phototone
Well-known
I know about the 35mm Summaron with goggles, to allow the field of view of a 35mm lens on an M3.
What is the reason for the goggles on the 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit, and what particular M Leicas is it intended for? Will it work on all of them, giving the correct field of view?
Is it a good lens?
Inquiring minds want to know.
What is the reason for the goggles on the 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit, and what particular M Leicas is it intended for? Will it work on all of them, giving the correct field of view?
Is it a good lens?
Inquiring minds want to know.
ddutchison
Well-known
Same diff. as the goggled 35's but in reverse. The gogles magnify the view so that the 90mm frame lines (which the lens activates) give the correct framing for the 135.
Originally intended for the M2 which had no 135 frame lines, but works on all M's. The extra magnification also increases RF accuracy, which, given the 2.8 aperature of this lens, is a good idea. That and the stock 135 frames on the newer cameras (M4 and after) are pretty small.
I don't have one, but I hear it's a very good lens. Main complaints seem to be that's also a very heavy one, and somewhat awkward to use.
Originally intended for the M2 which had no 135 frame lines, but works on all M's. The extra magnification also increases RF accuracy, which, given the 2.8 aperature of this lens, is a good idea. That and the stock 135 frames on the newer cameras (M4 and after) are pretty small.
I don't have one, but I hear it's a very good lens. Main complaints seem to be that's also a very heavy one, and somewhat awkward to use.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
David is spot on. I sold mine because it is bulky, heavy and (with the goggles) a bit awkward to pack. But if you want 135 on a Leica, it's the easy winner. I may yet buy another.
In fact there's an article on 'spectacles' lenses (35, 135 and DR Summicron) in an upcoming Shutterbug -- next month or the month after, I think.
Cheers,
Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
In fact there's an article on 'spectacles' lenses (35, 135 and DR Summicron) in an upcoming Shutterbug -- next month or the month after, I think.
Cheers,
Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
It also increases the base of the rangefinder, making the otherwise somewhat less accurate measuring a lot more exact.
Jaap
Jaap
Last edited:
I saw a list of cameras which could be used with this lens and surprisingly, the M3 was not on it. Is there a reason it cannot be used with an M3 or was that an error in what I was reading?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Rover,
The spectacles aren't 'needed' with the M3 (which of course has a 135 frame) but the 135/2,8 is eminently usable with it and many people prefer a 135/2,8 on an M3 to the other 135s.
Cheers,
Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
The spectacles aren't 'needed' with the M3 (which of course has a 135 frame) but the 135/2,8 is eminently usable with it and many people prefer a 135/2,8 on an M3 to the other 135s.
Cheers,
Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
Thank you Roger for the answer.
I guess my question would be better asked,
If used on an M3, would the goggles negatively effect framing with the 135 framelines? I like the 90mm framelines in the M3 because they are about equal in size as the 75s in my M6. I still think the 135 lines are small in the M3 though, so magnifying them would be a benefit.
I guess my question would be better asked,
If used on an M3, would the goggles negatively effect framing with the 135 framelines? I like the 90mm framelines in the M3 because they are about equal in size as the 75s in my M6. I still think the 135 lines are small in the M3 though, so magnifying them would be a benefit.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Rover, this lens works with the M3. I have a specimen (gotten very cheaply on eBay) and found that the goggles enlarge the framelines in the M6TTL, and also in my particular M3 (which, for a DS, has both the 90mm and 135mm framelines).
The only concern I had is that the goggles seem to be very slightly out of line. They're not perfectly perpendicular to the lens barrel. However, as the "proof and pudding" saying goes, the photos I've made are well focused.
One particular thing: when I purchased this lens I thought I'd be using it a lot with film faster than ISO 100... but I've found that in sunny days I have to close it down to f8 and f11. Of course, with that kind of DOF you can expect a nice amount of sharpness.
No wonder the f-stop range goes from f2.8 to f32...
Hope this helps!
The only concern I had is that the goggles seem to be very slightly out of line. They're not perfectly perpendicular to the lens barrel. However, as the "proof and pudding" saying goes, the photos I've made are well focused.
One particular thing: when I purchased this lens I thought I'd be using it a lot with film faster than ISO 100... but I've found that in sunny days I have to close it down to f8 and f11. Of course, with that kind of DOF you can expect a nice amount of sharpness.
No wonder the f-stop range goes from f2.8 to f32...
Hope this helps!
ddutchison
Well-known
rover said:
Hi Rover
Sounds like you'd like this lens as it uses the 90mm frame-lines - the goggles just magnify the field of view so that they accurately represent a 135mm's coverage. It doesn't use the 135 lines at all, though if you dialed them up, they'd show (roughly) the coverage of a 190 mm lens, and the 50mm lines would give you something close to a 70mm F.O.V.
Tom Diaz
Well-known
I have one I bought on eBay. Excellent lens. You have to bear in mind that many or most of these date from the 70s, and they might need a tune-up, which is done only in Germany.
The goggles make it much easier to focus accurately. It's heavy, but the focusing accuracy and lower cost (vs. the current 135mm lens) made it a good choice for me. I am basically a wide-angle person, so I use telephotos only rarely.
The goggles make it much easier to focus accurately. It's heavy, but the focusing accuracy and lower cost (vs. the current 135mm lens) made it a good choice for me. I am basically a wide-angle person, so I use telephotos only rarely.
Thanks guys.
I too am not much for tele lenses, but now that I have an M3 it makes more sense to me to look that way a little more. I may put this on my "for a good price, maybe" list.
I too am not much for tele lenses, but now that I have an M3 it makes more sense to me to look that way a little more. I may put this on my "for a good price, maybe" list.