RE: [Leica] RE: 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M

[Buzz Hausner <Buzz@marianmanor.org>]

Sal, for whom I have enormous respect, and I agree for the most part about
the f2.8/135.  The intention of my comments were that I did not find the 2.8
as contrasty as the f4.0, that the f2.8 was a big, heavy mother, and that I
found that the eyes dimmed the viewfinder.  This is not to say that the
f2.8/135 is a bad performer, just that it has characteristics which I do not
like and that the f4.0 fits MY needs by being smaller, lighter, and to my
eye a bit more contrasty.  Also, I endorse Sal's recommendation to use any
135 with a .85 body or an M3.

	Buzz Hausner

- -----Original Message-----
From: Sal DiMarco,Jr. [mailto:sdmp007@pressroom.com]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 2:24 PM
To: LUG >for posts
Subject: [Leica] RE: 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M


Luggers,
    This owner of a 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M has to disagree with Buzz Hauser's
assessment of the lens. I have found it to be an excellent performer. I have
the second version w/ 55mm thread. The eyes hasn't gone out of alignment. I
think the metallurgy is better and construction is better on the late
version.
    On the down side is the size and weight of the lens. It is heavy and at
toward the end of the day, seems to gain weight.
    Because the eyes are not removable, it's awkward to carry in one's bag.
I use the old Leica USA #13 case, and it take up a lot of room in my bag.
But, it is still smaller than a reflex body and a 180mm lens.
    Without out a doubt, the 135mm f/3.5 Apo-Telyt-M is a better lens.
    Ideally, I would like to see Leica introduce a 180mm  f/3.5 Apo-Telyt-M.
I Have shot with a prototype of one and it is beautiful!!!!!
    Lastly, I think the very best way to get the most out of this and any
135mm rangefinder lens is to use  it was either a .85 or M3 viewfindered
camera.
Happy Snaps,
Sal