Elmarit-M 135/2.8 question

QUAsit

QUAsit

Established
Local time
9:50 AM
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
139
Good day all

I am going to buy this lens, and after checking information about I noticed some mentions about `eyes misalighment`
Is there any way to check this thing without making test shots? Some glass separation inside magnifier goggles it is? Or something else?


Thank you!
 
In my experience, you need to have the lens in hand, and put it on a camera to see if the goggles are misaligned. However, the good news is that even if they are, it doesn't affect the focusing in any significant way, as the goggles are, from what I understand, something like magnifiers (they help you focus with the 90mm framelines, not the 135mm).

In short, if you buy the lens, put it on the camera and check how the RF alignment looks. If it's a little off, the goggles may need alignment. If not, you got a good copy!

Apparently, the alignment can be done at home and there's no need to send the lens out to have it done. I don't know how to do it, but, again, it's not a terribly significant problem.

BTW, it's a heavy lens. Some people claim it's clumsy, uncomfortable and what not... It is, however, nicely sharp and worth the effort. I have the second version (takes an E55 filter as opposed to a VII series filter), and it's never given me any grief. :)
 
I have one and I love it. Yes, it is heavy, but it produces beautiful imagery. I highly recommend it.
 
I've used three or four, and owned two (still have one amd love it), and I have never encountered this problem. Yes, it's theoretically possible. No, it's not likely.

Tashi delek,

Roger
 
If I remember correctly, there is a screw head on the back of the goggles part that looks like an adjustment screw. This is a guess, but it might lead to some useful info. If the rf images align perfectly on your camera at infinity, that would be promising.

However, I would never buy a second hand lens unless I had the right of refund were I not happy with focus. I explain that my M6 has had a service and focuses properly with several lenses, and if the newly bought lens does not focus then I would want a refund. I offer to give photographic evidence. If the vendor refuses, so do I.

Some funny things have happened to older Leica lenses over the decades. I bought on once that had a bit of someone's lunch still in it. And it didn't focus properly either.
 
I have the earlier series 6 version and have had it for a few or more decades. I've never heard of a goggle mis-alignment and can't imagine how you could get it out of kilter. I think it would require a pretty serious drop to the floor. I suspect moving a lens element would be easier. I love my lens and it seems like all tele-photos are currently out of favor (including the 90's) so now is the time to grab one. Any lens or camera than is 30 plus years old should either be bought with some type of guarentee or figure in $100 for maintenance.
 
If I remember right, there are three plugged screws around the right "eye". You have to remove the rubber plugs and can adjust the alignment using those screws. Not trivial though, since the screws are small and the right eye might be tight in place after all those years.

While the lens itself might not go easily out of alignment (the eyes, that is), the lens might have to be slightly adjusted to a given camera, depending on how picky you are.

Good lens. Cheers,

Roland.
 
I'll sell you mine if you really want one. It's the latest 55mm version. I bought it less than two years ago to try on the M8 - upon receipt I immediately sent it off to DAG for a CLA and had it six-bit coded.

I experimented briefly with it, but haven't used it since. IMHO, it is just too big and heavy to be practical on an M camera.

If interested, send me a PM and let’s chat. I’ll make you a great deal…
 
A few years ago I got rid of all my seldom used Leicaflex and Leica R bodies and lenses. I missed the 180/2.8. I needed a longer that 90mm, and faster than my 135/4 Tele-Elmar. I found a good deal on a 135/2.8, sold the 135/4, and on the very rare occasion when I wished that I still had the 180 I shoot with the 135 and I crop.

As heavy as that 135/2.8 lens may be it's a LOT lighter than carrying a 180/2.8 on an SLR body for an occasional shot.
 
anyone have an extra cap for the version with the scalopped focusing wheel as well as the removable head for use with the visoflex?

thanks!
 
Thank you all for your answers. So nothing to worry about, just standard check of lens is needed then.
 
Purchased mine many many years ago Mint used from reputable dealer. Eyes were sligthly out of alingment, dealer adjusted eyes and no problems since.
It does happen.
BTW it's a great lens, able to do what no other M lens can do for low light tele photography.-Dick
 
SolaresLarrave said:
In my experience, you need to have the lens in hand, and put it on a camera to see if the goggles are misaligned. However, the good news is that even if they are, it doesn't affect the focusing in any significant way, as the goggles are, from what I understand, something like magnifiers (they help you focus with the 90mm framelines, not the 135mm).
Click to expand...

The alignment of the glass in the goggles is important for focussing. If they are misaligned, the image that is sent to the rotating prism (it's usually the round eyes that are out of whack) is off axially, which affects focussing. It doesn't matter what framelines are displayed. Of course, if the optics in the rectangular eye are off axially, incorrect focussing will also occur.

The good news, as mentioned, is that usually the eyes can be adjusted, but I've seen misalignment often enough.

Over the years I've had a couple of these lenses, with the later ones having a definitely better optical design. As mentioned by others, it's a nice way to get the benefits of a 180/2.8 without having to carry another body and lens.

Henning
 
Thanks, Henning. My copy (the first I bought, an early version) had a slight misalignment in that the horizontal lines didn't quite line up. I tested the focus on a brick wall, with camera on tripod, and shot several frames at different EVs. In the end, the focusing was fine in all... Must have been a negligible problem.

Don Goldberg fixed it and, by the time I sold the lens, it was performing perfectly well in that department. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom