135mm lens comparison, infinity images added

[caspert79]

Contestants:
Steinheil Auto D Quinar 135mm f/2.8
Mamiya SX 135mm f/2.8
Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm f/3.5
Nikkor Ai 135mm f/2.8

Bokeh wide open (note: CZJ is slower at f/3.5):
CloseWideOpenOverview by devoscasper, on Flickr

Bokeh @ f/4:
CloseF4overview by devoscasper, on Flickr

Bokeh @ f/5.6:
CloseF56overview by devoscasper, on Flickr

Bokeh @ f/8:
CloseF8Overview by devoscasper, on Flickr

I think the Steinheil has the least distracting bokeh, then the Mamiya; the CZJ is very close.

100% crop wide open (note: CZJ is slower at f/3.5):
CloseWideOpen by devoscasper, on Flickr

To my surprise, the Nikkor shows some more detail wide open than the Mamiya SX. The CZJ is excellent, but this is at f/3.5. The Steinheil not so great.

100% crops @ f/4:
CloseF4 by devoscasper, on Flickr

The Mamiya became much sharper. On a similar level as the CZJ. The Nikkor a bit behind, and the Steinheil is rather soft.

100 % crops @ f/5.6:
CloseF56 by devoscasper, on Flickr

I think the CZJ wins here, the Mamiya is close. Surprisingly, the Steinheil here seems sharper than the Nikkor.

100% crops @ f/8:
CloseF8 by devoscasper, on Flickr

The Steinheil almost on a similar level as the Mamiya and CZJ. The Nikkor not so great.

Winner of this test IMO: the Sonnar 135/3.5. Great detail, smooth enough bokeh.

[55]

Thanks for another interesting comparison, caspert79. Which of these 135s do you use most often?

Is it true the CZJ has the shortest close focusing distance in this group? If so, the CZJ would be my choice.

[papasito]

I had the four.

Now, only the mamiya.
Will tray again it at F/8. Really good image

Thanks for sharing

[caspert79]

[caspert79]

Infinity test. From my attic, I can just look over a row of houses. As you can see, focus is BEHIND the houses.
Example picture:

voorbeeldklein by devoscasper, on Flickr

Wide open center performance:
CenterPerformanceWideOpen by devoscasper, on Flickr

Best performance by CZJ, but this is at f/3.5. Nikkor best performer @f/2.8; Mamiya almost at the same level. Steinheil far behind.

Corner performance wide open:
CornerPerformanceWideOpen by devoscasper, on Flickr
Best performance from the Mamiya. Nikkor almost on the same level. The CZJ a bit less, even at smaller aperture. Steinheil far behind.

Center performance @ f/4:
CenterPerformanceF4 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Mamiya the strongest IMO; the CZJ almost on the same level. The Nikkor not far behind. The Steinheil is the weakest.

Corner performance @ f/4:
CornerPerformancef4 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Very similar performance of the Mamiya and the Nikkor. I think the Mamiya has a slight edge over the Nikkor, but I'm splitting hairs here. CZJ is not far behind. The Steinheil is the weakest here.

Center performance @ f/5.6:
CenterPerformancef56 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Performance of the Nikkor, Mamiya en CZJ is very similar. I think the Mamiya is the best, by a very small margin.

Corner performance @ f/5.6:
CornerPerformancef56 by devoscasper, on Flickr

The Nikkor and Mamiya are awefully close. It seems that the Mamiya has slightly better contrast. The Nikkor maybe a bit sharper? Hard to tell really. The CZJ is slightly behind. The Steinheil not so good.

Center performance @ f/8:
CenterPerformancef8 by devoscasper, on Flickr

The Mamiya, CZJ and Nikkor are very close. I think the Mamiya and CZJ have slightly better contrast. The Steinheil's performance is quite close to the others now.

Corner performance @ f/8:
CornerPerformancef8 by devoscasper, on Flickr

A very similar image from the Mamiya and Nikkor. The CZJ a bit behind, and the Steinheil far behind.

Conclusion: after this added test, I'm inclined to declare the Mamiya SX the winner. It has very good overall performance. It is better in the corners than the Sonnar. Also the Nikkor proves to be stronger than the CZJ in this regard; quite impressive. The Steinheil in comparison shows rather 'old fashioned' performance.

[stevemark]

Here are a few additional images - as usual 100% crops from the corners of the 24 MP Sony A7II - to put the above results in perspective. Whether conditions were not ideal as you can see. Nevertheless these images will give you an idea of how two zooms (Canon nFD 4/80-200mm L from around 1985 and Minolta/Sony AF 2.8/70-200mm APO G SSM from 2004) and a Zeiss prime (Zeiss CY Sonnar 2.8/135mm) perform in comparison to the Mamiya SX 2.87135mm.



Wide open, the two zooms (both with Fluorite/ULD and AD glass) have nearly no CAs. The Canon, however, isn't really sharp in the corners, probably due to manufacturing tolerances. The Minolta/Sony AF 2.8/70-200mm is pretty much on par with the primes when it comes to detail resolution and contrast, butr has a better color correction.





At f8 and under these not-so-ideal conditions the two primes are virtually indistinguishable. The Canon nFD 4/80-200mm L is almost as sharp and has much less CAs than the two primes. The Minolta/Sony zoom however steals the show: it is much better than the three others - look at the clarity of the tiles on the roof!

S

[caspert79]

Yes, the Sony is almost as sharp as it gets, which is a testament to great modern optical engineering. But does it fit in my little camera bag 🙄😉?

[papasito]

With the A7II the sony GM 135/1,8 is one of the better options.

It's my prefer 135 mm lens

[vivaldibow]

Always interested in seeing such comparison. Thanks. I wish you had Nikon 135mm f/2.8 Ais in the comparison.

[caspert79]

[Oldhand]

This is a wonderful thread - thank you for the effort and time that it takes to prepare, shoot and collate a comparison like this.
Like you I have several 135mm lenses and have shot all of them at one time or another, and have developed a fondness for some.
I have been thinking back and looking at my images, and the number of times that I used a 135mm lens at infinity was negligible.
I would be interested in knowing how many photographers actually do shoot such a lens at infinity.
Tom

[caspert79]

[caspert79]

[Oldhand]

[KEO]

The Leica 135 Elmar f/4 is still my favorite.

My Rodenstock 135 Yronar 3.5 is also excellent.

[caspert79]

[tb_a]

[KEO]

[kiddo]

I've just received this mamiya , in pristine condition, but the iris it won't work with my adapter (all others M42 lenses will work with it) - when I screw all the way to the end the adapter to the lens, the aperture ring won't move at all, if I loose it a bit, it Will turn, but not move the iris, is there something else I should check up ? Many thanks

[caspert79]

[kiddo]

Finally, that pin is really necessary if I would use the Sony e M42 adapter?

[kiddo]

The iris was stuck, but there are two levers inside , one that actuates the iris and another that is actuated by a ring that sits on the mount and is actuated by the aperture ring. The problem is that I don't see any relation between the two levers inside , nothing that can make them work together, wonder if there is something missing . I've tried with pin inside or pin removed ,nothing can make those two levers work together. This 135mm is a bit different that the 100mm

[caspert79]

[cbass]

[55]