135mm Elmarit - Do we like it?

<p>There's a pretty good-looking Leitz Elmarit 135mm up on eBay and I want some user opinions on it. Who can help me out? Anything special I need to know before I take the plunge? It was once owned by famous music photographer Dave Gahr who passed away last year.<br>

(Dunno why I can't link to it but that's OK)</p>

<p>Thanks!</p><div></div>

<p>The 135 Elmarit is <strong>big</strong> and <strong>heavy</strong> , focusing is a bit stiff, and the bug eyes provide a rather "squinty" view. On the other hand, optical quality is excellent, and it can produce some stunning images. Joy to use? No. Effective tool? Yes.</p>

Search it here and you'll get a lot more information. I had one like the one in the photograph, and sold it when I got a copy

of the newer version.

 

Mike is right... it's a bit heavy and hard to handle, but the results are worth the effort. See what it does: <p><center><a href=" title="Zwinger Palace Capitel by franciscosl, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3402/3327031218_c35e120d79.jpg" width="500" height="331" alt="Zwinger Palace Capitel" /></a><p><i>Dresden (Germany) capitel (Zwinger Palace) with this lens and an M6TTL</i></center>

<p>I had one for a couple of years and sold it...too clunky. The 135/f4 Tele-Elmar is more suited to my style.</p>

<p>Agree with Stephen. I prefer the Tele-Elmar as well. After the very expensive aspherical 135 it is probably the best for quality. Much easier handling than the Elmarit, although without the magnification or speed provided by the latter.</p>

<p>The one pictured is the older type and filters for it I am told are not easy to come by. It also looks beat up, which would make me worried about the state of the optics. I own the second version, bought on a whim in 1985 and used sparingly until I got my M8. It's also great on the Hexar RF and, of course the M6 TTL 0.58 and M2. It is heavy but balances well considering its weight. It is a pain with the new motor drive because you cannot take it off without removing the motor drive. But it takes great pictures. Love the monster. I'd post some shots were it not so late and way past my bedtime.</p>

<p>I've had one for a number of years. Mine is the second version with screw filters and I purchased it for my M3 kit. I have also used it on my M6 Classic and M7's, all 0.85 finders. As correctly stated for use with the motor just install on your M before loading film and remember you can't remove it until you unload the film. I use Kodachrome K64 and before that K25 so I always need the f2.8. I came from Nikon F land and do not find the lens overly large and its very managable and will bring the shots no other M lens will do. Its also sharp wide open which is where I use it.-Dick</p>

<p>You can find the first version of this beautiful and great performing Leica Elmarit M 135 f2.8 for around $250, (I did), in Mint- to E++ condition on eBay if you keep your eyes open . You won't find that kind of deal at places like KEH, anymore. I'm used to working with larger format equipment, so this relatively small lens does not bother me in the least.</p>

<p>I removed the original 14161 series VII retaining ring from my first version Leica Elmarit M 135 f2.8 and replaced it with a <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/118528-REG/General_Brand_54_55_54mm_55mm_Step_Up_Ring_Lens.html">54mm to 55mm step-up ring</a>.</p>

<p>Now I can us regular 55mm screw in filters. I also found a fake Leica clip on 55mm lens cap (see photo) which are sold on eBay, for a for $11, including shipping.</p><div></div>

<p>Hi,<br>

As others have said, an excellent lens, but a beast to work with. I sold mine. I reasoned that using my 90 and cropping would probably get almost as good results with less camera shake.</p>

<p>I have the newer version too - focus ring is a bit stiff and even with the goggles I have trouble focusing precisely. Even on the larger M5 this isn't really a joy to use.</p>

<p>Peoples feelings and opinions change over the years, I guess. </p>

<p>I remember at Brooks Institute back in 1968, the Leica Elmarit-M 135mm f2.8 was the Leica lens that many students ogled over and dreamed about getting. But at $300 dollars, it was about $100 more than a the 135mm Tele-Elmar f4 at the time. </p>

<p>I certainly couldn't afford either one of those lenses as a student.</p>

<p>I suppose I could be influenced by past enthusiasm, but I still think it's a fine lens. If you had trouble focusing Dieter, the spectacles are probably out of alignment.</p>

<p>User experience is subjective no?</p>

<p>Sorry to Dave Garr, but I'd pass on that one if I were going to buy one.</p>

<p>I asked the same question some time ago, then posted a follow on thread with some pics.</p>

<p>It performs much better on a tripod, obviously, but with faster film it's very handleable. OOF areas are nice, I'll post another example from the other thread, plus the links.</p>

<p>If you want a medium fast medium telephoto it's your only choice. Next to an older Elmar it's big, ths gogs are an advantage in optics if a penalty in weight, it's built like a tank.</p>

<p>Hell yea man I like it, it does what it was designed for pretty well since you asked, and you can really do cool things with the lens in 35mm on a MP.</p><div></div>

<p>You can see the Elmar in the back, it's a pretty cool lens. That one is spotless, incredible. I don't need it. The only thing better then cameras is taking photographs.</p><div></div>

<p>http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00P75g</p>

<p>This is a thread about K64, but has same 135 photos, more of the above and some others.</p>

 

<p>Expect the lens for sale to have some rf alignment issues on your camera. Most of these lenses will need some tweeking of the goggle lenses, something easy to do if you're handy but most people send them out to a good tech like Sherry Krauter which will cost about $75. I wouldn't pay more than $225 with this in mind. </p>

<p>Yes, this lens is big, clunky, but I love the files produced by it on the M8. </p><div></div>