135mm RF lenses - used a lot?

Krosya

Krosya

Konicaze
Local time
4:11 PM
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
3,550
I was just wondering if many people here use 135mm lenses on their RF?
Do you like them? how often do you use it? Worth having one? I have a couple of 90mm - well 90mm and 85mm, but never tried 135mm. Any thoughts? Pictures?
 
I had one that got used outside somewhat mostly when I was not carrying my SLR extension kit (an SLR body with either a 180/2.8 or 200/5). Never used it inside but found it handy when I only wanted to carry one camera body.

B2 (;->
 
Had a 135 with an M3 for 17 years, but used it less than a dozen times. But then I never liked the focal length, even with an SLR. Now I have a 40-150 (equiv. 80-300) zoom for my digital SLR and find that I hardly ever use it. Many people believe that 90 (or 85/100/105) is about the longest practical focal length for a RFDR.
 
i use mine but only for the novelty, its quite a slow focus and hard to use on moving subjects. its actually on the camera right now.

i have a 135 f2 on my ae1, actually half the weight.
 
I use it sometimes. As mentioned, it's good when you only want to take an RF but still want maximum lens choice. Works for details, close-ups, outdoor scenics, and telephoto "compression" effect.
 
I have used mine often. It's an Elmarit 135 f2.8. Useful when you want to get a little closer. Like in this case: young lady reading at Borders, Chicago (State Street), while I waited for Liam and Matt to come for one of our meetings (M3, Portra ISO 400).
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • CHI-Borders-Woman-04-08.jpg
    CHI-Borders-Woman-04-08.jpg
    101.3 KB · Views: 0
I have the 135mm Apo Telyt-M - an incredibly sharp lens. But in the eight years I have owed it I may have used it twice (three times if I stretch my imagination).

I recently purchased a 135mm Elmarit-M (the one with the goggles) to try out on the M8 (don't ask why!). It was immediately shipped off to DAG because the focusing was stiff from not being used.

I can tell you at least one of them will show up in the RFF classifieds once the Elmarit returns from DAG early next week.
 
The Russian Jupiter-11 is a good 135mm Sonnar copy and cheap--no reason not to have the equipment. I use it for portraits and sports. Generally it's wide open (f:4) so I can use a fast shutter speed.
 
135mm lenses are great for portraits and for scenics. I used to use them more often in the past. I have sold my Canon 135/3.5 but I still have a Nikon 135/3.5, a Hektor 135/4.5, a Sonnar 135/4, a Schacht 135/4, ... who knows which other 135mm lenses still hide in some places.
 
I have a Nikkor 135/3.5 and Tele Elmar 135/4.

Don't use them a lot, but when I do I usually get a keeper.

Great for landscapes.

Roland.
 
I have the 135/4 TE and mostly use it wide open but it's one my least used lens lately second only to my CV 15/4.5. When I first stated using M's, I used a 135 much more especialy when traveling. Fabulous lens though.
 
The Leica APO Telyt is supposedly one of Leica's best. The only problem I have with it is that it's too slow. Apparently, the TE has a similar reputation. I had both in mind for a while, but chose to buy the Elmarit with goggles... because I won my first on eBay by sheer luck. I sold it recently, when I acquired a copy of the second version from Ken Ford.
 
I have a Nikkor 135 f3.5 S mount and a Zeiss Sonnar 135 f.4 contax mount. I don't use them much but when I do the results remind me I need to use them more often.
 
Don't use it often because it is just a lot of trouble to truck around, along with an external viewfinder, but it sure does take some nice portraits without disturbing the subject. Like others, I always end up thinking I shold be using it more.
LJS
 
A lot? No, like everyone else so far, I don't use my 135's all that much. But I'll _always_
have that J-11 135/4 Sonnar in my bag because when you need it, it's all there is.

I like longer lenses. There have been days where I considered my 85/2 to be a wide angle lens and really really really wished that I had the money for the $499 (!ONLY!) 180/6.3 RF coupled Tele-Tessar that was on ebay a couple of weeks ago.

I really like having that option available. The rest can live with it ;)

William
 
>>More Nikon RF 135 lenses sold than anything else other than the 50mm.
No one ever uses them, they are both too long and too short.<<

I think that's mostly a reflection of the pre-SLR era. Before zooms became so common, just every amateur who bought a camera kit took the kit-lens 50mm, then the next purchase was a telephoto. Once SLRs became common, the shortcomings of using a telephoto with a rangefinder meant that most RF shooters stopped using their long lenses.

When my dad bought a Pentax SLR kit in the 1970s, it came with a 50 and 135. When I started shooting for the US Army in 1981, the standard photo kit in several offices was a Canon F1 wtih a 35, 50 and 135mm, and none of us beginners knew much about what to do with the 35, which wasn't wide enough. It takes a lot more shooting experience to begin to understand the importance of wide angles and how to use them, but everyone puts the telephoto on right away. I had shot years with 50s and a 70-200 zoom before discovering how to use 28s and 24s.

The 135mm lens is a good tool. An easy lens to make, they tend to be the sharpest in the bag. Carry a lightweight one, and you've got it when you need it.
 
I've usually had a 135; at present I have a Tele Elmar and an Elmarit. On film cameras I used the Tele Elmar at times when I didn't want to carry an SLR but wanted a bit more reach, mostly on trips, but now with the M8 I find that I use the Elmarit a fair bit more. The 180mm 'equivalence' is something that I like, as that has always been one of my favourite focal lengths on an SLR. My Elmarit also is an excellent performer. Not as good as the Tele Elmar, but with a bit of sharpening its technical performance is never the downfall of a picture. It complements the 75/2 very well.

Henning
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom