Hektor 135 mm

<p>Hi<br>

I've recently acquired a hektor 135 f4 LTM, at a very good price (yes, I know, but it was a good price for what is a very plain performer). The only problem is that when it mounts, the tripod socket is not parallel to the camera base, but is about 10 - 12 degrees at an angle. Not a real drama, as I don't use very slow film. But is there a fix? It may have been poorly serviced at some time in its life, but it does generally look in very good condition, with no damage to screws, etc. Thanks for any advice.<br>

Apiarist1 (Arthur)</p>

<p>Hello Arthur,<br>

I have an Elmar 135 f/4 which came after your Hektor, which also left the camera at an angle when tripod mounted. I sent it off to Don Goldberg, and as part of his overhaul, he straightened it out for me. Depending on the degree of wear on the lens mount threads, each camera may come to rest at a different degree from square. If you contact Don, it may be wise to send the camera that you intend to use with this lens to him. </p>

<p>All my 135mm f4.5 Hektor , tripod screw parallel to camera base.<br>

It may have been (in) correctly serviced and re-assembled.<br>

I bought my last one for less than $60, including cap and bayonet cap.<br>

Lens is not marked or scratched.<br>

It is a miserable lens..<br>

Occasionally I get a good sharp image..<br>

That has been my experience with other Hektors.<br>

Are your photos acceptable?<br>

If they are, leave alone.<br>

My 135mm f4 Tele Elmar is in another dimension.</p>

<p>This is not an easy lens to use at close to medium distances. It is not sharp until stopped down into the f 8-11 range and you'll need a lens hood and 135 bright line viewfinder with parallax correction. Furthermore with the 135 focal length it has a depth of field that becomes very shallow with closer objects. The above factors are further aggravated by camera/lens rangefinder inaccuracies that don't match up the focused image and depth of field with the subject you thought was properly in focus per the camera won't be and the out of focus will be noticeable. Hand held, you'll need a shutter speed of at least 1/125 and higher to limit blurring due to camera motion and unsteady hands. So you now have an old long focus lens that restricts you to bright days, higher speed film, high shutter speeds stopping down and perhaps the use of a tripod for vintage sharpness images. Robert Lai's advice is sound, match the lens mount to the camera body to at least gain focus accuracy. But don't give up, see below. <br>

If you are really determined to get good results from your f4.5 Hektor 135 LTM, I've had acceptable results by using the Hektor lens head on a Visoflex reflex housing mounted on a tripod and using a cable release. It's a clunky set up but it works well for shooting stationary, brightly lit objects like flowers. For general 135 shots, l I switched to a Leicaflex with an f2.8 Elmarit-R 135. </p>

<p>I used one Hektor on a Visoflex 11 and 111.<br>

It still was lousy.<br>

Taking a inexpensive 135mm Enlarger lens Vivitar?,<br>

I saw really great performance, esp. of flowers and general views.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Why do you keep buying them Jason? Why why why:-)</p>

 

<p>Thinking more about the Hektor 4.5 135, I have two of them; one in "user" condition manufactured in 1952 and the second in very good condition dating from 1958. Both are LTM lenses. The earlier lens was in fact matched to both IIIf and IIIg bodies while the second had the lens head frequently used on a Visoflex I with a bellows. So any comparison between the two lenses is subjective. Images taken during the 1950's using lens #1 on the matched IIIf and later IIIg were good enough for publication in Road & Track magazine. Slides taken in the 1960's with a IIIg mounted Visoflex and lens head #2 were good enough to win American Rose Society photo competition prizes. But the images do not hold up when compared to current Leitz 135 lens results. Its like comparing a 1958 Mercedes Benz to a current Benz. If you like vintage images, the lens works. You cannot expect tack sharp images using 50-60 year old lenses that were designed without computers 70-80 years ago with mount compromises for both camera and Visoflex use. I've read comments that National Geographic photo editors accepted the lens images with Kodachrome as there is no color shift. Have your lens and mount CLA'd and matched to a good LTM body and you may be happier with the results.</p>

<p>I think you are right, Christopher. My experience, at least with coated Hektors, is that they are sharper than they look. An unpromising photo with a car in the distance, but I can read the number plate. They had quite a good reputation for close ups, I guess with visoflex, but those were the days when most photos for enlargement were taken at f8 or smaller, and for close ups, f11-22 maybe.<br>

I haven't really tried to pump the best out of Hektor digital images with Photoshop; I have a Tele Elmar, my Photoshop skills are pretty poor, and life's too short.<br>

I can't resist buying them, however I see one that's pretty and cheap.</p>

 

<p>I bought the 1st one in the late 60's as I needed a longer lens.<br>

Sold it quite soon.<br>

Next one came with other pieces worth keeping.<br>

The last one, because it came with lens cap and back mount cap!<br>

The cap and back cap worth the price!</p>

 

<p>The coated versions often turn up in good condition. It doesn't seem that there was any optical formula tweaking between 1933 and 1960 other than production improvements and coating.<br>

One can airily say, "yes I have 20 Leica lenses", expect to collect suitable admiration, but neglect to mention that 19 are 135 Hektors. This will now only work with around .01% of the population, few of them girls. For this purpose, it's better to get a puppy.</p>

<p>I am in the process of getting a 135 Hektor f4 from 1938, at quite a low price, so will have to see if it is possible to use well with my recently acquired iiif. All the comments here are helpful. Thanks to all.</p>

<p>Hi Geoff,<br>

Just to clarify, the 135 Hektor is f4.5. Hope it is optically clear. The pre-war Hektors can have element separation and pitting of internal lens surfaces, along with the excessively casual cleaning marks on external surfaces. At the same time, many are in good condition, so good luck. It will most likely be uncoated, unless coated in the post war period. You can't really lose if the price is good.</p>