Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/02/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John Collier wrote: > > Beats me. Ask Mark Rabiner about it as he uses one. > > Mark, how do you like your 135/3.4? > I come from using Nikons and the 70's 80's and 90's. After getting sick of the 70-200 zooms i found myself switching between the 85, 105 and 135 lenses. Some where big money (for Nikon lenses like the 105 macro but others I'd get for less than a hundred bucks at swap meets. I also come from and still use Hasselblads. I used to use a 150 C lens for 20 years but have just replaced that with a 120 macro Sonnar and 180 Sonnar. The 120 macro Sonnar compares to the 85mm Nikkor now for me I use both the 90 apo Asph Summicron or Elmarit - a real friendly focal length but less great for tight heads and way out there on road trips and when you just really need some real reach. Then you need the 180 Sonnar for the Hasselblad or the 135 apo 3.4 on the Leica M. That 135 apo 3.4 is a real thrill to use; first the negs then contact sheets both looking like what you saw in your viewfinder: Small but clear. But then the revelation when you blow the puppies up and they are the clearest shots you've ever seen. As much as i love getting a cheap used AI Nikon glass for 99 dollars which have very usable results I love more of course getting the sublime results from my 135 3.4 apo. Now that I am able to swing it. It used to be the Leica system could go from the 21 Super-Angulon to the 90 Elmar or Tele whatever. The 135's were not worth the weight or were worth bringing home to show mom. Now with this 3.4 apo: AND the option of the 1.25 screw on thing for the rangefinder which i have. AND the option of an .85 body which i don't yet have... 135 is a very Leica-M-like focal length. Exquisite results you'd expect from Leica M glass. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html