I am trying out a Lietz Visoflex - although that is not written on it. It has a bellows and an Elmar 1:4/135 comes with it. on my m6

Does anyone know where I can get info about the visoflex? what about the 1:4/135?

I am planning to use it for close up interior photos and for photographing drawings.

thanks charles

-- Charles Curry-Hyde (charles@chho.com.au), February 22, 2001

Answers

This site has a great deal of Visoflex information:

http://elshaw.tripod.com/

If you have the 135 Elmar lens then just test it yourself! The lens came between the two long running lenses; the 135/4.5 Hektor and the 135/4 Tele-Elmar. It was only produced for a few years but was considered a very good lens. Beyond that I do not know as I have never tried the lens myself. I have a Hektor that I use on the Visoflex and, when stopped down, it is an excellent lens. The Tele-Elmar is simply stunning in the wide to medium apertures but not as good as the Hektor when stopped right down. I imagine the Elmar is better than the Hektor wide open and better than the Tele-Elmar stopped right down. Try it out for yourself and tell us what you find!

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), February 22, 2001.

At one time I had all of the 135's: Hektor (in LTM), Elmar, Tele- Elmar and APO-Telyt. I offered both the Tele-Elmar and Elmar for sale and it was the Elmar that garnered all the demand and which I did sell. The performance is almost equal to the Tele-Elmar (which is nearly impossible to tell from the APO-Telyt) and just slightly ahead of the Hektor. The fact is that all the Leica 135's are superb lenses, which makes it that much more of a pity that only because of the frameline size (am I the only one who thinks there isn't much of a difference between the 135 frame in the 0.72 vs 0.85?) they are not very popular. I have an accessory bright-line finder, which makes using the 135 much more pleasant.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 22, 2001.

I have the 135mm Elmar but rarely use it as all I have these days (M-cameras) is a CL and it is not a lot of use with that combination. However, I do use it as a macro lens on my R6.2 with the M to R adapter and focussing sleeve and extension tubes (Visoflex) and have also used it like this on my R for normal distances, as well as using it in the past on an M3. It is a lovely lens and a real bargain these days. Perhaps not as razor sharp as a modern Leica lens at full aperture, but perfectly fine in practical terms. Lovely bokeh and all the great characteristics of a classic 60's Leica lens. Its price differential with a Tele-Elmar always made me assume that the Tele must be much superior optically. I would not know as I have never tried the Tele-Elmar. Certainly I think it is worth hanging on to it as you will get little for it if you try and sell it and it is a great portrait lens. You need the dedicated hood of course.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 22, 2001.

are there any particular things one would do/photograph when trialling a lens? that is other than take some photos...

thanks for the advise - have a shoot tomorrow so will try the lens there.

-- Charles Curry-Hyde (charles@chho.com.au), February 23, 2001.

Here are some lens testing ideas:

1. With the camera on a tripod, shoot some architectural/structural subjects such as bridges that have lots of fine details like structural cross members, nuts and bolts, and stuff. See how much detail is revealed in the negative or transparency. Sidelighting helps to emphasize detail. A fine lens can give an apparently unsharp picture in a flat light.

2. Try a portrait with very careful focusing on the eyes. It seems to me that eyes and eyelashes give a good idea of what a lens can do in this range (also reflects focus accuracy).

3. OR: just shoot whatever you are actually going to mostly use the lens for. Possibly the best test of all.

Something not to do: probably should avoid shooting test charts taped to the wall. Real life subjects seem to give a better estimate of real life performance.

Best wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 24, 2001.