Lens Review #4 - Hektor Love – Leica 135mm f4.5 Hektor LTM

For a Lens that is approaching 72 years old, my Leica 135mm f4.5 Hektor gets serious admiration from me.  It is quite sharp, has good contrast and a lovely older style look about the photos.  Here’s a few sample shots when I was kicking around the neighbourhood.  

 

 Interestingly this lens was made in Germany in 1940, and its serial number places its date of manufacture just before Hitler was about to invade Finland and Denmark.  For this reason it was probably initially destined for the local German market, which can also be shown by no “Made in Germany” markings, just “Ernst Leitz Wetzlar”.  The focus distance is marked in metres and it uses the old style aperture calibration – f4.5, f6.3, f9, f12.5, f18, f25, f36.


My copy is a black lens with LOTS of brassing, suggesting a lot of use in those intervening years; and if it could talk, I am sure it would have quite a few stories to tell.

Surprisingly these lenses can be found quite cheaply.  Sure, they’re not fast lenses (two and a half stops slower than my Nikon 135mm f2), but you could probably find a copy nicer than mine for under a $100, and at that price it’s a steal.

 

As a footnote, the shot with fall leaves had a little contrast added and brightness reduced, as did the basketball ring shot.  The bottom photo is straight out of camera, and I love the kids getting out of the car.

NEX Lens Perspective - 15mm vs 135mm

Here’s two separate subjects showing the difference in perspective between using a wide angle and a telephoto lens.  I used the NEX with two Leica LTM lenses to illustrate the difference, a Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 Super Wide Heliar and a Leica 135mm f4.5 Hektor.  In 35mm terms, this is approximately 22.5mm and 200mm for these two lenses respectively.  As both have a maximum aperture of f4.5, it will make an interesting comparison, despite an age difference of more than 50 years.

For the first shots of the leaf on our back deck, I used maximum aperture (f4.5 for both) and minimum focus distance (30cm on the Voigtlander and about 1.5m on the Leica).   As can be seen, the dominant difference is that the telephoto lens has the effect of creating a shallow depth of field, while the wide angle creates a dramatic landscape.

NEX with Leica 135mm f4.5 Hektor

NEX with Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 Super Wide Heliar

For the two second shots of the tree and the garage, I was about 15m away from the subject with the tele lens and about 3m away with the wide angle.  With these two shots it can be clearly seen that the Leica telephoto has the effect of compressing subjects together, while the wide angle makes subjects look further apart. Depending on the look you want will depend on the lens you choose.

NEX with Leica 135mm f4.5 Hektor

NEX with Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 Super Wide Heliar

Minolta Rokkor 13.5cm f4 for Leica Screw Mount

Before Leica’s partnership with Minolta for the M Mount CL and associated lenses, Minolta made cameras that were essentially a copy of a Leica IIIc / IIIf.  These “35 series” cameras were made between 1947 and 1958. They also made a series of Leica Screw Mount lenses for this camera, including the Tele-Rokkor 13.5cm f4 that I have.   

My copy is a very early as it only has a four digit serial number, and it is marked “Chiyoko”, an amalgam of CHIYOda KOgaku, the name of the company.  Interestingly it has the original lens cap which is marked “Minolta”.  The other give away that this lens is early is the fact that it has a maximum aperture of f4.  This lens became an f4.5 in the mid 1950’s.

Compared to the pre-war Leica 13.5cm f4.5 Hektor I also have, the Minolta is much more compact (by a little over 30mm) and it is 1/3 stop faster.  However it has a much further minimum focus distance (8ft vs 5ft on the Leica) and 10 aperture blades vs approx 15 on the Leica.  Overall image quality isn’t too dis-similar, the Leica flares more, however image quality on the Minolta is better further away, but not as good near minimum focus distance. 

Speaking of minimum focus distance, to me, that’s the big let down on this lens.  Eight feet is too far away for most portraits, and it is close to useless indoors.   However, for a 60 year old lens, it is still capable of producing nice images on the NEX.