Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/07/17

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

Subject: [Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 42, Issue 191
From: douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 00:26:24 +0200
References: <mailman.1309.1247806961.92465.lug@leica-users.org> <EAF29DFC-BCB0-41D3-A87E-B6AC76BD5363@verizon.net>

Larry,

I agree about the 135/3.5 - quite a heavy brute, wonderful pictures too, 
but it does seem to me to be rather prone to flaring when shooting 
against the light. (BTW, the 85/1.9 is also a great lens, it's even 
heavier - but also tends to flare a little)

Cheers
Douglas

Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:
> I've never used the Canon 135/4 LTM lens but I own and regularly use a 
> Canon 135/3.5 LTM lens with an adapter on my M3. I think that they are 
> essentially the same lens. It takes wonderful pictures but, as several 
> have said, it is very heavy. The Canon Lens  Guide drawings show it to 
> a 4 element long focus lens, the center group being a solid glass 
> cylinder. No wonder it weighs a lot. It focuses adequately with the M3 
> but probably should be stopped down with rangefinders of  lesser 
> magnification.
>
> Larry Z
>
>> From: James Laird <digiratidoc at gmail.com>
>> Subject: [Leica] Canon 135/4 LTM
>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Message-ID:
>>     <daaeb97e0907161444r689fa9c7pc8afab17d843bda3 at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> Anyone familiar with the Canon 135/4 LTM? I've seen some at very good
>> prices. Opinions?
>>
>> Jim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at verizon.net (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 42, Issue 191)