Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Best 135mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2019 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks again everyone. That's wealth of information. I had a Sankor made 105mm f/2.8 which I like. So I thought Sankor 135mm f/2.8 should be a good one as well, since 135mm (2.8 or slower) seems so mature a design for everyone. In the end, a Sankor made 135mm let me down. It is just mediocre. I've also tried Soligor 135mm f2.8 (Sun made) and found not that exciting. A Schneider 135mm f/3.5 is pretty good in my impression. The Tamron 135mm f/2.5 CF doesn't seem to stand out, which seems a little opposite to the consensus on the internet. The Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 rangefinder lens performs just ok in my impression. The list can go on and on.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2019 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Best 135mm lens? is such a difficult question to answer.
Best at what?
Some lenses are very sharp but limp in other areas.
Some render colours rather cool-ly, others are warm in their rendering.
Some have 3D pop - others do not.
Some have beautiful bokeh and some do not.
Some show a distinct cinematic rendering that is very pleasing.
Some show a softness and transition to creamy out of focus that is simply stunning.
Some are just a joy to use because of their superb ergonomics.

I have quite a few 135mm lenses because I value all of these things at different times.
The best thing for anyone to do is to try different examples and see if they suit your image making.
You may end up with several lenses like I have.
Tom


PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
vivaldibow wrote:
Thanks again everyone. That's wealth of information. I had a Sankor made 105mm f/2.8 which I like. So I thought Sankor 135mm f/2.8 should be a good one as well, since 135mm (2.8 or slower) seems so mature a design for everyone. In the end, a Sankor made 135mm let me down. It is just mediocre. I've also tried Soligor 135mm f2.8 (Sun made) and found not that exciting. A Schneider 135mm f/3.5 is pretty good in my impression. The Tamron 135mm f/2.5 CF doesn't seem to stand out, which seems a little opposite to the consensus on the internet. The Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 rangefinder lens performs just ok in my impression. The list can go on and on.


The Tamron is an interesting lens, I had one back in the 1980's and loved it, when I tried another on an A7 II a few years ago, I found it to be at it's most impressive at f/2.5 but less impressive compared to others at smaller apertures.

On a more general note, I have experienced different levels of chromatic aberration with the same lens but using different cameras/sensors. Most notably, I tested a Takumar Bayonet 135/2.8 (underrated lens in my opinion) with an EM-1 and a Canon 80D; the EM-1 shot had CA whereas it was missing from the 80D. The shots were taken within a minute of each other using a tripod in the same position (compositionally different due to the crop difference, but the same distance and position pointing at the same subject).

The point I'm making is that it's important to be wary of comments about CA with lenses as there are so many factors that affect the level of CA that are camera and lens combo specific.

A final point is that it's worth mentioning sample variation especially (but not exclusively) with Eastern Bloc lenses, it took me ten lenses to get a great Jupiter-11...

The phrase, "Your mileage may vary" comes to mind.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2019 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
vivaldibow wrote:
The Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 rangefinder lens performs just ok in my impression.


This RF Nikkor perform exactly as good or bad as the Jupiter-11 and the CZJ Sonnar 135/4 RF lenses. At least that was the result of my direct comparison on 42MP FF.
IMHO all these old Sonnars aren't bad at all, the Zeiss Tele-Tessar 135/4 is even worse.

As already stated, the Leitz Elmar 135/4 is definitely better. Only the Leica APO-TELYT-M 135/3.4 for USD/EUR 4.000.- is probably a little bit better, at least on pixel-peeping level.
Quite a nice descriprion of this lens can be seen here: https://kenrockwell.com/leica/135mm-f4.htm .


PostPosted: Mon Dec 09, 2019 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If anyone has experience of the SMC Pentax-A 135mm f1.8, I'd love to read about it.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
itsfozzy wrote:


The point I'm making is that it's important to be wary of comments about CA with lenses as there are so many factors that affect the level of CA that are camera and lens combo specific.

A final point is that it's worth mentioning sample variation especially (but not exclusively) with Eastern Bloc lenses, it took me ten lenses to get a great Jupiter-11...

The phrase, "Your mileage may vary" comes to mind.


