Archive 2017 · Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
p.26 #1Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
PEKA62 wrote:
I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?Hi Peka,
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.htmlI finally have a perfect copy of a like new lens. It was not easy though, and took some time:
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just...Show more →
I am afraid to ask how much it cost to purchase 2 lenses and the labor cost to cannibalize both lenses to prepare one like new perfectly centered sharp copy.
Rich
Edited on Jul 16, 2021 at 06:22 PM · View previous versions
Fred Miranda wrote
PEKA62 wrote
Congrats, Fred.I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.html
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just...Show more →
I am afraid to ask how much it cost to purchase 2 lenses and the labor cost to cannibalize both lenses to prepare one like new perfectly centered sharp copy.
Rich
Edited on Jul 16, 2021 at 06:22 PM · View previous versions
Jul 16, 2021 at 03:25 PM
p.26 #2Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Congrats!! It’s worth it IMO.
PEKA62 wrote:
I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?Hi Peka,
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.htmlI finally have a perfect copy of a like new lens. It was not easy though, and took some time:
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just...Show more →
PEKA62 wrote:
Fred Miranda wrote
PEKA62 wrote
Congrats, Fred.I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.html
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just...Show more →
Jul 16, 2021 at 03:43 PM
p.26 #3Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
naturephoto1 wrote:
I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?Hi Peka,
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.htmlI finally have a perfect copy of a like new lens. It was not easy though, and took some time:
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just for spare parts'. The rear element was completely missing in this one, but the rest really was like new. So my lab combined the two defective ones and TATAAA:
Here it is:
https://kappel.com/fotos/IMG_1489.jpg
It is perfectly sharp corner to corner from wide open at every focal length and perfectly centered.
Best @ F/5.6, after that diffraction begins.
This is a shot out of my window wide open @100mm, handheld. A7R4
https://kappel.com/fotos/_DSC1125.jpg
BTW, the white dot on top of the power pole under the crane is a stork :-)
I am afraid to ask how much it cost to purchase 2 lenses and to then the labor cost to cannibalize both lenses to prepare one like new perfectly centered sharp copy.
Rich
Don't tell my wife, I paid around 900.- EUR all together. The second lens was not that expensive..
Of course it's a good question if it's worth it.
I'm looking at it more from a collector's point of view than from a professional photographer's (which I'm not).
I believe I could sell this lens for the price I payed, if I wanted.
But I just don't care...
PEKA62 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
PEKA62 wrote
Congrats, Fred.I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.html
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just for spare parts'. The rear element was completely missing in this one, but the rest really was like new. So my lab combined the two defective ones and TATAAA:
Here it is:
https://kappel.com/fotos/IMG_1489.jpg
It is perfectly sharp corner to corner from wide open at every focal length and perfectly centered.
Best @ F/5.6, after that diffraction begins.
This is a shot out of my window wide open @100mm, handheld. A7R4
https://kappel.com/fotos/_DSC1125.jpg
BTW, the white dot on top of the power pole under the crane is a stork :-)
Rich
Don't tell my wife, I paid around 900.- EUR all together. The second lens was not that expensive..
Of course it's a good question if it's worth it.
I'm looking at it more from a collector's point of view than from a professional photographer's (which I'm not).
I believe I could sell this lens for the price I payed, if I wanted.
But I just don't care...
Jul 16, 2021 at 04:36 PM
p.26 #4Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
PEKA62 wrote:
I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?Hi Peka,
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.htmlI finally have a perfect copy of a like new lens. It was not easy though, and took some time:
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just for spare parts'. The rear element was completely missing in this one, but the rest really was like new. So my lab combined the two defective ones and TATAAA:
Here it is:
https://kappel.com/fotos/IMG_1489.jpg
It is perfectly sharp corner to corner from wide open at every focal length and perfectly centered.
Best @ F/5.6, after that diffraction begins.
This is a shot out of my window wide open @100mm, handheld. A7R4
https://kappel.com/fotos/_DSC1125.jpg
BTW, the white dot on top of the power pole under the crane is a stork :-)
I am afraid to ask how much it cost to purchase 2 lenses and to then the labor cost to cannibalize both lenses to prepare one like new perfectly centered sharp copy.
RichDon't tell my wife, I paid around 900.- EUR all together. The second lens was not that expensive..
Of course it's a good question if it's worth it.
I'm looking at it more from a collector's point of view than from a professional photographer's (which I'm not).
I believe I could sell this lens for the price I payed, if I wanted.
But I just don't care...
Good show! The classic sports car of zoom lenses! Congrats! 😊😊
naturephoto1 wrote
PEKA62 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
PEKA62 wrote
Congrats, Fred.I also bought one on Ebay Japan recently as well, waiting for delivery.
