Sharpest 135mm

[Rico]

Besides sharpness, I selected the Tele-Elmar for its compatibility with my 90mm lenses: the caps, IUFOO hoods, filters. The TE and Elmarit 90 v1 share OTZFO for Visoflex focussing. While not strictly APO, I find the TE rendering to be pleasant and well-behaved. As for sharpness, judge for yourself:

​

​

Image was shot on a Canon 1Ds DSLR with Viso adapter. The 1x-scale crop looks fairly detailed. 🙂 Both images are lightly sharpened.

 

[Harry Lime]

All else being equal, I prefer a lighter small lens in LTM. I don't care about the extra speed, because most of the photos would be in daylight. Does these criteria and preferences mean I should focus on the Nikkor?

The Tele-Elmar 4/135 is actually quite compact, especially the early version (same optical formula), which is tapered. As a bonus the optical head can be removed and used on a Visoflex.

This is an extremely sharp lens. The new APO version is better, but not by much.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The Apo-Telyt-M is the one, but the 135/2.8 is also excellent and the FSU 135/4 is astonishing good and costs next to nothing. I use a late 135/2.8 (one of the last made).

By f/5.6 (or maybe f/8) there's no difference worth worrying about between the three, even on a tripod. Without a tripod, steadiness matters more than theoretical sharpness.

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Chrome Nikkor 13.5cm f3.5 is a heavy lens. If you go in that direction, you will want the later model chrome/black, I think the serial number >267xxx. The Black Canon 135/3.5 is much lighter than the earlier lens.

At F5.6 and F8, all of these lenses are sharp and difficult to distinguish. But you are after the center 1/3rd of the image, basically making them act as a 400mm lens. As Roger stated, you should be using a tripod and faster shutter speed. Instead of the "shutter speed to match the focal length" rule, you need to triple it at least. That means 1/500th is the slowest speed that you should consider.

I have a Komura 200/4.5 in LTM that is small and light, but bought it for a curiousity. I would be using a Nikon F2 with 300/4.5 for these types of pictures.

 

[gavinlg]

Sorry to be such a prick and bring up SLR lenses but the canon 135mm f2L and the new zeiss ZA 135mm f1.8 have to be the 2 sharpest 135mm lenses IMO.

 

[ferider]

TE example

TE example

Here is a typical Tele Elmar shot from me:

And cropped:

The lens outperforms the scanner (5000 ED).

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[Harry Lime]

Sorry to be such a prick and bring up SLR lenses but the canon 135mm f2L and the new zeiss ZA 135mm f1.8 have to be the 2 sharpest 135mm lenses IMO.

Why? Because they are the newest? A general rule of thumb in optical design is that a slower aperture lens will generally outperform a highspeed design. There is a lot, lot more energy traveling through a highspeed lens, which is far more difficult to control.

 

[venchka]

Why? Because he's correct. And they are faster. Huge too. The photos I've seen from the Canon wide open will cut you. Stopped down to 3.5 or 4 or 4.5 and it's no contest. The lens is huge. That's the problem.

 

[Al Kaplan]

The main consideration for me with a 135 on an M is that I won't need to carry an SLR body with a 180/2.8. I rarely use it as a 135. I crop and use it as a 180. I pretty much have the frame lines engraved in my brain. I really think that a goggled 180/4 would find a ready market.

 

[chris00nj]

The main consideration for me with a 135 on an M is that I won't need to carry an SLR body with a 180/2.8. I rarely use it as a 135. I crop and use it as a 180. I pretty much have the frame lines engraved in my brain. I really think that a goggled 180/4 would find a ready market.

That was my intention. I plan to crop the center, so I need it to be sharp.

After Brian noted the Arco 135/3.8 Tele-Colinar, I decided to see what other lenses exist as well. There were a LOT of companies that made 135mm lenses for the LSM.

The following is a list of what I've seen around, but I'm not sure if any are better than the Nikkor or Canon:

• Chiyoda Kogaku Tele-Rokkor f/4
• Tanaka Kogaku Tele-Tanar f/3.5
• Telesar f/3.5
• Jupiter 11 f/4
• Tokyo Kogaku Topcor f/3.5
• Komura f/3.5
• Sun Telephoto f/3.8
• Schacht Travenar f/3.5
• Steinheil Culminar f/3.5

I appreciate everyone's answers and pictures thus far! 😀

 

[ferider]

There is also a Komura 2.8.

Roland.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

> Tanaka Kogaku Tele-Tanar f/3.5

Had one. Was "decent". Not as good as the Nikkor or Canon.

> Jupiter 11 f/4
Waiting on results to come back. FSU lenses vary from sample-to-sample, but mine looked VERY SHARP through a loupe.

> Komura f/3.5
Aperture blades "self-destructed" on mine.

> Schacht Travenar f/3.5
"decent" performer, not as good as Canon or Nikkor. BUT: I need to retest mine, took it apart and cleaned all the surfaces. Really Pretty!

 

[Al Kaplan]

I'm not going to bore everybody with my math but a 180/2.8 with goggles should work at least as well as the 85/1.5 optics of yore, and they sported no goggles. How about it, Voigtlander?

 

[ferider]

I'm not going to bore everybody with my math but a 180/2.8 with goggles should work at least as well as the 85/1.5 optics of yore, and they sported no goggles. How about it, Voigtlander?

ZI/ZM ... a new Olympia Sonnar. Go for it, Zeiss !

 

[Sonnar2]

sharpest 135: Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8 (Rollei QBM), followed by the Tele-Tessar 135/4 (same mount). Close: Canon 135/2.5 (MB2-RF-lens). Quite good: Canon 135/3.5 (RF)

 

[GlennB]

Question for those more knowledgeable than me. How do you tell a 2nd gen 135 2.8 from the 1st gen? I have one that says made in Canada, but thought all the 2.8 135mm were made in Canada.
Glenn

Edit: nevermind, I found the answer on Stephen's site.

 

[Harry Lime]

Why? Because he's correct. And they are faster. Huge too. The photos I've seen from the Canon wide open will cut you. Stopped down to 3.5 or 4 or 4.5 and it's no contest. The lens is huge. That's the problem.

I wouldn't bet money on that. The Canon is good, but I highly doubt that is built to the same mechanical tolerances, as a lens from Leica. Mechanical construction is half the game in making a high performance lens. And again, it would take a minor miracle for Canon to build a f2 lens that outperforms or matches one of the sharpest lenses Leica has ever made for the M line up. Physics are not on Canon's side.