Thanks. That's very interesting comment. I've tried a Nikkor P 105mm f/2.5 non AI lens on my Sony a7ii. The purple fringing I got is significant, probably the most among all my MF lenses with random shots. On the other hand, I didn't seem to see a lot people complaining the CA about this lens. So perhaps it is really a combination with lens and camera. It is something worth to dig further.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Best 135mm lens? is such a difficult question to answer.
Best at what?
Some lenses are very sharp but limp in other areas.
Some render colours rather cool-ly, others are warm in their rendering.
Some have 3D pop - others do not.
Some have beautiful bokeh and some do not.
Some show a distinct cinematic rendering that is very pleasing.
Some show a softness and transition to creamy out of focus that is simply stunning.
Some are just a joy to use because of their superb ergonomics.

I have quite a few 135mm lenses because I value all of these things at different times.
The best thing for anyone to do is to try different examples and see if they suit your image making.
You may end up with several lenses like I have.
Tom


Can t agree more, change the 135 number with any other focal and this will still be valid.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:
kypfer wrote:
For me, "best overall" would be my Tamron Adaptall-2, it's slightly faster than most at f/2.5, it's close-focus is slightly better than most, at 4ft. and the image quality is as good as my Vivitar/Takumar/Fujinon/Zeiss etc. etc.


Like 1 +1 ...and more compact than most.

+1 and the built-in collapsible lens hood is very convenient...

I also like the Leitz Elmar 135mm f/4.0. Sharp, low aberrations and the front part of the lens with the optics is detachable and can be used on a bellows, allowing to focus from a few centimeters to infinity.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
I have more than 10 135mm lenses but I haven't seen any lens up to now which would be able to beat my old Leitz Elmar 135mm/F4.



👍👍👍👍


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I don't have a lot of experience with 135s. It's a focal length that has never held much interest for me. Too long for some situations and too short for many others. But the few times I've used them, I've had really good performance out of a couple.

First one was a Nikon AI 135mm f/3.5. Surprisingly sharp with great color and contrast. Second was the Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Close Focus -- the one with the 62mm front filter thread. Again, surprisingly sharp with great color and contrast.

Nikon FM, Nikon AI 135/3.5, Kodachrome 64


NEX 7, Vivitar 135/2.8 CF, ISO 100


The Nikkor ais 135/3,5 os one of the best Nikkor lensez


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Best 135mm lens? is such a difficult question to answer.
Best at what?
Some lenses are very sharp but limp in other areas.
Some render colours rather cool-ly, others are warm in their rendering.
Some have 3D pop - others do not.
Some have beautiful bokeh and some do not.
Some show a distinct cinematic rendering that is very pleasing.
Some show a softness and transition to creamy out of focus that is simply stunning.
Some are just a joy to use because of their superb ergonomics.

I have quite a few 135mm lenses because I value all of these things at different times.
The best thing for anyone to do is to try different examples and see if they suit your image making.
You may end up with several lenses like I have.
Tom

Can you include some names for each of your 7 categories, please?


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm glad to see such praise for the old 135 Elmar. I have a lot of 135s, and that one's the last on my "to get" list.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Antoine wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Best 135mm lens? is such a difficult question to answer.
Best at what?
Some lenses are very sharp but limp in other areas.
Some render colours rather cool-ly, others are warm in their rendering.
Some have 3D pop - others do not.
Some have beautiful bokeh and some do not.
Some show a distinct cinematic rendering that is very pleasing.
Some show a softness and transition to creamy out of focus that is simply stunning.
Some are just a joy to use because of their superb ergonomics.

I have quite a few 135mm lenses because I value all of these things at different times.
The best thing for anyone to do is to try different examples and see if they suit your image making.
You may end up with several lenses like I have.
Tom

Can you include some names for each of your 7 categories, please?



