[Leica] Identifying 6.8 Telyts

[Doug Herr <71247.3542@compuserve.com>]

On Fri, 5 Jun 1998, Paul Franz wrote:

>I am a relatively recent Leica R user and I found the attached post of
>interest.  I am also interested in the older Leica lens models such as t=
he
>6.8 Telyts.  Is their any information available from the LUG on the Tely=
t
>lenses or the Novoflex quick focus lenses?


What kind of information are you looking for?  The similarities between t=
he
6.8 Telyts and the Novoflex lenses are obvious (non-traditional focussing=

mechanism, optimized for hand-held use) but the differences are many; som=
e
differences are clear but others are subtle.  FWIW, I've use both Novofle=
x
and 6.8 Telyts for photographing wildlife and I prefer the Telyts.  The
Novoflex lenses have some advantages but for me those advantages are
outweighed by the Telyts' advantages.


I spent much of today using the Telyts in the Sierra Valley, north of Lak=
e
Tahoe.  There's a marsh in the valley fed in part by a hot spring, in par=
t
by snowmelt from the nearby Sierra.  The marsh is a magnet for a wide
variety of bird life.  Ducks and Ibis flying past; coot, grebe, heron and=

rail in the marsh waters, plus marsh wren, 3 species of blackbird, 3 of
swallow, cranes, pelicans, owls, hawks and shorebirds made quite a
spectacle.

In this day working with the Telyts on several camera bodies, an analogy
became clear to me:

If black-and-white photography to you means photographs without color, th=
en
the Telyts work on any R-body.  I have the proof: I can make pictures wit=
h
the Telyts and an R-body.

If black-and-white photography to you means photographs vibrant with
character and soul, then the Telyts only work on the Leicaflex SL or SL2.=
 =

(disclaimer: I haven't used the R8).  The photographs I've made with the
Telyts and SL are the ones I like.

Since the 400 6.8 was designed for the Leicaflex SL my observation is
really a no-brainer, but three design factors stand out:

1) the viewfinder.  The SL's viewfinder is superb.  Focussing is quick an=
d
positive even with flying birds.  I have no desire for AF.

2) the SL is big enough that I can comfortably keep my hand on the camera=

instead of using the release in the shoulder stock's handgrip.  All
controls are at my fingertips so I don't need a winder or exposure
automation.

3) the SL's continously-variable shutter.  I leave the aperture at 6.8 so=
 I
can use the fastest possible shutter speed.  The continuously-variable
shutter means there are no compromises with accurate exposure.

In the photographs, the ones made with the SL are more dynamic.  The R-bo=
dy
photographs require a bit more time for finding correct focus, and possib=
ly
switching metering modes.  The dynamic images slip away while I'm fussing=

with the equipment.  Long live the SL!

In case anyone cares, the SL does not have a red dot, I never use a UV
filter, and Kodachrome and Scotch don't mix.

Doug Herr