Well USPS screwed up so did not make it to me today. Hopefully tomorrow. I really dislike USPS.. Actually the other two UPS and Fedex has been making some big mistakes of late.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
A7/r lens recommendations 90-135mm
- Thread starter biglouis
- Start date
Someone recommended the Leica R 180/3.4 apo. Any thoughts on this lens? Price is more attractive than the 180/2.8 apo and might make a good addition to the long end for landscapes as my longest lens is 90mm right now. I would prefer the 2.8 for occasional concert photography, but I do that so rarely as not to make the extra money sensible. Any issues using this on the A7r? Is the lens mount sturdy enough for this lens without a tripod mount on the adapter? Any recommendations for the R to E mount adapter? Think this would make an optically better choice than the forthcoming 70-200/4 native mount lens? Thx for any info or suggestions. I am really struggling with long lens options for the A7r, for some reason. Just for completeness, my lens lineup is WATE (16-21), FE 35/2.8, CV 35 1.2, Lux 50 asph 1.4, FE 55 1.8, Summicron 90/2 apo.
D
Deleted member 7792
Guest
No problem here with a Novoflex adapter. My test shot is in an earlier post. It's got to be your adapter(s). The lens is stellar.
Joe
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Woody has all the test shots with the Leica 135mm. Lets see if he see's this. That adapter looks to be cutting the corners. Im a bit surprised as i thought the Voigtlander was supposed to be good.
Maybe get the Novaflex. I like there adapters myself
I am in indecision paralysis. What focal length would be the next step up from 90mm? I have 35,50, 90 and was thinking for landscape it might make more sense to go from 90 to 180, but one fellow said he thought 135 was a more useful length and now I am confused. I had decided on a 180 R 3.4 but now am unsure. Obviously, the zeiss 135/2 is great (tho heavy) as is the Leica 135/3.4 (lighter and slower), but then that is still not very long and there are only so many lenses I will carry! Maybe primes are a bad idea? What do you guys carry for landscape applications? I know for concert photography or the like what to carry (fast and longish) but for hiking in the mountains? Right now, I have 16-21, 35, 55, and 90. Thoughts? Camera is Sony A7r. Thx much!
I know it should not.. 
but they do. I have a cheap adapter for a leica screwmount lens and it works perfectly. To be honest I do not like the way the metabones is a bit hard to lock the lens. The voigt is much smoother. My nikon metabones is not like that. But the metabones does seem to work well. I am going to see about returning one of my voigts. I have the regular and the close up version. The later is great. It makes my WATE a wide angle macro.
but they do. I have a cheap adapter for a leica screwmount lens and it works perfectly. To be honest I do not like the way the metabones is a bit hard to lock the lens. The voigt is much smoother. My nikon metabones is not like that. But the metabones does seem to work well. I am going to see about returning one of my voigts. I have the regular and the close up version. The later is great. It makes my WATE a wide angle macro. 
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
How about Leica 80-200/4?
jlindstrom
Member
What about Leica Elmarit-R 135/2.8 ? Has anybody tried that one? I could get one locally, cheap as chips...
Same also for 90 & 180 elmarit-r, what about those?
//Juha
Same also for 90 & 180 elmarit-r, what about those?
//Juha
Well as Guy said-- the Zeiss 135/2 plus the 1.4x extender was stellar. Even though that is a bit larger and heavier--- with an extender you would get two lenses… 135 and 190mm.
I took my A7r leica 16-18-21, Sony 35mm/2.8, Sony 55mm 1.8, Voigt 75/2.5, Leica 90/2.8 M all in a very small bag.
I took my A7r leica 16-18-21, Sony 35mm/2.8, Sony 55mm 1.8, Voigt 75/2.5, Leica 90/2.8 M all in a very small bag.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Yea the Zeiss 135 and a 1.4 really is amazing. I have my Kenko for sale. Have not tested on the Sony yet but on the d800e it was pretty good at 5.6 on the Sony with the Sigma 1.4 at F4 it was amazingly good. I'm going to buy the Sigma. The Kenko is for sale cheap though if someone wants it. I'll try today on the Sony
Good thoughts here. Thanks much all! Seems like no one way to go. The 135/2 is only a little heavier than the 180/3.4 and from what I am gathering, with a1.4x from sigma, it probably is as good or better than the 180, even at infinity with the extender. Hmmmm. Weight wise, the 80-200/4 would be similar, but not quite as good optically. I have never owned a Nikon lens(!), but maybe this will be the first. Or, could wait and see what Zeiss announces for the Sony (or how good the Sony 70-200/4 will be), but that may be a while. Guess I will keep my eyes open for a good deal on a good deal on a Zeiss 135/2. Thx again for the help!
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I just ordered the Sigma 1.4 this morning from B&H used for 169.00 there is another one for 179. I will run a test next week with the z135. It's as heavy as a Nikon 24-70 for reference or something like that.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Zeiss 135 f2 Nikon mount and from experience use the Novaflex . Adapter
Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.31 x 4.13" (84 x 105 mm)
Weight 2.02 lb (920 g)
Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.31 x 4.13" (84 x 105 mm)
Weight 2.02 lb (920 g)