Re: [Leica] help with M 135mm lenses

[Jay Kumarasamy <jayk@cisco.com>]

Marc,

Iam on the look out for M 135mm.  I have held and 'inspected' the Elmar 135/4.
A real smooth operator and built solid.  But I hear the Tele-Elmars are better.
They also almost cost twice as much as the Elmars.  They look shorter and
perhaps lighter. 

Which is a better lens ??.  If the cost difference is about $150, I would
go with the Tele-Elmar.  Tele-Elmars are 5 element, as opposed to 4 element
Elmar.  May be that improves performance.  But I like the feel of Elmar, and
for appearence I prefer satin chrome than black finish.

- - Jay


> 
> Good heavens.  A 135mm lens is perfectly useable on a regular M6 to the
> most of us, though a few find it a bit hard.  I regularly use one on both
> M3 and M6 and haven't a bit of a problem.
> 
> All of the M 135's are wonderful lenses save for the 2.8/135 Elmarit,
> which, in both its versions, is a trifle soft wide-open, though several of
> my published jazz photos were shot with this lens at f/2.8.  The 4/135
> Elmar is a sterling performer, the Tele-Elmar is delightful, and the
> current 3.4/135 is a stunningly wonderful lens.  For that matter, a Russian
> 4/135 Jupiter-11 (a clone of the Zeiss 4/13.5cm Sonnar) is a fine lens, and
> costs around $100, so it might be the best starting place until you've
> decided whether your style calls for this focal length.
> 
> Marc
> 
> msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
> Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!
> 
>