Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric wrote: > [snip] And the 135 2.8 is a very >nice lens. I really liked the one I used to own. But the 135 M is not as >ideal to focus with as the SLR lens. Rangefinder focusing is best from 90mm >and shorter. Even though the 135 2.8 has 1.5X goggles that make it equavilent to focusing a 110mm lens sans goggles? Don't you think you are giving up a lot by excluding the 135mm lens from your M system considering that the 135 is 2.25 times the magnification? I ask because right now I only have up to the 90 and I've come across many instances where I could use a little more power. Sometimes I just don't feel like lugging the SLR with long lenses. I was thinking of getting the 135 f/4 but your comments are making me apprehensive. Eric, aren't you the one who a while ago said "why would anyone want a 135 M lens". (the quote is paraphrased.) Art Art Searle, W2NRA, w2nra@erols.com, Lake Grove, Long Island, NY, USA 20 miles east of Nikon USA, 70 miles east of Leica USA