I hope it is as mint as the seller is promising.
This is my 3rd copy I'm re-buying after selling 2 good ones I already had...
Obviously this lens causes some special variant of GAS, where no vaccine can help ...
*Edit*:
Where do I find this Leitax-Adapter?
Good luck getting a great copy!
BTW, I bought the Leitax directly from the source. It's easy to install and the combination very solid:
http://www.leitax.com/Contax-lenses-for-SonyE-cameras.html
I bought one in Japan 2 months ago that was advertised as 'near mint' and 'just cla'd'. When it arrived it was a pure disaster. Lot of dirt inside, lot of fungus on the central lens element, but it had a perfectly clear rear element, no haze, like new.
My local camera repair lab could not clean the lens, it was not possible to completely disassemble it and access the central lens element...
I found another copy, that was advertised as 'defective', 'just for spare parts'. The rear element was completely missing in this one, but the rest really was like new. So my lab combined the two defective ones and TATAAA:
Here it is:
https://kappel.com/fotos/IMG_1489.jpg
It is perfectly sharp corner to corner from wide open at every focal length and perfectly centered.
Best @ F/5.6, after that diffraction begins.
This is a shot out of my window wide open @100mm, handheld. A7R4
https://kappel.com/fotos/_DSC1125.jpg
BTW, the white dot on top of the power pole under the crane is a stork :-)
Rich
Of course it's a good question if it's worth it.
I'm looking at it more from a collector's point of view than from a professional photographer's (which I'm not).
I believe I could sell this lens for the price I payed, if I wanted.
But I just don't care...
Good show! The classic sports car of zoom lenses! Congrats! 😊😊
Jul 16, 2021 at 06:20 PM
p.26 #6Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
A couple from this past week rolling around down in the blue ridge mountains, A7iii+100-300
 |
||
| https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51661180632_5e5b72d83e_h.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51662213283_1d2ead0505_h.jpg | ||
|
Nov 07, 2021 at 01:01 PM
p.26 #7Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Clever Juniper Titmouse.
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-G9cGkFS/0/b77f8239/O/F%20_DSC1981%20Clever%20Juniper%20Titmouse_Export.jpg
GIF clip
https://www.smugmug.com/app/organize/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-5NpT433
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-J2GvtDG/0/2ff7ed44/O/F%20_DSC2097%20Clever%20Juniper%20Titmouse_Export.jpg
The Reward
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-2wMv49j/0/d564fb17/O/F%20_DSC2099%20Juniper%20Titmouse%20Reward_Export.jpg
GIF clip
https://www.smugmug.com/app/organize/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-VLqvcfK
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-3KC2FHW/0/0a73d13c/O/F%20_DSC2142%20Juniper%20Titmouse%20extra_Export.jpg
Sony ILCE-1 + FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS @ 400.0 mm.
K-H.
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-G9cGkFS/0/b77f8239/O/F%20_DSC1981%20Clever%20Juniper%20Titmouse_Export.jpg
GIF clip
https://www.smugmug.com/app/organize/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-5NpT433
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-J2GvtDG/0/2ff7ed44/O/F%20_DSC2097%20Clever%20Juniper%20Titmouse_Export.jpg
The Reward
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-2wMv49j/0/d564fb17/O/F%20_DSC2099%20Juniper%20Titmouse%20Reward_Export.jpg
GIF clip
https://www.smugmug.com/app/organize/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-VLqvcfK
https://photos.smugmug.com/2021-11-05-A1100-40045-56-GM-OSS-IMBY-Song-Birds/i-3KC2FHW/0/0a73d13c/O/F%20_DSC2142%20Juniper%20Titmouse%20extra_Export.jpg
Sony ILCE-1 + FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS @ 400.0 mm.
K-H.
Nov 07, 2021 at 07:29 PM
p.26 #8Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.
Mar 07, 2022 at 02:28 AM
p.26 #9Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...
Fred Miranda wrote:
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.
Mar 07, 2022 at 03:04 PM
p.26 #10Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
hanay78 wrote:
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...
I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...
Fred Miranda wrote
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Mar 07, 2022 at 03:25 PM
p.26 #11Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Have the 11861 and the 11851 some difference in the optics? some update in the coatings?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Fred Miranda wrote:
hanay78 wrote
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...Fred Miranda wrote
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Mar 08, 2022 at 03:19 AM
p.26 #12Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
hanay78 wrote:
Have the 11861 and the 11851 some difference in the optics? some update in the coatings?
