Four 135mm Bokeh Beasts!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ส.ค. 2024
- A test, review and discussion, with sample images, of four 135mm lenses - the Pentax Takumar 135mm f 3.5, the Minolta MD 135mm f2.8, the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f 3.5 and the Olympus Zuiko 135mm f3.5.
Support this shannel at Patreon.com/zenography
This guy makes talking about lenses sound like a bedtime story, lol Great video.✌️
Yep. This is my new favorite vintage lens channel. I was just thinking about getting a 135mm and here you are. Beautiful content
Many thanks, glad you found it useful!
Happy to add to the content. 😁
Just a minor correction, the Minolta is a MC version. Not MD. Minolta made 5-6 different 135mm 2.8 lenses for their SR mount and the one on this video is specifically the MC Rokkor-PF version with the rubber focus ring and built in hood, if anyone cares.
Have a great day!
Thanks for the correction - and the lens loan!
Was looking to get one of these! Are their any major differences between the many versions? Is there a distinguishable one that’s better than the rest? Which one do you recommend for me to get?
@@danzelcastillo3700 Minolta made a lot of different versions of these lenses with different optical formulas and coatings so be careful when buying. I can't tell you which is 'best' because I haven't tried them all but I can tell you exactly what mine is. It reads "MC TELE ROKKOR-PF" (does NOT read Celtic or Auto). The outside has a 5 bumped row grip. Serial numbers range from 163xxxx to 166xxxx. Here's the exact version on eBay to get a look.
www.ebay.com/i/114379258067?chn=ps&mkevt=1&mkcid=28
@@danzelcastillo3700 Of the differences I have seen in the three Minolta 135s I've used, there are significant difference in contrast, how they render CA, and shape of out of focus point light sources that really give this lens the character I love.
@@vikmanphotography7984 Thanks for the detailed explanation above. How is the MD Super Denubia version? My main concern is the CA and image characteristics.
I have the Carl Zeiss and the Olympus, both are fine lenses and welcome additions to my collection.
I have the Minolta 135mm 2.8 and it really is astounding. My absolute favorite lens.
It's a stunner, no doubt about it!
@@zenography7923 Sir, I am super confused between Milonta 135mm F/2.8 and Pentacon 135 F/2.8.
Just bought one for my Minolta 35mm film camera. Can't wait to use it
I absolutely love your videos, it's like a one stop encyclopedia for some guidance on vintage lenses, narrated in such a mellow way, a joy to watch... I have just started my journey in building my vintage line up for my mirrorless slowly replacing my autofocus lenses, I find manually focusing brings more enjoyment to photography and indeed like yourself I buy them needing some work or a strip down, keep up the good work.
Very glad you're enjoying the channel!
@@zenography7923 yes I'm enjoying it very much so, I must say buying vintage lenses is very very addictive each one has different characteristics , just purchased my very first f1.2 lens, I'll be eagerly awaiting its arrival to test out.
Funny you should mention it: manual focus is so much more fun than autofocus as an experience. I can take my time to experiment with the depth of field rather than fighting with the camera.
I have the last MD version of the Minolta 135mm f/2.8 (the one right before mine with four elements is regarded as the best of them) and it is just amazing. Then again, it is very hard to get a 135mm lens wrong. Back in the day I owned a K Mart Focal brand 135mm f/2.8 (made by Kiron) that was outstanding.
On full frame these are about the best head shot lenses one could ask for.
I am not a specialist, just an amateur. I have tried various lenses on this 135mm focal length, Takumar 2.8 M42, Minolta cheap Celtic 135 3.5; OM 135 2.8 and I currently use a Nikkor 3.5 AI on my D700. Even with the cheapest, the Minolta, the results seemed very good to me, very sharp and very contrasty. Being old lenses you have to be careful with fungi and haze that if they are very affected by these problems, the performance will not be as expected. I think there is something about this focal length, perhaps that it is relatively simpler to build. They are also simpler lenses to clean, If someone wants to experience how a cleaning is done, it is a good lens to start with. Your videos are very pleasant and I congratulate you for your slow and calm way of speaking, It helps me improve my English.
Thanks, glad you're enjoying the channel!
I really like the Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm. Mine is a PK fit and I use it on my Canon full frame 5D bodies. It has a nice pull-out lens hood which helps with contrast and anti-flare. Very small and light too so I carry it in my pocket. (PK to EF adapters are very cheap too. Had to chop off the aperture lug to avoid fouling the mirror). As you say, beautifully made lenses. A lovely focal length which works well for portraits and street photos. I leave it on f5.6 or f8 and use manual settings with ISO 320 which suits the 5D very well.
That's a completely different lens
I bought a couple of these long portrait lenses out of curiosity and find they're awfully handy during a pandemic. : )
Ideal focal length, increase in value.
I return to your videos over and over. Thank you for sharing all of your expertise.
Thanks Kristi, glad you're enjoying the videos!
Your creamy, soft, bubbly bokeh quality voice made everyone of these lenses a winner! Now I'm confused which is a better one!!
Well done my friend and way to go.
.🎄🎄⛄🎅❄ *Merry Lockdown Christmas to you and all vintage lens fans* ❄🤶⛄🎄🎄
Many thanks and happy Christmas to you!
Thanks. I've been looking at getting a 135mm to add to my collection.
