Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alex Brattell wrote: > > There's never any mention of the 135mm 2.8 goggled lens for the M. > I'd consider one for the occassional portrait or stage photography (can't > quite reach over the orchestra pit with the 90mm). Wouldn't be able to > justify a new 3.4 apo as 135mm is not a favourite focal length for me. > Is this lens unpopular due to its size, or performance or both? > > Thanks > Alex > > ____________________________________________ > > alex@zetetic.co.uk > http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~abrattell/ > > ___________________________________________ On the front porch of the "Goose" in Portland Oregon this weekend Lugnut Michael Leitheiser went off to the other side of the deck and grabbed a shot of Lugnut David Medley and myself going over his slide pages of sharp saturated wellseen Leica M Fujichromes. He used his 135 2.8! This lens transforms your Leica into a heavier and more solid beast, well balanced. I did get the 3.4 APO the however and I feel this lens on the long run will turn a less popular focal length for Leica M users into a much more popular one. My negs I shoot with it glow as do the prints. Perhaps someday I will show them to you or you will see someone elses and you will be impressed. Mark Rabiner