Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There is nothing wrong with using a 135 on the rangefinder. Sure the frame is a bit small, but composition is equally helped by the ability to survey the surrounding scene --- I think this is an advantage often somewhat overlooked in the use of Rangefinder cameras. I bought an f4 tele-elmar at a very "compeditive" price, and the results are excellent. I would like the newer lens, but here logic kicks in --- I don't use 135 on the M all that much, but its there and now that I've paid for it, it can go whereever I go ;-) goldframe1@yahoo.com writes: > I keep thinking about getting this length - if I'm only carrying the M and I > want to reach out it would be useful. I'm not planning on really using my > Nikon stuff any more so the M will be the only tool. I have been told > "you'll never use" - I recognize its not the M's strong point and the > view-frame is small but I'd like to hear from you folks who have used the > 135mm length with the M. > > If I don't get the 135mm I'm thinking about the 75mm Summalux-M after > reading about it here the last 2 weeks but I'm not sure how much I'd really > use it. I have the 90mm f2 and the 2.8 and do use them regularly. When I'm > trying to get shots of my daughter I often wish I had more than the 90. > > Thanks - gold >