Please help me pick a 135mm..

Well, yesterday evening I decided to buy a nice priced canon 135/3.5 chrome on Ebay. Guess what, this morning I saw a Canon 135/3.5 in black for about the same amount. So now I have 2 Canons on their way..

Will see if the weight differs much and if picture quality differs. Will sell one of them after that. Will post some results asap.

Again thank you for your replies. I'm still interested in views on Canon/nikon vs Leica Elmar.

Greetings from the Netherlands.
Roel
 
Interesting to see that a thread about 135s received so many replies. It often seems that this focal length, for "obvious" reasons, is the least favourite for the M or screw system...and yet it can be rewarding and the kit available generally affordable (with exceptions) and excellent.

Any comments on the latest 135 f3.4? Is it that much better than the Tele Elmar?

Michael
 
Sorry to jump in late on this thread... I know you have already picked up a couple of Canon 135's, but you should also check out the Kyoei Super-Acall 135/3.5. It's a great ltm lens that can be had for under $50-$60 (often with finder) on ebay. I hate to see them go without an opening bid & now have two!

Peter
 
ferider said:
Roel,

the black Canon 135/3.5 is a great lens, compact and light, and sharp. 48mm filter size, you need a T-50 or T-52 hood. Make sure it focuses correctly to infinity, these lenses are known to have the RF tongue out of whack, sometimes.

Here is a comparison to the Tele Elmar:

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CeC3

Roland.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I wonder if Ronald is around and could explain the comment he made on that thread. Would one really see a diff with the negs and loupe?
 
btw, I love my canon...it unclutters my cluttered world. I just tore it apart and re-greased it...not very hard. Black would be nice though...chrome feels sort of Dirty Harry-ish...

345706920_b9ababc095_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm also a big fan of the 135mm focal length. I use a Nikkor, which is also available in LTM versions. But I've read that most lenses of this focal length are of high image quality. I'd go with whichever mount seems to weigh less, because it's something you don't use all the time, but it's nice to have it in the bag when you want it.
 

Attachments

  • 135Number_One_sept2005.jpg
    135Number_One_sept2005.jpg
    143.6 KB · Views: 0
  • 135mm-apr06.jpg
    135mm-apr06.jpg
    171.6 KB · Views: 0
ferider said:
Roel,

the black Canon 135/3.5 is a great lens, compact and light, and sharp. 48mm filter size, you need a T-50 or T-52 hood. Make sure it focuses correctly to infinity, these lenses are known to have the RF tongue out of whack, sometimes.

Here is a comparison to the Tele Elmar:

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CeC3

Roland.
Click to expand...

Roland, thank you very much for this comparison. It gives some nice info on the performance of both lenses. Gives me a clue on how to rate the famous Tele-elmar. In your experience, is the Canon very dependend on using a hood.


Steve, Nice foto of the girl and the bike. Do you know what aparture you used for this one. The 'uncluttering' effect is nice indeed.

Vince: I agree, weight is an issue. I have a great bag but it is getting heavier all the time. Nice results of the Nikon.
 
Roel said:
Roland, thank you very much for this comparison. It gives some nice info on the performance of both lenses. Gives me a clue on how to rate the famous Tele-elmar. In your experience, is the Canon very dependend on using a hood.


Steve, Nice foto of the girl and the bike. Do you know what aparture you used for this one. The 'uncluttering' effect is nice indeed.

Vince: I agree, weight is an issue. I have a great bag but it is getting heavier all the time. Nice results of the Nikon.
Click to expand...

Hi Roel,

in general I feel it's always good to put a hood on a tele lens. Plus the T-50{-2} is not too expensive, here are a couple: 170066771984, 270074502082 (US 18 BIN), 7622054648 (GBP 13 BIN).

Cheers,

Roland.
 
135 lenses and hoods are one of those rare instances in the rangefinder world where you really get your pick of the very best lenses for very affordable prices. The bottom fell out of the 135mm lens market as soon as SLRs became popular. People who stick with RF cameras tend to prefer wide and "normal" lenses while those who want telephotos use SLRS. So fantastic 135mms are just sitting around looking for good homes because very few people want them.
 
Roel said:
Steve, Nice foto of the girl and the bike. Do you know what aparture you used for this one. The 'uncluttering' effect is nice indeed.
Click to expand...

Hi Roel, sorry, the pic was 3.5 I think. I have better (indeed sharper) examples in my gallery. The two pics in there of the girl in the white blouse holding the green worm are probably my favorite pictures. I hope you enjoy your new lenses. 🙂
 
SteveM(PA) said:
Hi Roel, sorry, the pic was 3.5 I think. I have better (indeed sharper) examples in my gallery. The two pics in there of the girl in the white blouse holding the green worm are probably my favorite pictures. I hope you enjoy your new lenses. 🙂
Click to expand...

Hi Steve, thank you for sharing. The pics of the girl with the worm are truely wunderfull. Makes you want be kid again. I hope I will be abble to make a shot with intensity and concentration of my daugther. It shows this 135mm lens will not be the limiting factor..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom