conradyiu
closer
I heard about that the most tele lens for RF is 135mm, is this right? If so, why?
Sorry for not having search over the web and ask this question here.
Sorry for not having search over the web and ask this question here.
Spyderman
Well-known
Who says that ? 
AFAIK there used to be even 200mm RF lenses...
but generally the RF isn't capable of focussing long lenses, because long lenses have shallow DOF and need precise focussing. SLRs are generally better at this.
AFAIK there used to be even 200mm RF lenses...but generally the RF isn't capable of focussing long lenses, because long lenses have shallow DOF and need precise focussing. SLRs are generally better at this.
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
Parallax is a bit of a problem also. The more narrow field of view gets, the harder it gets to sync up the rangefinder view with the lens view.
bmattock
Veteran
conradyiu said:
There is no technical reason that you can't put a lens of any focal length on a rangefinder camera. However, at a certain point, it stops being a good idea to do so.
Three reasons that I can think of.
1) With non-magnifying viewfinders, a longer lens displays a smaller viewfinder image than a wider lens. In other words, you see the same view in the viewfinder regardless of lens, but the framing / composition marks represent a smaller and smaller rectangle for each longer focal length. At 135mm, the image rectangle you're supposed to frame and compose with is very small indeed.
With an SLR, since you are looking through the lens itself, you see what it sees - your viewfinder image is constant relative to the lens you have mounted.
2) A rangefinder camera focuses based upon the baseline distance between the viewfinder window and the ranging window - that little small opening on the right of the camera's faceplace. The more distance there is between the two of them, the more potentially accurate the focus can be. However, as a lens focal length becomes longer, it becomes harder to arrive at an accurate mechanically-precise focus solution.
3) At a certain point, a long lens on a rangefinder defeats the main purpose of what a rangefinder camera is best at, which is close-in photography, low-light, and fast action.
But it can be done, if one really wants to do it. In the early days of 35mm photography, Leica and other companies made a vast array of accessories to allow very long lenses to be used (with additional SLR-like devices called the "Visoflex" amont others) as well as macro photography. It's not that rangefinders can't do these things, it is just that it is not their best use.
You can pull tree stumps out of the ground with a Volkswagon Beetle if you must. But a tractor might be a better choice. Right tool for the right job and all that.
dll927
Well-known
But the Visoflex essentially turned an RF camera into an SLR, and the purpose was usually for closeup and macro (scientific) work. Some of the lenses made for Visoflex use were telephotos, or at least long focus, but it was a rather jerry-built system.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The longest lens from a major manufacturer of which I am aware was the 180/2.8 Olympic Sonnar for the 1936 Olympics, subsequently reissued in a short mount for a reflex housing because even a Contax RF base ain't big enough to focus a 180/2.8 quickly and reliably.
And if Zeiss couldn't do it in the late 30s, with (relatively) very cheap skilled labour, it surely isn't going to happen now.
Cheers,
R.
And if Zeiss couldn't do it in the late 30s, with (relatively) very cheap skilled labour, it surely isn't going to happen now.
Cheers,
R.
BillP
Rangefinder General
dll927 said:
"Jerry-built"...?? Either you have never used one, or you are using this term in the wrong way.
"Built unsubstantially of bad materials; built to sell but not last." (OED)
Regards,
Bill
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Bill,BillP said:
Perh. from confusion w. jury-rigged?
Cheers,
R.
furcafe
Veteran
Even before they introduced the Olympic Sonnar, Zeiss offered a 180/6.3 Tele-Tessar for the Contax, but it was never a big seller. With such a small maximum aperture, focusing probably wasn't so much of a problem as the framing & parallax issues mentioned by crawdiddy & bmattock.
Roger Hicks said:
BillP
Rangefinder General
Roger Hicks said:
Maybe so, but I would still take exception with that - there is nothing impermanent or expedient about a Visoflex
Regards,
Bill
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Thanks. I'd completely forgotten than one.furcafe said:
Not sure about the parallax, though. I had an extension tube and frame finder for using the 200 Telyt, SCALE FOCUSED! Probably OK with near-infinity shots or for use with a Focoslide for focusing on e.g. a bird's nest from a fixed hide.
Cheers,
Roger
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Bill,BillP said:Maybe so, but I would still take exception with that - there is nothing impermanent or expedient about a Visoflex
Regards,
Bill
I'd agree -- I have and use a Viso -- but I was thinking more in the sense of improvising by using what it at hand, even though it was not designed for the purpose, nor the best way of doing it. That's not the Viso: it's the camera body...
Cheers,
R.
mikeh
-
There is a Komura doubler that increases a 135 Elmar to 270mm....it does work with a stop or two exposure loss.
It has an accessory VF for focus and framing, and is supposedly parallax corrected (you set your lens length on the VF) but I do recall parallax problems; I had some cropping to do. The shots were pretty decent......but not as sharp as with a Viso and 280mm Telyt.
You still see them around on epay, a lot cheaper than a Viso and Telyt set-up and fun to play with.
But you're not going to turn your 50mm Noctilux into a 100mm Noctilux F1.0....
It has an accessory VF for focus and framing, and is supposedly parallax corrected (you set your lens length on the VF) but I do recall parallax problems; I had some cropping to do. The shots were pretty decent......but not as sharp as with a Viso and 280mm Telyt.
You still see them around on epay, a lot cheaper than a Viso and Telyt set-up and fun to play with.
But you're not going to turn your 50mm Noctilux into a 100mm Noctilux F1.0....
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Again, thanks for the reminder. I've heard of these but never seen one, and I'd quite forgotten that it was Komura.mikeh said:
Cheers,
R.
BillP
Rangefinder General
Roger Hicks said:
Roger, I can certainly agree with that. I had a Viso III for a time, and used it with my M7. It was certainly functional and practical, but the photographic equivalent of strapping an outboard to a rowing boat when you have a purpose-built motorboat at your disposal...
Regards,
Bill
bmattock
Veteran
Roger Hicks said:
I have seen the doubler on eBay several times over the years. Often it has gone cheap as no one knew what it was. It was sold by itself or with a Komura 200mm LTM lens of no particular repute. I have not tried either myself, and so cannot comment based on personal experience.
However, I do have a Komura 135mm f/2.8 in LTM, which is passable, if not particularly well-made.
I have the Komura 200mm F4.5. Found it at a Photorama show for $50. Had to get it for the novelty. It's minimum focus is 20ft. With the Canon VI-T magnifying finder, focus is accurate. I use the RF spot for framing, not bad. Performance is about the same as a Nikkor-Q 20cm F4 for the Nikon F, about the same vintage.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I've seen a couple of 200mm LTM lenses out on EvilBay from time to time, never got one. I rather liked the 135/2.8 Komura, while not a Nikkor or Leica, she was fine for the price.
B2 (;->
B2 (;->
gordonb
Pierre get my snorkle
Canon made 200mm through 1000mm lenses for the S-Mount including an 800mm Serenar back in 1953 - See Page 9 - only $796Roger Hicks said:
Last edited:
Most of the major RF lines had "Visoflex" type devices to turn their cameras into SLR's. These often requires the use of a double cable release to actuate the aperture and fire the camera.
The Longest focal length lenses that could be used directly on the camera and couple with the RF cuts down the practical limit. The longest lens that I use on the RF's is 135.
The Longest focal length lenses that could be used directly on the camera and couple with the RF cuts down the practical limit. The longest lens that I use on the RF's is 135.