Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I wish to demur from the many comments lauding the 1:2.8/135mm. Let me say at the outset that I find our correspondent's opera photographs to be quite good, exceptionally good for the genre. However, I have found the subject lens troublesome. The unit I owned and used was heavy and did not balance well on an M6. I for one found the eyes made focus difficult and that they diminished the brightness and the sharpness of the finder more than I think acceptable. My biggest problem with the lens was that it seemed to exhibit low contrast at all stops and was not nearly as sharp as any of the later versions of the 135 (for many years I have used and loved a late Wetzlar Tele-Elmar f4.0 version, SN#3415735). The old f2.8 may actually be better for theatrical lighting than general photography because production lighting and makeup tend to be contrasty. The 2.8 is indeed a bargain when compared to the present f3.4, but neither is as good a deal as late model f4.0s which seem to be the cheapest bayonet lenses on the market. This is especially true if one is shopping for general photography and not work as specialized as theatrical photography Buzz Hausner - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html