Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In reference to the original mailing stating a preference for a Hasselblad with 250mm to the 135/2.8 on an M, I'd like to offer the following experiences: * I think you might be right on the issue of weight. The 135/2.8 & M seem pretty massive (dense?) compared to my 250/5.6, 503cx, A12, and PME51. Still, the maximum aperture of the 135 is two stops faster (unless you've got the 250/4), the M doesn't have the 6x6 mirror and other mechanicals flailing about, doesn't black out the viewfinder (until film advancement with the 6x6), and is somewhat quieter. The mass might be a factor in helping reduce some shake. I have difficulty holding the 6x6 in less than favorable lighting conditions which for me negates any advantage of using the medium format. * Size - obviously. The 135/2.8 & M are more portable in the luggage I happen to have with me on any given day. So, I guess I'd still recommend trying the 135/2.8. Admittedly it's a less than ideal solution but might have other redeeming benefits if it can be made to work for you. - Kevin kburke@iterated.com