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
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vivaldibow wrote:
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.


I went on a road trip last year and was shooting film on my Pentax ME Super.
I only took three lenses - all SMC Pentax-M
1.7/50, 2.8-3.5/35-70 and the 3.5/135

I also had a PK to Fuji adapter for my X-E2s

One morning I shot a whole sequence of landscapes with the 135mm lens - you will see why when you look at the picture below.
This SMC Pentax-M is a wonderful travel lens as it is so small and light, but has great optics.
I don't use it for anything else much besides landscapes, but it is so much better than my much loved Komura for this.
I wouldn't use the Komura for landscapes as this is not its strength.
Interestingly this SMC Pentax-M 3.5/135 lens will most likely not even make the short list of "best 135mm lenses", and yet its optics are very good. What sets it apart for me is its outstanding build quality, excellent ergonomics and its small form factor - perfect for travel
Tom

#1


PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:


Interestingly this SMC Pentax-M 3.5/135 lens will most likely not even make the short list of "best 135mm lenses", and yet its optics are very good. What sets it apart for me is its outstanding build quality, excellent ergonomics and its small form factor - perfect for travel
Tom



That is a nice shot. It looks especially good in B&W.

Somehow I like the Pentax M series as well. To me, they feel better than Olympus OM series mechanically (although also very compact).


PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vivaldibow wrote:
Oldhand wrote:


Interestingly this SMC Pentax-M 3.5/135 lens will most likely not even make the short list of "best 135mm lenses", and yet its optics are very good. What sets it apart for me is its outstanding build quality, excellent ergonomics and its small form factor - perfect for travel
Tom



That is a nice shot. It looks especially good in B&W.

Somehow I like the Pentax M series as well. To me, they feel better than Olympus OM series mechanically (although also very compact).


Thank you for your kind words.
Pentax generally are under-rated and undervalued in my opinion.
Takumars are the foundation for many of them, and their ergonomics and engineering are legendary.
The Takumar pre-set 3.5/135 is exceptional, and a different design from the SMC Pentax-M.
Here is another from that wonderful morning with the SMC Pentax-M
Tom

#1


PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kiddo wrote:
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


Guys, true story -- I found my Vivitar 135 CF in a local Camera Shop's "junk lens" box for $5. This store had several boxes of unwanted and unexciting lenses and flashes and other pieces of photo gear in the back of its store, with cheap prices on all of them. Whenever I went in there, I'd dig through the boxes, sometimes finding a gem -- like the time I found a Gossen Luna Pro SBC for $5. It had a sticker on it that read "four stops off." Turns out they hadn't bothered to check that the front dial had been moved four stops off center. Worked (and works) perfect. So, anyway, I'm back there digging through lenses, and I spot this Vivitar 135. Nikon mount. Very clean condition, especially for being in a junk box. Just another unloved 135 I was thinking, but I picked it up and just started messing around with it as I was talking with one of the fellows who worked there. Cranking on the focusing collar and all. And I look down and see that I've cranked this thing way out and its revealing all sorts of ratio numbers. And I'm thinking, holy shit! This thing is worth more than $5! So I crank it back to infinity, all surreptitious like, so the clerk won't notice what I spotted. Paid my $5 and beat a swift retreat outa there.

Now, at the time, the prices on that lens hadn't taken off yet, but within about a year or so of my purchase, they had begun to. Geez, glad I got it when I did.

Oh, and if you're wondering how sharp it is, go back and look at that shot I posted of the deep red colored rose, and judge for yourself. I have a lot of macro lenses and this Vivitar CF hangs in there with the best of them.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:

Pentax generally are under-rated and undervalued in my opinion.
Takumars are the foundation for many of them, and their ergonomics and engineering are legendary.


