnification and can't be removed. However, the lens head can be removed for Visoflex use.

 

[menos]

What is the going rate for a second version these days?

 

[Roger Hicks]

It's the 2nd version of the 135/2.8, optically a little better and with beefed up mounting of the goggles. As mentioned before, the goggles are keyed to the 90 frame lines regardless of finder magnification and can't be removed. However, the lens head can be removed for Visoflex use.

Except on the very last run of lenses, apparently. That's how I got one of the last ones made, cheap, from a friend who had bought it new but wanted to get a slightly earlier one to go on his Viso.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Shahir]

i've tried looking up on how these lenses (135 and 35 summaron) be mounted on a M body, but seems I can't find them...anyone knows? thanks...

 

[Roger Hicks]

i've tried looking up on how these lenses (135 and 35 summaron) be mounted on a M body, but seems I can't find them...anyone knows? thanks...

Bayonet straight on.

Cheers,

R.

 

[awilder]

Roger, I was reaaly surprised to read they made late 135/2.8 Elmarit-M lenses without the lens head removal option. Is it possible someone had possibly fouled the lens threads so that it couldn't be unscrewed?

 

[steve kessel]

What is the going rate for a second version these days?

Probably around £300. I paid about £80 for one on ebay that needed work on the lens (balsamic separation) and focusing, so all in £300 there too. Don't use it much but it's useful now and then and the results are usually a pleasure

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger, I was reaaly surprised to read they made late 135/2.8 Elmarit-M lenses without the lens head removal option. Is it possible someone had possibly fouled the lens threads so that it couldn't be unscrewed?

No, it unscrews, but it won't go into the mount. I forget why, as it didn't worry me. There's a land in the head that fouls, or some such. Sorry I can't be more precise but I wasn't really paying attention. The owner (whom I've known for 35 years) bought the lens new, one of the last in the UK -- I have the box, leather case, etc.; tried it; checked with Leica; and was told that it officially didn't work.

Cheers,

R.

 

[menos]

Thanks for the info Steve.

How is focussing with the lens?
Is it comparable with focussing the 90 Elmarit (as the 135 has magnifiers)?

Is it a sure focussing experience with additional 1.4 magnifier on the M8 (which I use for my 90 Elmarit) or is it hit and miss?

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I have one, and like it a lot. However, one must make sure the goggles are correctly calibrated or else they'll never show a perfect alignment. It's a relatively easy job... if one has the tools and knows how to do it.

BTW, I used to have a first-version lens of this type (which takes series VII filters that required a special ring), and later got a copy of the newer version (with e55 filter threads). Cannot say there's a difference between their performances but I can say that in Photo.net one fellow posted shots taken with his M8 and this lens, and they were very well done.

 

[menos]

I got a 1st series sample today and test drove it for a few hours. I will bring it back to the shop tomorrow.

It unfortunately doesn't fit by far to the focus settings of the rest of my lenses.
It also is not really a joy to use as it is as heavy as a substantial SLR lens on front of the small M.

The focus throw is huuuuge (which is rather useful for this fast a long lens), but is very sticky (smooth but sticky).
The sample looked quite nice in shape and should go for 450,- EUR.

I decided, I will not give this lens (another sample) another try soon and rather look for a 90 Cron, which fits my other lenses regarding focus.

I really recommend anyone using this on a M8/ M9, to use the 1.4 magnifier, which makes focussing a lot easier, than squinting through that tiny tunnel (much worse an experience than using a mediocre APS-C DSLR viewfinder).

 

[awilder]

The 135/2.8 is sometimes derided in that it's focus doesn't seem to exactly match that of non-goggle lenses in one's arsenal. In fact if you ever buy one, assume it's likely to be slightly off on your camera. However, the beauty of this lens is that any horizontal or vertical focus misalignment with the camera's rf patch can be easily corrected by a simple adjustment to the goggles by a tech familiar with the lens or anyone that's reasonably steady with a decent set of flathead screwdrivers. It requires no more skill than adjusting the vertical or horizontal rf patch misalignment of an M3, M2, M4 or M5, just a different means of adjustment. For those who like tweaking lens' focus to perfection, this is a joy to work with. Of course, this assumes the camera is correctly adjusted with your other lenses. Once adjusted, it stays that way unless the goggles are wacked out of adjustment. Historically, the 135 on a rangefinder has sometimes been criticized because of softness. It's not so much caused by the optical design of the lens (even 55 year old designs like the Canons or Nikkors), but because focus may not perfectly calibrated to the camera. This is vitally important in order to get the most out of these lenses, as a slight mechanical error is greatly magnified due to the limitations of rangefinder focusing on longer lenses. The 135/2.8 is the only 135 from Leica I've ever used that allows the user to precisely adjust it for exact rf calibration ensuring sharp images. The more popular 135/4 Tele-Elmar or 135/3.4 APO Telyt might be a little better optically, but if not precisely calibrated to match the camera's rf or if the finder magnification isn't high enough, a properly adjusted 135/2.8 will appear visably sharper. However, that being said, the added bulk and odd form factor of the mounted goggles makes the 135/2.8 difficult to easily slip into a camera bag. Thus making other 135's a more practical choice for travel.

 

[elmoG]

I took a shoot few days ago with this lens.

M2 Eastman 5222 Rodinal

 

[menos]

… The 135/2.8 is the only 135 from Leica I've ever used that allows the user to precisely adjust it for exact rf calibration ensuring sharp images.

I might well give it a try considering a few points:

1) Do you have any reference to how to adjust the version I 135/2.8 (scalloped focus ring)?

There are the following screws on the backplate of the goggles:
- left rectangular window for viewfinder magnifier:
1 big screw to the left and one to the right of the rectangular window

4 small screws on each corner around the window (presumably fixing screws for the metal sheet back of the goggles)

- right round ocular:

3 small screws, same form factor than small screws on left side (presumably also fixing screws for the metal sheet back)

2) Was the price, I paid appropriate for a later loss less resale (I paid 450,- EUR)?

My sample has cleaning marks on both goggle optical elements (cosmetically, likely not influencing performance but resale value).
Both caps (front Leica metal slip on with red velvet liner, back: glossy black plastic cap "Ernst Leitz GmbH Wetzlar Germany" with grey bajonett).

It looks well alround with only little marks.
The aperture ring is a bit loose but doesn't feel bad - very sharp, precise clicks (different and more mechanical feel than modern Leica lenses).

Focus is heavily damped but smooth.


Definitely this lens would not be often used, rather an interesting portrait lens with very little use.
Focussing and handling with my 90 Elmarit (latest version) is MUCH more comfortable, as well as being very transportable.
I am leaning to give the lens back.


I am happy, to hear any advise, as today would be my return dead line.

Thanks for your help. 🙂