TEST 135mm: Minolta MC & AF 135f28, Zeiss CY 135f28 &

[stevemark]

Yesterday I got my second sample of the Minolta AF 2.8/135mm. I had sold my first MinAF 2.8/135mm back in 2011, after finishing my large book on the Sony/Minolta Alpha system (http://www.artaphot.ch/minolta-sony-af/alpha-systembuch). On the A900, I usually was working with the Sony Zeiss 2.8/16-35mm plus Sony Minolta 2.8/70-200 APO, plus a few selected prime lenses (2.8/20, 2/28, 1.4/50, 1.4/85, 2.8/100 Macro, 2.8/200 APO, 2.8/300 APO). The fast 2/35mm and 2/100mm lenses as well as the 2.8/135mm seemed redundant.

Later on I found a cheap AF 2/35mm on the flea market, a very cheap AF 2/100mm in a local photo store, and now ... the AF 2.8/135mm

Unlike all MF 2.8/135mm lenses, the MinAF 2.8/135mm has a internal focus (IF) construction. It not only allows for fast AF operation, but also for better close range performance and a MFD of just 1.0m /3 ft. The lens is pretty lightweight (366 g) and short (83mm). From earlier tests I knew it was pretty good - but before I sold my first sample (2011) it was impossible to compare it on digital FF with older MF lenses.

Both the Zeiss CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm as well as the Minolta MC-X 2.8/135mm [4/4] are said to be some of the best vintage 2.8/135mm lenses. Therefore I have compared them with my "new" MinAF 2.8/135mm, using the 43 MP FF Sony A7RII. As usual we have here 100% crops from the corners, and also from the center:
(CLICK TWICE ON THE IMAGE FOR FULL RESOLUTION!)



Obviously the Minolta MC-X is slightly weaker than the Zeiss Sonnar which has less CAs and a better corner resolution.

Interestingly, wide open the Minolta AF 2.8/135mm is even better than the Zeiss Sonnar, with better contrast / colors, and a slightly higher corner resolution. Stoped down to f5.6 or f11 the Zeiss has less lateral CAs, but also less contrast / weaker colors. Overall the Minolta AF 2.8/135mm is at least as good as the Zeiss, especially when considering its internal focusing (IF) which results in better performance at close distances and a rather convenient MFD of 1.0 m / 3 ft.


That said - I know that many legacy 4/80-200mm and 4/70-210mm zooms are surprisingly good at f=135mm. Let's see how one of the best vintage MF 2.8/135mm compares to one of the best vintage 4/80-200mm zooms:



Amazingly, the Zeiss CY Vario Sonnar 4/80-200mm is quite a bit better than all three primes discussed before. Even wide open and using a 43 MP high res sensor, the corners are nearly perfect. Stopping down doesn't change much ...!
The Zeiss 4/80-200mm was developped around 1982 by Lothar Kölsch, who later became head of lens design at Leica where he was responsible for the development of some of the best Leica lenses (e. g. the APO 2.8/280, APO 2.8/400, and many others). He now is an independent lens designer (http://k-s-optics.de/de/ueber-uns/).

S

[caspert79]

Curious how the Hexanon 135/3.2 would do in this comparison. Closed down a bit its performance seems quite impressive.

[stevemark]

[stevemark]

[caspert79]