Sure, here are some from my own experience.
Lots of sharp lenses with poor ergonomics and slop in their build - you will know them when you handle them
Tamrons that I have used are cool in their rendering while Takumars and Sankyo-Kohki Komuras are warm
Komuras again for bokeh and the faster Canon FD's and FL's
Anything by Carl Zeiss for 3D pop and Jupiter 11 sometimes - and definitely Schneider
Cinematic rendering - Komura again and the Schneider 3.5 that I have
softness and transition to creamy out of focus - Komura definitely, and I would love an Angenieux but will never be able to afford one.
superb ergonomics - Takumar every time followed by Komura.
I am sure there are plenty of others and people can post their own experiences

You can see that I am a Komura fan - the 3.5 and the 2.8 are both excellent
Tom


PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Antoine wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Best 135mm lens? is such a difficult question to answer.
Best at what?
Some lenses are very sharp but limp in other areas.
Some render colours rather cool-ly, others are warm in their rendering.
Some have 3D pop - others do not.
Some have beautiful bokeh and some do not.
Some show a distinct cinematic rendering that is very pleasing.
Some show a softness and transition to creamy out of focus that is simply stunning.
Some are just a joy to use because of their superb ergonomics.

I have quite a few 135mm lenses because I value all of these things at different times.
The best thing for anyone to do is to try different examples and see if they suit your image making.
You may end up with several lenses like I have.
Tom

Can you include some names for each of your 7 categories, please?



Sure, here are some from my own experience.
Lots of sharp lenses with poor ergonomics and slop in their build - you will know them when you handle them
Tamrons that I have used are cool in their rendering while Takumars and Sankyo-Kohki Komuras are warm
Komuras again for bokeh and the faster Canon FD's and FL's
Anything by Carl Zeiss for 3D pop and Jupiter 11 sometimes - and definitely Schneider
Cinematic rendering - Komura again and the Schneider 3.5 that I have
softness and transition to creamy out of focus - Komura definitely, and I would love an Angenieux but will never be able to afford one.
superb ergonomics - Takumar every time followed by Komura.
I am sure there are plenty of others and people can post their own experiences

You can see that I am a Komura fan - the 3.5 and the 2.8 are both excellent
Tom


In my nex5N my copy of the Komura 3,5 has a lot of CA wide from open to f/8.

Nice resolution power and colors.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:

In my nex5N my copy of the Komura 3,5 has a lot of CA wide from open to f/8.

Nice resolution power and colors.


I don't see that with mine - 3.5/135 pre-set.
Perhaps your lens/sensor combination may have something to do with it.
Here are two images - the first taken with a Pentax K-10D, the second with a Fuji X-E2s.
Both wide open and almost no CA at all.
Tom
#1


#2


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tomasg wrote:


Can t agree more, change the 135 number with any other focal and this will still be valid.


It is very true. Sorry my question is too big. Smile)

When I see people say this lens is sharp or good, I always want to know what other lenses he has ever used, if there is a comparison, etc.
I have read many comments of lenses on Pentax forum. But people didn't say if he has comparison. This leads to my post. Smile

Thanks again everyone.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wonder where the vivitar close focus stands for comparing the others , I've seen nice pics of it


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Wonder where the vivitar close focus stands for comparing the others , I've seen nice pics of it


It is the lens that I like a lot. Here in the US, it is kind of expensive to get German lenses on ebay. So I only have experience with Japanese lenses.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yeah, I've seen very few samples for sale and always expensive for my pocket,but the results very good. Hope one day could get one..mm


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 7:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
vivaldibow wrote:
tomasg wrote:


Can t agree more, change the 135 number with any other focal and this will still be valid.


It is very true. Sorry my question is too big. Smile)

When I see people say this lens is sharp or good, I always want to know what other lenses he has ever used, if there is a comparison, etc.
I have read many comments of lenses on Pentax forum. But people didn't say if he has comparison. This leads to my post. Smile

Thanks again everyone.


Perhaps if you can think about what you would be most likely to use it for, then we can recommend some lenses in a more restricted field.
Some people use 135mm lenses on full frame/film cameras as short tele landscape lenses. In this case the minimum focus distance doesn't matter.
Some use them as full frame/film portrait lenses. In this case the minimum focus distance could be a significant issue.
(On APSc digital, a good portrait length is 50mm-105mm depending on taste)
If you just want a general purpose short telephoto, then the comments that I have made elsewhere above will apply.
In my case I rarely use this focal length for landscapes, but more so for close and mid distance tele shots and the occasional portrait, but I prefer the 85-105mm for that on film/full frame.
For portraits on APSc, 50mm-85mm is my "go-to" focal length
Tom


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Vivitar close focusing 135mm is built more like a macro than a regular 135mm. I have a regular Vivitar made by Komine 135, which is just OK in my view.

ebay pic of the close focussing one.




