Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/12/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hans, the Leica/Leitz 135s are vastly underated. Here in Britain you can pick up an Hektor, or an Elmar if you're lucky, for 100UKP, c $165USD with good glass but maybe poor externals. There's no other Leica lens I can think of which gets sold so cheap! I gather that the 135 use to be the size which people judged a company's performance by, sounds wierd to me, but I've had one of each, kept the Elmar (F4 instead of F4.5) and even sold a Tele-Elmar having had one of those. The Tele-Elmar's size was barely any different and it was decidely heavier, and in normal use I could never see the difference on my 12x16 b/w prints. Jem K ---------- Hans wrote Thanks to both Marc and Jermy for the Kilar info. Well, I was thinking of getting a 135 mm lens for my M:s, but I guess I will go for an Elmar (or Hector), as they are fitted without reflex housings. I use the 135 very little, so an oldtimer will do fine. I was just curious to know what the Kilar was. /Hans