Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/03/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 03:42 PM 29/03/04 -0800, you wrote: >Will soon buy an M 135 mm and would like users' >opinions/comments/anecdotes/cautions about the 3.4 APO and old glass (such >as the 2.8). Have read Erwin Puts material, but would like some hands-on >input closer to the photo world I inhabit. Lean toward a new 3.4 simply 'cuz >I've had wretched luck over the years with anything used; must admit, >however, that I am tempted by the extra stop and significant price >differential of the old glass. Hi Greg, I can't believe it is nearly 3 years since we had coffee in Chicago and visited Central Camera. Time flies when you are having fun! About the 135 - I have an old 135 Elmar - the one with removable head - that I bought at Bill Bagnall's swap meet in LA for $200 about 15 - 20 years ago. I briefly had a 135 2.8 but hated the eyes and the lens was soft wide open. I have considered getting a 135 APO but the expense outweighs the amount of use I would give it. I suggest you go to Central Camera (say hello to Albert for me) and buy a 135 Elmar and try to determine if you really like the focal length on an M series camera. For me the viewfinder frame is too tiny and I find myself switching to SLRs above 90mm. The great thing about old Elmars is that if you decide you don't like the 135 length then you won't be out much money when you sell it. If you don't sell it the detachable head makes a great loupe for looking at negatives. (You remember negatives - the things we had before digital). :-). Cheers Howard (still in Hong Kong) Warm Regards Howard