Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: 135mm f3.4 APO-TELYT-M
From: firkin@netconnect.com.au
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:10:56 GMT
References: <LPBBKHLDJBDAHMFCOIEEGEGNCIAA.goldframe1@yahoo.com>

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
> 

In reply to: Message from goldframe1@yahoo.com ([Leica] 135mm f3.4 APO-TELYT-M)