| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 9:59 am Post subject: Carl Zeiss 135mm lenses - f/2.8.... f/3.5: is there much in |
 |
|
tikkathree wrote:
I have a Carl Zeiss MC 135mm f/3.5 lens which I'm very happy with the performance of. I wish it had a hood but I could fashion something if ever we had enough bright sunshine in Britain for it to become a burning issue.
The kit monster reminds me that I'm always interested in faster lenses and I see Zeiss 135mm lenses for sale in f/2.8, made in the DDR just like my f/3.5 item. And in a portrait lens, the shorter DF has got to be a good thing hasn't it?
What I'd like to know is whether there is much difference in performance between the two, does the 2.8 offer the same colour reproduction, the same clarity and so on or is it even better than the 3.5?
I can see where this is going; I need a steadying hand on my shoulder to tell me either to stick with what I'm happy with and not bother, or to just get on with it. In which case I will not be keeping both.
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
I know the CZJ 3.5/135 (which is a good lens) and I know the Zeiss (Contax) 2.8/135 (which is a fantastic lens). I don't know a CZJ 2.8/135.
Anyway, the difference between f/2.8 and f/3.5 is hardly visible IMHO.
Sometimes f/3.5 lenses are better wide open than the faster ones.
But I don't think we can generalize that.
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:01 pm Post subject: Re: Carl Zeiss 135mm lenses - f/2.8.... f/3.5: is there much |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
| tikkathree wrote: |
| I can see where this is going; I need a steadying hand on my shoulder to tell me either to stick with what I'm happy with and not bother, or to just get on with it. |
If the list in your signature is complete, then you don't have any Contax (West-Germany/Japan Zeiss) lens. Sure the CZJ's are good, but they don't give you that T* look. It's still a different level of clarity and rendering (especially microcontrast). The Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 happens to be one of the cheapest of their line.
Since you're happy with your CZJ 135/3.5, it may be nicer to get a Contax Distagon 28/2.8. It will beat the pants off your expensive L zoom at f/11.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alex
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 561
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
alex wrote:
I suspect the 2.8/135 DDR lens you're referring to isn't the C/Y mount Zeiss 2.8/135 Sonnar, but an Orestor 135mm f/2.8 lens that was also made in Praktica Bayonet mount for the B200 series of cameras from the DDR. The CZ Sonnar 2.8/135 is from the Contax/Yashica stable. The CY version is superb, and the 3.5/135 'S' is excellent, but I don't know the Orestor, though I've read many complimentary things about it.
_________________
Alex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
symphonic
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 550
Location: SE Europe, Croatia
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:23 pm Post subject: Re: Carl Zeiss 135mm lenses - f/2.8.... f/3.5: is there much |
|
|
symphonic wrote:
| tikkathree wrote: |
| I wish it had a hood |
It does have an in-built hood, though I don't know whether you regard that as insufficient?
As for the comparison with the Contax version, I'm very interested too. I never run into any side to side comparison between these two. The Contax must be better, but it's hard to imagine it being better by a lot... The CZJ is a great lens.
_________________
Toni,
EOS 450D
CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5 MC | Pancolar 50/1.8 MC
Contax Planar 50/1.4 AEJ | Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 AEJ
Yashica ML 28/2.8 | Zuiko 28/3.5
Vivitar Series1 105/2.5 OM
AF: Tokina 12-24 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:35 pm Post subject: Re: Carl Zeiss 135mm lenses - f/2.8.... f/3.5: is there much |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
| Quote: |
| If the list in your signature is complete, |
It wasn't but it is now... 
| Quote: |
then you don't have any Contax (West-Germany/Japan Zeiss) lens. Sure the CZJ's are good, but they don't give you that T* look. It's still a different level of clarity and rendering (especially microcontrast). The Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 happens to be one of the cheapest of their line.
Since you're happy with your CZJ 135/3.5, it may be nicer to get a Contax Distagon 28/2.8. It will beat the pants off your expensive L zoom at f/11. |
STOP IT STOP IT!!! Do you realise how many results a "Contax" search of EBay produces??
[/quote]
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit
Last edited by tikkathree on Sat Aug 07, 2010 1:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
| alex wrote: |
| I suspect the 2.8/135 DDR lens you're referring to isn't the C/Y mount Zeiss 2.8/135 Sonnar, but an Orestor 135mm f/2.8 lens that was also made in Praktica Bayonet mount for the B200 series of cameras from the DDR. The CZ Sonnar 2.8/135 is from the Contax/Yashica stable. The CY version is superb, and the 3.5/135 'S' is excellent, but I don't know the Orestor, though I've read many complimentary things about it. |
+1
If it´s a Praktica 2.8/135, is one Pentacon Electric. The Sonnar 135/3.5 is better. There are many examples and comparisons here.
You could try the C / Y 2.8/135 or "Canon FD" 2.0/135. That can be adapted.
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:38 pm Post subject: Re: Carl Zeiss 135mm lenses - f/2.8.... f/3.5: is there much |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
| symphonic wrote: |
| tikkathree wrote: |
| I wish it had a hood |
It does have an in-built hood, though I don't know whether you regard that as insufficient?
|
Mine doesn't. There's what looks like a velvet friction ring on the "in-out" part of the lens and within the knurled focussing tube what might be the remains of something broken off.
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
| alex wrote: |
| I suspect the 2.8/135 DDR lens you're referring to isn't the C/Y mount Zeiss 2.8/135 Sonnar, but an Orestor 135mm f/2.8 lens that was also made in Praktica Bayonet mount for the B200 series of cameras from the DDR. The CZ Sonnar 2.8/135 is from the Contax/Yashica stable. The CY version is superb, and the 3.5/135 'S' is excellent, but I don't know the Orestor, though I've read many complimentary things about it. |
Alex,
Thanks for the expert input, my head's starting to spin. The vendor's description is brief but includes the words "Carl Zeiss, M42, 135mm and f/2.8".