Back in my salad days, when I had been mostly a Canon FD shooter and had just recently switched to Nikon (because of its AF upgrade path), I had the opportunity to take a trip with my future wife through some very scenic areas of the southwestern USA. At that time I had recently started buying and selling photo gear and I had a fairly heavily worn Pentax KX and several lenses among my inventory at the time, so in a bit of a lark, I decided to pack the KX with slide film for the trip. This was back in 1989, December, in fact. 30 years ago. Geez. Anyway, my then future wife and I saw some magnificent country and I recorded it all with that Pentax and a handful of Pentax lenses. Well, ever since that trip, my opinion of Pentax lens quality has taken an enormous leap forward. Ever since that trip, I refer to Pentax lenses as being not just sharp, but scary sharp. So, yes, I gotta agree that Pentax glass is undervalued. Or rather, some of it is. The Pentax brand however has such a fierce and loyal following that its users manage to keep the prices elevated on certain models of cameras and lenses.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand, That's some pretty sh1t right there!

I don't remember having an opinion of my M 135mm when I had it... Wait did the M have that build in hood that used to flop around?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tromboads wrote:
Oldhand, That's some pretty sh1t right there!

I don't remember having an opinion of my M 135mm when I had it... Wait did the M have that build in hood that used to flop around?


There is a built-in lens hood, mine is pretty good but a worn one might flop a bit.
These were taken at Bombo Rocks near Kiama.
Amazing morning with some huge seas running.
There is not much to show the scale here, but those rocks are around 30-40 feet high (10-13m)
I can't remember which lens for these two, but it may have been the SMC Pentax-M 1.7/50 or the SMC Pentax-M 2.8-3.5/35-70
An amazing morning and I loved every minute
Tom

#1


#2


PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote



PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
tromboads wrote:
Oldhand, That's some pretty sh1t right there!

I don't remember having an opinion of my M 135mm when I had it... Wait did the M have that build in hood that used to flop around?


There is a built-in lens hood, mine is pretty good but a worn one might flop a bit.
These were taken at Bombo Rocks near Kiama.
Amazing morning with some huge seas running.
There is not much to show the scale here, but those rocks are around 30-40 feet high (10-13m)
I can't remember which lens for these two, but it may have been the SMC Pentax-M 1.7/50 or the SMC Pentax-M 2.8-3.5/35-70
An amazing morning and I loved every minute
Tom

#1


#2


WOW, pretty amazing!!


PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Indeed amazing pictures and surely great moments! Like 1 small Like 1 small


PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you all for the kind words.
I got a little distracted in showing images from the shorter focal lengths.
Clearly the shorter focals are sharper.
Nevertheless, the 135 is a delight to use.
Here is another from that sequence using the SMC Pentax-M 3.5/135
Tom


#1


PostPosted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice pictures, Tom.

The question of best 135mm, or any other focal length, comes up every now and then and always gets a plethora of responses and never a definitive result because there isn't one.

I think each person has to come to that answer on their own after some research and trial. Looking back at the impressive list posted by MIR, I see one of my favorites that did not appeal to him. My own experience with 135mm or any other focal length and how I come to an appreciation is based on how I react to several factors. The feel of the lens is one but not necessarily the most important. I began with sharpness being my primary concern but it didn't take long to realize that it really wasn't the most important characteristic. Today, I value a combination of things such as speed, minimum focus distance (MFD), and bokeh characteristics but not necessarily in that order. There are examples where I favor a slower lens because of its bokeh.

About two years ago I realized that my usage didn't match up with what I thought were my favorite lenses. Since I file all my images by lens type, I was able to make a list of most used lenses. Among my (too many) 135mm lenses, my favorite isn't a 135mm, it's a 133mm, Tair-11. It is followed very closely by Vivitar Series 1 2.3/135, then Primotar 3.5/135. However, since going full-frame, I've gotten a new appreciation for the Orestor and have been using it more. Among those top three most used lenses, the Tair provides very good sharpness, reasonably short MFD, and outstanding bokeh. The Vivitar S1 has an even shorter MFD, greater speed, and is the sharpest. The Primotar is slow, not very close focusing, not as sharp, but has such a unique and interesting bokeh that I love using it.

I have several more that I could easily enjoy using more. I had not used my ISCO lenses due to their long MFD but that has been solved by use of a focusing helicoid. The ISCO and my Komura lenses are really quite good, I just end up going with the top three most of the time. I should also mention that I have an old Rokkor that I also like.