I have seen a Canon M-mount 135/3.5, in very good condition. Does anyone have any experience with this lens. How is this compare to the Leica 135/2.8 elmarit.

Thank You

-- Jeff Yiu (jeffyiu@quamnet.com), March 05, 2002

Answers

I owned two of these lenses, back when they were new, and they were both awful!

-- Wilhelm (wmitch3400@hotmail.com), March 05, 2002.

Jeff, I own this lens in a chrome version. I cannot compare it with the Leica 135/2.8 Elmarit, but find this lens very good. You can also look here "http://www.cameraquest.com/ltmlens.htm".

-- Richard (richard.srienz@swissonline.ch), March 05, 2002.

I don't know what you mean by "M mount", and you don't say if it's chrome, or the black aluminum. The late black lens is superb.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 05, 2002.

I had the late black version, but I think all the later canons are marked "canon" and not "serenar". Found it to be really sharp. Also had the 135 2.8, but could'nt stand the bulk of it, especially when used with an M grip attached-- the eyes ran afoul of the grip, so the grip had to be removed each time the lens was mounted. The Canon lens was far superior in handling, but Im pretty sure the edges were reasonably short of the Leica.

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), March 05, 2002.

Both of my lenses were "Canon" not Serenar. I don't believe that they represented bad design, there was just something wrong with them during assembly (both were brand new). So in you buy one, be sure and get return privileges just in case.

-- Wilhelm (wmitch3400@hotmail.com), March 05, 2002.