Yes, another shot from the same place as yesterday’s as well as several others throughout these pages, each with a different setup, and this one with a Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Aspherical III, the widest I’ve ever shot this scene.
When the decision was made to return to shooting an M10, it was accompanied by my preference that my cornerstone focal lengths, 21mm, 35mm, and 90mm, should all be Mandler glass. Mission accomplished.
When I ran across a 11861, the modern-shaped version of Dr. Mandler’s 135mm f/4 Tele-Elmar, I grabbed it on impulse, failing to recall that the previous two older copies of the lens I’d had mostly sat in the dry cabinet. Even the 135mm APO-Telyt-M that I owned for a time seldom saw action. And I took note of the fact that many of my M-shooting friends don’t go over 90mm. That’s what other brands are for, some told me.
Although I love the look I get from the Mandler 21 Elmarit, 35 ‘cron, and 90 ‘cron, I’m also learning to appreciate the more modern optics of the two Voigtlanders I’ve latched onto so far. There’s most definitely a place for both eras in my arsenal. But that long-desired 135? Looks like I’ll have little use for it. The venerable EF 135mm f/2 absolutely buries it in speed and saturation; and equals it in sharpness—at f/2! Looks like my friends are right.
Another misfit is the TTartisan 28mm “Summaron” I grabbed on impulse not too long ago. While it punches well above its weight, there’s something about the image texture that doesn’t mesh well with the other M glass. And now I’m wondering if I really need a 28mm, since I’ve gotten by for so many years without one.
So what else is there? Well, alternate looks with the focal lengths I like to use, which now includes 50mm. A Mandler ‘lux, maybe? No, no, no . . . slowly . . . slowly . . .