I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Basically there is version I (11851) and version II (11861). Both designed by Mandler with the same optical design. The latter is about 40 grams heavier but it has a built-in hood (It's more rare and expensive). This was one of the most successful telephoto lenses and had a run of 35 years before being replaced by the 135/3.4 APO which is still in production and only marginally better in terms of resolution and contrast. (Not in rendering in my option).
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling mine but I'm even happier with version II just for the haptics.
Have the 11861 and the 11851 some difference in the optics? some update in the coatings?
Fred Miranda wrote
hanay78 wrote
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...Fred Miranda wrote
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Basically there is version I (11851) and version II (11861). Both designed by Mandler with the same optical design. The latter is about 40 grams heavier but it has a built-in hood (It's more rare and expensive). This was one of the most successful telephoto lenses and had a run of 35 years before being replaced by the 135/3.4 APO which is still in production and only marginally better in terms of resolution and contrast. (Not in rendering in my option).
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling mine but I'm even happier with version II just for the haptics.
Mar 08, 2022 at 09:28 AM
p.26 #13Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Here is a great article on this:
https://casualphotophile.com/2020/10/12/leitz-tele-elmar-135mm-f-4-review/
https://casualphotophile.com/2020/10/12/leitz-tele-elmar-135mm-f-4-review/
Mar 08, 2022 at 10:07 AM
p.26 #14Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is a great article on this:
https://casualphotophile.com/2020/10/12/leitz-tele-elmar-135mm-f-4-review/
Thanks Fred. The TE 135/4 is a really great lens.
K-H.
Here is a great article on this:
https://casualphotophile.com/2020/10/12/leitz-tele-elmar-135mm-f-4-review/
Thanks Fred. The TE 135/4 is a really great lens.
K-H.
Mar 09, 2022 at 02:00 AM
p.26 #15Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Sorry for my late response. Is version 11861 multi coated? in case it is, does this make a significant difference?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914Basically there is version I (11851) and version II (11861). Both designed by Mandler with the same optical design. The latter is about 40 grams heavier but it has a built-in hood (It's more rare and expensive). This was one of the most successful telephoto lenses and had a run of 35 years before being replaced by the 135/3.4 APO which is still in production and only marginally better in terms of resolution and contrast. (Not in rendering in my option).
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling...Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote:
hanay78 wrote
Have the 11861 and the 11851 some difference in the optics? some update in the coatings?Fred Miranda wrote
hanay78 wrote
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...Fred Miranda wrote
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling...Show more →
Mar 22, 2022 at 03:47 AM
p.26 #16Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
hanay78 wrote:
Sorry for my late response. Is version 11861 multi coated? in case it is, does this make a significant difference?
I have the 135/4 Tele-Elmar 11861, so the one with the built-in hood. Having owned both, I prefer this version to the latest 'apo' for its longer focus throw and more pleasant rendering to my eyes. They are very close in sharpness and physically, the 135/4 is slightly longer than the 135/3.4 APO.
I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914Basically there is version I (11851) and version II (11861). Both designed by Mandler with the same optical design. The latter is about 40 grams heavier but it has a built-in hood (It's more rare and expensive). This was one of the most successful telephoto lenses and had a run of 35 years before being replaced by the 135/3.4 APO which is still in production and only marginally better in terms of resolution and contrast. (Not in rendering in my option).
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling mine but I'm even happier with version II just for the haptics.
I'm not sure. However, usually newer versions means better coating.
Sorry for my late response. Is version 11861 multi coated? in case it is, does this make a significant difference?
Fred Miranda wrote
hanay78 wrote
Have the 11861 and the 11851 some difference in the optics? some update in the coatings?Fred Miranda wrote
hanay78 wrote
I am interested in Tele-Elmar. When you say last version, do you mean Tele-Elmar-M, 11861? I have tried several of the old ones, in shops, but either they show some kind of coating damage or wobbly focusing ring. I was thinking of giving the 11861 a try, but it is significantly more expensive...Fred Miranda wrote
I still love the VS 100-300 but the 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar (latest version) does slightly better at 135mm. I was surprised to see this as the Contax is capable of amazing performance at this focus length.I have owned the Leica 135/4 Tele-Elmar (11851) and it's also a great lens. I compared it to the 135/2.8 Batis here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1675914
Honestly you can't go wrong with the version I and it's a bargain for the price. I regret selling mine but I'm even happier with version II just for the haptics.
I'm not sure. However, usually newer versions means better coating.
Mar 22, 2022 at 10:36 AM
p.26 #17Sony FE 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM vs Contax 100-300/4.5-5.6
Has anyone tried the Contax N 70-300? there are versions that have been converted to Canon EF mount floating around . . .
Mar 22, 2022 at 04:07 PM