cosmonot
uʍop ǝpısdn sı ǝʞ
If I need to shoot anything over 80mm, I use my Olympus OM. Go for the zuiko 85/2 for speed, or the Tamron SP 80-200/2.8 for reach.
So yeah, 135mm sucks.
So yeah, 135mm sucks.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
I went with 135 - I also dislike anything under 24 as well, don`t need it, for the work I do
I use 50`s and a 85 on my screw mount Leica`s all the time - and a 24 wide on my vintage Canon SLR
Tom
I use 50`s and a 85 on my screw mount Leica`s all the time - and a 24 wide on my vintage Canon SLR
Tom
m_chris
Newbie
why is ti so many dislike 135mm? Got a CZJ sonnar 135mm that produces beatutiful images......though i do understand the framlines. But this then means the problem lies in the camera than the lens itself : )....mind you i don't use the 135mm often, but it does shine once in a while
aoresteen
Well-known
Well, I don't like the 800mm on my M3. Hard to ballance. 
Other than that, I'll use 'em all sometime.
Other than that, I'll use 'em all sometime.
aizan
Veteran
i went with 135...cuz really, what else is there to choose?
erikhaugsby
killer of threads
Truer words were ne'er spoken. Especially considering my 90 was cheap enough for an impulse buy, but still enough to keep me from picking up a few other things (it is Leica, after all).thpook said:
Mike Ip
Vagabond Light Collector
135. If you need to go tele, use an SLR
bobkonos
Well-known
135. Rarely use 90 as it is.
dof
Fiat Lux
For me it's definitely the 28 - not that I don't own one. The trouble is it sits on the edge of wide without delivering a unique perspective. I find that I use it if I have to for coverage in a tight spot, but rarely because I want to for the look it imparts. Granted I try to use the longest lens I can for a given view as a rule, but there's a big gap between 35 and 24.
Looking at the results here leaning heavily on the 135, I have to wonder how many people have used this length on an RF camera? I don't even consider it for the many reasons already listed.
Looking at the results here leaning heavily on the 135, I have to wonder how many people have used this length on an RF camera? I don't even consider it for the many reasons already listed.
Bingley
Veteran
I have tried... I mean, I've REALLY tried... to use the 135. I just can't make it work. And, although I know that the 35/75 combination is a classic that many use, I just can't feel the love for the 75 focal length.
Senmu
Member
135s Rock
135s Rock
I really must defend the noble 135. Back in October, I spent a few days on safari in South Africa with my M6TTL and a 135/4.0 Tele-Elmar. Through about 15 rolls of film, I had a great time, and captured wonderful images. While we were crawling around some rock ledges, the ranger remarked how well I was able to take care of my "antique camera"
135s Rock
I really must defend the noble 135. Back in October, I spent a few days on safari in South Africa with my M6TTL and a 135/4.0 Tele-Elmar. Through about 15 rolls of film, I had a great time, and captured wonderful images. While we were crawling around some rock ledges, the ranger remarked how well I was able to take care of my "antique camera"
Attachments
dacaccia
M246&X100V&GFX 50R
always 50mm (or aequivalent 35/40mm on RD-1, 28/35 on 40D).
I also much like 75mm (or the 60mm on Leica-R).
Cheers,
dacaccia
I also much like 75mm (or the 60mm on Leica-R).
Cheers,
dacaccia
Spider67
Well-known
I chose the 135 not out of an aversion. It's a lens I rarely use. But it has it's merits on an RF when taking shots of concerts or stageshows and don't want to upset by having a "noisy" SLR so it's the time of the Kiev or the IIIS
Last edited:
Dogman
Veteran
I chose the 50mm even though it is actually my favorite and most used lens. The reason is because all focal lengths are valid and useful depending on subject and circumstances.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Your ballot doesn't begin low enough for me. My least-favorite focal length is 21mm... sometimes you've gotta use it, but I'm never really comfortable with it. Too much background junk, too many crazy angles.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
I love, 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, etc.. but for some reason 28mm just rubs me the wrong way. Too short to use as a wide/normal, too long to really be wide...it just hangs in the middle like it can't make up its mind.
Drives me nuts.
Drives me nuts.
narsuitus
Well-known
I have used 20, 35, 40, 45, 50, and 100 on a 35mm rangefinder body. I like them all.
I would love to have the equivalent of a 135mm for my medium format rangefinder. However, since I prefer normal and wide-angle lenses on a 35mm rangefinder, and since it was the longest focal length on the list, I voted for the 135mm.
My real least favorite 35mm rangefinder focal length lenses, however, are the telephotos with the reflex housing.
I would love to have the equivalent of a 135mm for my medium format rangefinder. However, since I prefer normal and wide-angle lenses on a 35mm rangefinder, and since it was the longest focal length on the list, I voted for the 135mm.
My real least favorite 35mm rangefinder focal length lenses, however, are the telephotos with the reflex housing.
Paul_C
Established
I chose 135 pretty much just to fit in.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'm reasonably happy from 15 up to 75mm and like the Heliar for this length ... 90 and 135 on a rangefinder really get hard to frame accurately in my opinion and although the results will be OK it's not much fun in the execution with that tiny square in the middle of the viewfinder!
holgaguy
Established
I picked the 50mm For me it's too big and too small. I like either a 28 or 35 for general landscape or view type photoghy. And for people and things I go with a 85- 135mm . Making th 50mm Ok If you can only take 1 lens. But I perfer taking 2 bodies one with the wide and one with the tele.
holgaguy
holgaguy