Vintage telephoto lens?

I grabbed a Vivitar 135 f/2.8 which has a nice feel to it (not 'telephoto' obviously) but I'd thought i'd mention it in case you would consider. If I were looking for telephoto i'd probably look at one of the vivitar series 1 versions since I like the 135.

Not sure if you're wanting 'zoom' or 'prime'.. telephoto to me insinuates 'zoom'..

Just my thoughts to share for the moment and await more input from the group..
 
135 f/2.8 used to be the std telephoto that most everyone bought after their 50 f/1.8, so there's loads of them and all but the cheapest "no-name" lenses will be pretty good to superb.

@Kastro
Telephoto is a technical term for a lens with negative rear elements so it's shorter than the focal length would imply.
 
I've had these:
Leitz (Leica) Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8 (1976)
Leitz (Leica) Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 (1967)
Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/4.0 Sonnar "zebra" (1964)
Carl Zeiss Jena 180mm f/2.8 Sonnar "zebra" (1970)
Carl Zeiss Jena 300mm f/4.0 Sonnar (1974)

tests, as usual, here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsv.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html

I must say I've not been blown away by many of those lenses

the best one among them is the leitz 180mm f/2.8: it has sharpness issues (and not just in the corners), but they're resolution issues, acutance is great, so it is soft for stills but good for video; yes, I've said that; I always say sharpness matters for video too, but it's a different kind of sharpness; most soft lenses lack on both sides, this one is lacking only on resolution; not ideal, in any case
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2009/06/have-you-seen-my-acutance

I think my sonnar 180 probably was a bad copy, as bokeh was not nearly as nice as it was supposed to be; I didn't give that design a second chance
the sonnar 135 is sharp and has great bokeh, but it's f/4 only, so and I'm actually selling it since I bought the leitz 135: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?266253-declicked-vintage-lenses-(Zeiss-Jena-50mm-and-135mm-for-M42)
the leitz 135 is softer than the sonnar, and bokeh is the worst among my Leitz lenses, but it's faster than the sonnar

one thing to keep in mind with all these lenses: except for the sonnar 135, they are huge and heavy, and focusing is not nearly as easy as you'd think it should be (the ring is huge and has more resistance than on smaller lenses)

if you're using full frame and don't mind a lens that will only work with Canon, consider the 70-200 f/4 IS too (I know: it's more expensive, and too slow for APS-C)
 
If f3.5 is okay, a 70-210/3.5 from Tamron or a Nikon mount Vivitar Series One 70-210/3.5 would be a good choice.
 
TON of stuff from basically every manufacturer. This was a VERY common focal length. If a hobby photographer only owned 3 lenses they were probably a 28 a 50 and a 135.

The Takumar 135 3.5 is nice. the 135 2.5 is even better.
Vivitar stuff from that era (early 70's) is generally pretty good as well. I'm sure there is also a Nikon offering as well as a ton of various off brand stuff and high end stuff.
 
I got a Nikkor 135 f2.8. It's not bad but it's not my favorite lens. The sharpness isn't quite there and I vastly prefer the Nikkor 105 f2.5.
 
One lens I do like very much is my Leitz 180 f3.4 Apo-Telyte-R. Very high quality, even wide open, it's true apo design,and although rare-ish isn't as hideously expensive as you might think, largely because it's from Leitz Canada, so doesn't attract the Leica collectors so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top