Nokton48
Veteran
Arrived yesterday from KEH, listed at Bargain condition, with caps for $159. A nice bargain in my opinion, but how's the lens? Well it's in exceptional shape, and the rangefinder is dead-on at infinity, I've heard some of these are mis-aligned (dropped?). Anyway this one is in apparent perfect condition, it is a good match on M5, and I can see the framelines easily and it is easy to focus. I am very pleased so far. I also picked up a black Leitz 90/135 short mount, so I put it on my Visos. The 135mm focal length nicely fills in the void between 90mm and 200mm. Takes Series 7 filters, has a supplemental Leitz ring to hold them in, and I have Series 7 stuff, which I'll have to dig out. Serial number is 2656079, I think this is a later version, because the focusing ring isn't scalloped, like on my earlier lenses. But I still like it, I'll be using it this weekend, for sure, on M4-2, M5, and M2.
Here, M2 tries out the new Viso lens head. M5 sits with the 135 Elmarit rangefinder helical, I just switch the front lens head between the two mounts. Pretty cool so far!
Here, M2 tries out the new Viso lens head. M5 sits with the 135 Elmarit rangefinder helical, I just switch the front lens head between the two mounts. Pretty cool so far!
rickp
Well-known
congratulations! mine arrived yesterday too, in very nice shape except for the focusing issue which i knew about before purchasing. sooooooooooo, it's off to will van manen (nl) for cleaning, adjustment and 6-bit coding. pls post some images after the weekend, and i'll do the same when my lens is back from the 'doctor'.
greetings from hamburg
rick
greetings from hamburg
rick
RichardB
Well-known
The series 7 filter indicates the earlier version of the 135 f2.8 M lens.-Dick
Al Kaplan
Veteran
It's a good lens, although heavy and a bit awkward to stick in your bag. When I got a good deal on one I sold my 135/4 Tele-Elmar as well as my Leicaflex SL and the 180/2.8. Now I have the f/2.8 speed and I can crop to the 180mm field of view easily enough.
Maybe it isn't as sharp doing things this way but I'm not making 16x20 prints. For a typical magazine or brochure illustration it works great and it's a lot less weight to carry around.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
Maybe it isn't as sharp doing things this way but I'm not making 16x20 prints. For a typical magazine or brochure illustration it works great and it's a lot less weight to carry around.
http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Congratulations on your purchase!
I've had two of these. One was like yours, a first-version with Series VII filters that had the goggles out of alignment (an easy repair by DAG). Then, I had a chance of buying a newer one, second version with 55mm filter thread, so I sold the old one. Both are, as Al said above, a bit on the cumbersome side, but FAST compared to the other 135mm lenses for RF cameras. The results are quite satisfying.
BTW, my avatar was taken with the old version I had. If it's soft, it's because the musician was keeping the beat with his foot (and adding some melodic percussion too), so he was moving it quickly. Still, makes for an interesting image...
I've had two of these. One was like yours, a first-version with Series VII filters that had the goggles out of alignment (an easy repair by DAG). Then, I had a chance of buying a newer one, second version with 55mm filter thread, so I sold the old one. Both are, as Al said above, a bit on the cumbersome side, but FAST compared to the other 135mm lenses for RF cameras. The results are quite satisfying.
BTW, my avatar was taken with the old version I had. If it's soft, it's because the musician was keeping the beat with his foot (and adding some melodic percussion too), so he was moving it quickly. Still, makes for an interesting image...
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I think that at one time Komura made an ungoggled 135/2.8 in LTM. They also made a 200/4.5.
ferider
Veteran
The Komura 135/2.8 is very much under-rated. Excellent and sharp lens, and you can buy it for around 50 bucks.
In contrast to the slower Komura 135, and the 200, a true Ernostar design, much like the classic SLR 135mm "Sonnars" you can get.
Congrats on the Elmarit N48.
Nokton48
Veteran
Well Thanks for all the Congrats, Guys!
I just looked up the serial number, mine is from 1973. So as I previously guessed (from examining the focusing rings) this is a somwhat later series lens, issued at the same time as my Leica M-5. The earlier version (in my original M-4 brochure, has scalloped focusing and aperture rings, like the 90mm F2). I am pleased about all this, it is a perfect fit and feels good on M-5 and certainly looks like it was made for it. TomA, Al and others have stated it's a good lens, but somewhat clumsy to use. We will see, I think it will be just fine for my uses.
High-Speed 135mm F2.8 is very useful for rangefinding. I particularly like the view through the M-5 rangefinder with this lens. It is -sweet-.
I just looked up the serial number, mine is from 1973. So as I previously guessed (from examining the focusing rings) this is a somwhat later series lens, issued at the same time as my Leica M-5. The earlier version (in my original M-4 brochure, has scalloped focusing and aperture rings, like the 90mm F2). I am pleased about all this, it is a perfect fit and feels good on M-5 and certainly looks like it was made for it. TomA, Al and others have stated it's a good lens, but somewhat clumsy to use. We will see, I think it will be just fine for my uses.
High-Speed 135mm F2.8 is very useful for rangefinding. I particularly like the view through the M-5 rangefinder with this lens. It is -sweet-.
Last edited:
Tom Diaz
Well-known
That's truly a bargain. It's a great lens. The f/2.8 speed is nice, and the goggles pay their own weight in my opinion: you can actually use the lens more than you would expect, because the goggles make it much easier to frame and focus.
Tom
Tom Diaz
Well-known
With mine, they could not do the 6-bit coding. Apparently at least some models of the lens do not have space on the mount in the right place.
Tom
rickp
Well-known
thanks, tom
i'll keep my fingers crossed. the lens flange was one of the "removable ones" with mounting screws, so maybe i'm in luck.
i'll come back to this thread when the lens is returned (sn 2064xxx).
cheers
rick
i'll keep my fingers crossed. the lens flange was one of the "removable ones" with mounting screws, so maybe i'm in luck.
i'll come back to this thread when the lens is returned (sn 2064xxx).
cheers
rick
rickp
Well-known
my 135mm is back from focusing adjustment and 6-bit coding, and got its first outing in town this afternoon. the goggles are a bit different, but make focusing and framing pretty easy. yes, it's heavy, but still works well on a wrist strap.
sharpness, color, ease of handholding? so far, so good.
greetings from hamburg
rick
sharpness, color, ease of handholding? so far, so good.
greetings from hamburg
rick
Attachments
Nokton48
Veteran
I shot most of a roll of Eastman Double-X with mine last weekend, on an M4-2 with Visoflex. I am surprised by the "look'' and focus characteristics of the 135 Elmarit. In fact I am -delighted- with it, sure looked great through the viewfinder (and it helps I have new eyeglasses!). I think this is a sleeper lens, very underrated in fact. And 135 is such a useful focal length for the way I see. I love it.
x-ray
Veteran
I've had two of the 1st version. Both have been sharp but both have had alignment problems with the goggles. My current one has been in the shop several times and needs alignment again. I found instructions on how to do it and think I will do it myself this time. It seems quite simple and anyway if I can't fix it I'll just send it in for service. I'm actually thinking about selling it when I fix it and picking up a tele-elmar version. I rarely carry the 2.8 due to size and its just not a FL I use much.