There a some for sale but all above €$ 150 (and wrong mount for me, I need PK or m42)


https://www.ebay.nl/sch/i.html?_odkw=vivitar+close+focus+-zoom+135mm&LH_PrefLoc=2&_sop=15&_osacat=3323&_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=vivitar+close+focusing+-zoom+135mm&_sacat=3323 (this result will change over time) The first one is not the close focussing variety but a regular one like I have


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Mir wrote:
I've owned and used all of these 135mm, some i've loved and yes, some should be avoided ....
And I've kept only one :

a 1973 Carl Zeiss Sonnar HFT 2.8/135 in QBM from West Germany, with 55∅, 6 blades and a MFD of 160 cm.

L39 Leica Hektor 4.5/135 (1953) 15b
M42 CZJ Sonnar 1Q 4/135 (1962) 8b
M42 aus JENA S 3.5/135 (1968) 6b
M42 Voigtlânder Color-Dynarex 4/135 (1976) 6b (CZ Tele-Tessar) MFD 160
M39 Jupiter 11 (Silver) 1962 KOMZ 12b
M39 Jupiter 11 (zebra) 1969 KOMZ 12b
M42 Jupiter 11 (silver) 1969 KOMZ 12b MFD 140
M42 SCHACHT MUNCHEN TRAVEGON 4.5/13,5 cm (1954) 16b
M39 AETNA Actinar 4,5/135 16b
Tokyo Kogaku RE Auto-Topcor 3.5/13,5 cm (1963) 6b MFD 120 (x2)
M42 Pentacon GDR 2,8/135 1972 15b MFD 150
M42 Schneider-Kreuznach Tele-Xenar 3.5/135 1968 6b
M39 Minolta Rokkor-TC Macro Bellows 1961 12b
M42 CZJ Triotar 1Q 1952 14b MFD 120
M42 CZJ S (DDR) 3.5/135 1975 6b MFD 100cm
Minolta MC TELE ROKKOR PF 2.8/135 1966 6b MFD150
M39 Tair 11 Silver 2.8/133 KMZ 20b MFD 150
Minolta MC TELE ROKKOR 2.8/135 1975 6b MFD150
M42 EBC FUJINON-T 2.5/135 6b MFD 150
*M42 ASAHI PENTAX S-M-C TAKUMAR (V2) 4/150 (1971-75) 6b MFD180
*M39 Schneider-Kreuznach Componar 4.5/135 Enlarger lens


WOW.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
The Vivitar close focusing 135mm is built more like a macro than a regular 135mm.


There a some for sale but all above €$ 150 (and wrong mount for me, I need PK or m42)


What camera are you using?


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:


Perhaps if you can think about what you would be most likely to use it for, then we can recommend some lenses in a more restricted field.
Some people use 135mm lenses on full frame/film cameras as short tele landscape lenses. In this case the minimum focus distance doesn't matter.
Some use them as full frame/film portrait lenses. In this case the minimum focus distance could be a significant issue.
(On APSc digital, a good portrait length is 50mm-105mm depending on taste)
If you just want a general purpose short telephoto, then the comments that I have made elsewhere above will apply.
In my case I rarely use this focal length for landscapes, but more so for close and mid distance tele shots and the occasional portrait, but I prefer the 85-105mm for that on film/full frame.
For portraits on APSc, 50mm-85mm is my "go-to" focal length
Tom


Tom, my use of 135mm is similar to yours. My post is mainly just for the sake of comparison. But like you said,
everyone has its strength.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
D1N0 wrote:
The Vivitar close focusing 135mm is built more like a macro than a regular 135mm.


There a some for sale but all above €$ 150 (and wrong mount for me, I need PK or m42)


What camera are you using?


Pentax K-1
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3