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
Here you have a comparison of both lenses.
http://slrlensreview.com/web/carl-zeiss-slr-lenses-51/telephoto-slr-lenses-95/400-carl-zeiss-jena-mc-sonnar-135mm-m42-f35-lens-review.html
http://slrlensreview.com/web/carl-zeiss-slr-lenses-51/telephoto-slr-lenses-95/381-carl-zeiss-sonnar-t-135mm-f28-cy-lens-review.html
Greetings
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
Most helpful - cheers!
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
symphonic
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 550
Location: SE Europe, Croatia
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
symphonic wrote:
Thx for the links. If we were to judge by the MTF charts in those 2 reviews, the CZJ version is sharper, especially in edges. Interesting.
_________________
Toni,
EOS 450D
CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5 MC | Pancolar 50/1.8 MC
Contax Planar 50/1.4 AEJ | Contax Sonnar 135/2.8 AEJ
Yashica ML 28/2.8 | Zuiko 28/3.5
Vivitar Series1 105/2.5 OM
AF: Tokina 12-24 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AhamB
Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Posts: 733
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
AhamB wrote:
Those slrlens review's are a bit funny... they contain some useful information, but they say such meaningless things in it like the color production was "quite decent", or "pretty accurate". How am I supposed to imagine what that means?
I know people who kept the C/Y Sonnar 135/2.8 and sold their 135L because they like the Zeiss drawing style much more. These differences are not appreciated at all in most reviews. They're afraid to include some actual subjective information but they do judge bokeh and color reproduction with bogus terms... 
I'm all for side-by-side comparisons of real-world shots where you can see the differences in detail and color rendering with your own eyes, instead of looking at some stupid bar charts and figures. 16-9.net is a great example for all (lens tests section). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
| symphonic wrote: |
Thx for the links. If we were to judge by the MTF charts in those 2 reviews, the CZJ version is sharper, especially in edges. Interesting. |
I think the big difference is in the T coating . Besides both lenses, although Sonnar, have different formulas.
The 3.5/135, does not behave very well in high contrast situations. 2.8/135 I think makes it better.
And according to what he says AhamB, reviews are relative (even those of 16-9) but we can draw any useful conclusion if we add one's own research work. Nothing better than seeing many photographs taken by each lens you are interested.
AhamB
As for the "stupid graphics, only show what can be compared in those terms. Number of lines per mm or inch and the size in px of the CA. (Equal lenses have different benefits, sometimes more if they are of age ) It is obvious that everyone knows that this is only part of the information.
Having said that as friendly as possible. 
Sorry for my bad English.
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
WIDE OPEN
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tkbslc
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Posts: 194
Location: Utah, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
tkbslc wrote:
I own a 135mm f2.8 lens and I often stop it down to f3.5-5 for portraits anyway for DOF reasons. If you have a lens you are happy with, I would advise not messing with a good thing just to gain 1/2 a stop of aperture that likely will make zero difference in your shots.
_________________
Canon 30D + some AF and MF lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 755
Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
Cheers tkbslc and thank you.
_________________
I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djmike
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 930
Location: Taiwan
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
djmike wrote:
The cat shot is great. You prove Sonnar is a great lens again.
_________________
DSLR: Canon 400D
SLR: Nikon FM2 + Canon A-1 + Canon AE1-P + Praktica MTL-5B + Pentax Spotmatic F + Fujica ST801 + Voigtlander Bassematic + Voigtlander Vito + Rollei 35S + Rolleiflex SL35 ME + Canon QL17 GIII + Olympus Pen EE-3
Lenses
M42: CZJ Flektogon 35/2.4 + CZJ Flektogon Zebra 35/2.8 + CZJ Pancolar 50/1.8 + CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5 + CZJ Tessar 50/2.8 Chrome + Pentacon 135/2.8 + Pentacon 50/1.8 + SMC Takumar 50/1.4 + SMC Takumar 55/2 + SMC Takumar 135/3.5 + Fujinon 55/1.8 + Jupiter-9 85/2 + Jupiter-37A 135/3.5 + Helios 44-6 58/2
Nikor: Nikkor 50/1.4 + Nikkor 28/3.5 + Nikkor 35-105 Zoom + 36-72 Series E Zoom
Canon: Canon FD + 28/2.8 + 50/1.8 + Canon 35-105 Macro Zoom
Other: Rollei Planar HFT 50/1.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
More samples
Sonnar 135/3.5
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009
Posts: 385
Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
| LucisPictor wrote: |
I know the CZJ 3.5/135 (which is a good lens) and I know the Zeiss (Contax) 2.8/135 (which is a fantastic lens). I don't know a CZJ 2.8/135.
Anyway, the difference between f/2.8 and f/3.5 is hardly visible IMHO.
Sometimes f/3.5 lenses are better wide open than the faster ones.
But I don't think we can generalize that. |
Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 2.8/135 @5.6
some canon-lovers say to me that this pictures is horrible... like a painting...
they are fucking idiots
yaya they have in their hands ciofegon and merdagon...so they can't speak! 
my father likes this mine picture...
dededa de de dou dou
_________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses....
Last edited by metallaro1980 on Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:14 am; edited 6 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Here you go:
http://forum.mflenses.com/135mm-sonnar-lenses-tested-t31562,highlight,sonnar+lenses.html
I actually preferred the 135/3.5 for contrast and flare control  In reality, they're both brilliant but the Contax version has a touch more pop.
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
