Re: 135mm f/4.0 Tele-Elmar-M

[Tom Hodge <thodge@charweb.org>]

Michael,

Great posting and I agree 100%....although mine is a much newer model in
perfect condition and isn't "viso" convertible.  I might have preferred
the faster 2.8 version but I'm using it on a CL and that's risky at best
becaz of no frame lines are activated and the short range-finder focusing
base is "iffy" at best....and a lens with the "goggles" - like the 2.8
Elmarit-M can't be attached anyway so I was "forced" into the f/4.o
Tele-Elmar.  Oh, woe is me!  Everyone.....shed a tear!!!  :):):):)  

The lens is simply incredible.  As you point out, wide open the thing is 
spectacular - typical slight "Leica" edge softness but that's EXACTLY 
what I want a portrait to look like!

Leica-Canada, I hope you read this forum.  You made a wonderful "M"  lens! 
I've read enough critical comments (negative, unfortunately) about this
or that lens to be pretty darned skeptical.....my small "collection" of
Leica M and C optics is absolutely, positively nothing short of
spectacular.  I've got a couple of Wetzlars and a couple of Canadian made. 

The only difference I can tell.......is when I compare 'em with ANYTHING 
else.  No contest!  Not even close!

I don't bother with lens tests - I'm not optically degreed or schooled so 
like rocket science, I trust others who specialize in that field.  I 
spend time shooting things I can cherish a lifetime.  Personally, I've 
never seen a lens chart framed and hanging in anyone's home or in a gallery.

Wide open, this Tele-Elmarit-M with Lumiere 100 makes one's jaw drop with
clarity, resolution and contrast that embarrasses most other optics.  
That's all the lens testing I need!

Leica.....thank you a million times over!

Again, Michael, thanks for the great information.  Good shooting!

Regards,

Tom Hodge




On Tue, 26 Mar 1996, Michael Reichmann wrote:

> Last week, on a whim, I bought a Visoflex III for my M6.  Needing a lens to
> use with it, I did some research and shopping and ended up with a used
> Tele-Elmar 135mm f4.0 in Ex condition -- the older model with the removable
> head that fits the Viso.
> 
> Anyhow, though using the Viso is fun (more on that later), this note is to
> comment on the Tele-Elmar.  WOW!  This lens is nothing short of fantastic.
> I've now shot a couple of rolls, studied the Provia 100 slides under an 8X
> loup and printed several 11 X 14 Cibachromes.  The image quality is truely
> "Leica" and the resolution, even wide open is superb.
> 
> According to various books, this lens is, according to Leica, an APO in all
> but name.  Interestingly, the lens design hasn't changed in almost 30 years
> -- only the cosmetics have been upgraded.
> 
> I havn't had a 135 in my Leica M set because back in the late 60's when I
> used Leicas to make a living I found this focal length to the the least
> useful.  For some reason, I now find that I don't perceive the same
> limitations.  I bought the Tele-Elmar to use on the Viso, but it's now going
> to form a permanent part of my travel kit for rangefinder use.
> 
> As for the Visoflex III -- I've enjoyed it, but in reality it's of limited
> usefulness.  For anyone who hasn't used one, here's the proceedure with an M6.
> 
> 1:      Open lens to maximum aperture, focus and frame.
> 2:      Flip up mirror, lightly depress shutter, shift eye to viewfinder
> window and meter the scene,         (guessing at the area being metered
> because there are no framelines) then closing lens to 
>         shooting aperture.
> 3:      Reopen mirror, open lens to maximum, reframe shot.
> 4:      Close lens to shooting aperture.  Shoot.
> 5:      Reopen aperture, prepare for next shot.
> 
> I use my Nikon F4 system in fully manual mode for nature and landscape work,
> on a tripod 90% of the time, so I'm used to a contemplative approach -- but
> the above is quite tedious -- but nevertheless fun.  I'm going to hang onto
> the Viso, but I don't think I'll use it much. 
> 
> Michael
> 
>