[Leica] Views on the Leica 135 f2.8 Elmarit M

["Anderson, Ferrel E" <AndersonF@ria.army.mil>]

I have the later 135 f2.8 Elmarit-R version that can be easily identified by the
shape of the rear element.  The earlier version has a concave surface, and the
newer version has a convex surface.  It is not easy to tell the difference since
the element is small and deeply recessed in the lens tube.  You might have to
touch it to tell the difference.  The optical formulae for the M and R 135 f2.8
lenses are the same.  The first R 135 adopted the M optics, and the later M
version adopted the new R formula.

I acquired a 135 f4 Tele Elmar lens head for use on my R bellows with the Leica
adapter.  Makes a nice longer focal length macro lens!  I also acquired the Viso
focusing tube and the Viso/Leicaflex adapter for fun.  Anyway, I have compared
the two lenses by  photographing scenics, people etc and also USBS lens test
resolution targets.   My conclusions:

	Color/brilliance:  The f2.8 wins.  This is especially visible in slides,
where the f2.8 lens displays wonderful brilliance typical
of the R lens stable.   The f4 Elmar is also excellent, but the R lens is better
for color rendition.  Brilliance at 			 f2.8 is very good, but
improves visibly at f4 to a level that remains stable through f11.  

	Contrast:  Both lenses display excellent contrast and no visible flare.

	Resolution:  The f4 Elmar wins.  The central resolution starts at 80
l/mm at f4, and remains at this superb level through f11.
At f16, like all lenses, diffraction takes its toll, and resolution is
diffraction limited - 68 l/mm at f16, and 56 l/mm at 			f22.
The lens displays some astigmatism, but performance across the field is
essentially uniform.  Exceptional 			performance for a
telephoto lens.  The f2.8 Elmarit also shows excellent resolution.  At f2.8
central resolution is 56 			l/mm, at f4 and f5.6 is 68 l/mm,
and at f8 and f11 is 80 l/mm.  Sagital resolution is uniform across the field,
but there 		is more astigmatism than in the f4 Elmar.  The Elmar is
a sharper lens.  I took a picture of a colorful balloon that
was drifting over my house with the F4 Elmar, and was amazed at the sharpness -
like the image was etched on the  		film.  On the other hand, I have
taken slides with the f2.8 Elmarit, and was also very impressed with the
sharpness.  

	Weight/handling:  The f4 Elmar wins.  Much lighter and smaller.  The
f2.8 Elmarit is HEAVY!

	Bottom line:  For color, the f2.8 Elmarit wins.  For B&W, the f4 Elmar
wins.  For available light the f2.8 Elmarit wins.  For
handling and portability, the f4 Elmar wins.  Also, if you have other M lenses
that take the E39 filter size, the 			       Elmar is a
reasonable choice.  Where do I stand:  since I very seldom use the 135, I am
considering selling 			       the f2.8 Elmarit, and keeping the
f4 Tele Elmar.

	Recommendation:  Buy the 135 mm f3.4 APO Telyt!  Optically superb, the
same weight and size as the 135 f4 Tele
Elmar, and 1/2 stop faster.   

Ferrel Anderson