The Zeiss Jena 135mm is one of the best bargains out there. I have three of the zebra ones. Two in their original boxes. They were practically give away at the time I bought them. They are tremendously good lenses for the money. Don't be fooled by the slightly less than great build quality. The glass is exceptional. Obviously lead content glass. They are quite heavy. I like a lot of the old lead laced glass.
I couldn't agree more - build quality isn't quite up to Western brands of the time, but their optical quality often exceeds that of contemporary Western lenses.
you might wish to have a look at Konica hexanon 135mm f3.2--its colour accuracy and sharpness excels zuiko, Minolta, Carl zeiss jena, Pentax and pentacon in my test.
thanks for the soothing video and images - I'm going to do something with my Nikkor 135 f2.8 tomorrow as a result - although in the past I've found it one of the trickiest lenses to focus spot on, it has given some lovely portraits in the past
That sounds like a lovely lens!
the SMC Takumar 135mm f2.5 (second edition) is a must have
I have this lens in the K Mount version, ie Pentax-K SMC 135mm f2.5 and use it on full frame Pentax K-1 body or Fuji X-E4 and it is a great lens. I wanted one for years and finally found one in mint condition last year.
love the zuiko. Great sharpness and colours. Nice and small lens with built in hood. Great for landscape!! thansk for the video :) !!
Great video as always. I have the Carl Zeiss , Minolta, Olympus , Jupiter and Pentax 135mm's , as you can tell I love this focal range and they can be picked up for crazy cheap prices now. Keep up the great work :-)
Thanks!
Hi! What's your favorite out of the bunch?
As 135 mm lenses I can recommend the Auto Revuenon 1:2.8 /f=135 MC, or the Auto Revuenon 1:2.8 /f=135 multi coated. You really have to pay attention to the spelling, which is also reflected a little in the price. The MC is available for between 10 and 40€, the multi coated between 60 and 80€. If you're lucky, you can also get the multi coated for 20 - 40€ after a longer and more intensive search. I was lucky just a few days ago and am waiting for it to arrive soon.
Good to see the CZJ still holding up! I personally can't go past my Hanimex, they made a good 135 back in the day.
thanks for this timeless review! I can also recommend the Schneider Kreuznach 135 f4. Phantastic bulit from the 1960s? and really sharp.
The David Attenboro of photography, could make a living doing voice overs !
Please do class on how to get focus like you have in these images. I would love to see some techniques on how to handle focus with a digital camera with vintage 135mm lenses.
All done with focus peaking on the sony a7!
If you have a mirrorless camera, use focus peaking and image magnifier to assist. If you intend shooting anything moving, close your aperture to the lenses mid-range example f8 to increase depth of field and pre-focus on a target object in the area that your subject will “arrive” in.
Even if you use fast focusing auto focus lenses, the common rules apply and will assist your camera in getting the best shot. Experiment.
Another great video and lenses. Only this channel and vintage lenses can make mop heads look so good.
:) Thanks!
Nice choices, great video as always, I love the shots you do to illustrate the lenses, you are a better photographer than about 95% of the TH-camrs out there. Can I make one correction, you have reviewed Carl Zeiss Jena lenses many times. The pronunciation of 'Jena' is not 'Jenna' with an English 'J', it is 'Yehna' which is how it sounds from German. Keep up the good work.
You forgot the AUTO Mamiya/Sekor SX 1:2.8 f=135mm. Razor sharp, extreme contrast, heavenly colour rendition and excellent bokeh in an m42 mount.
Just received my copy of Olympus Zuiko 135mm f3.5 - now waiting for my adaptor to come (Fujifilm X-T1 mirrorless)
The adaptor came and some great pics taken, as well with my newly acquired Zuiko 200mm f4, which is fantastic
Is that a micro 4 thirds or an APSC format camera? I have an Omd EM10ii and am looking for some more lenses. I have some old OM system Zuikos but not the 135mm. Sounds cheap!
@@davebellamy4867 Fujifilm X-T1 is a 16Mpxl APS-C camera
lovely review. would definitely consider one to use for portrait photography after the 50mm and more
Beautiful episode,as always.It might be not everybodys cup of tea but mine it is.
Thank you! At least I have to mention the 15 Version of the Pentacon 135mm f2.8. Sharp from 2.8 ,buttersoft blur and beautiful bubbles doing a slight swirl.
Colours are beautiful and clear and the build quality is awesome.And they are unbelieveable cheap,in my thoughts an absolute " no- brainer ".
Many of the Pentacon lenses were really nice - I'll look out for that 135 if it's as nice as you say!
@@zenography7923 it's a identical twin of the earlier Meyer Optik Gorlitz 135 2.8 Orestor. Pentacon took over its production
Thanks so much for this video. I found a Minolta Rokkor 135mm f2.8 in good shape for a good price. I am looking forward to using it on a number of different cameras that I have.
I have the Olympus 135mm which I bought for £20 a real nice lens to use, one of my favourite lenses.........
I got my mits on a Hoya 135mm 2.8, m42. it's excellent! Delighted with it
scored my minolta 135 f2.8 on a flea market for 10$ in perfect condition :D gorgeous lens.
Great video. On my end, I have a Nikon 135 1/3.5 pre ai and it’s amazing too. I just bought the Nikon one which was about $40 a little less that 40 pounds because it was a native fit, but that Minolta lens looks amazing
There are some very nice lenses in this focal length - hope you're enjoying the Nikon!
I have the Zeiss and two of the Olympus. My second one I got for $20 including shipping full of fungus, but with a near mint body. I took it apart yesterday and cleared out the fungus, and now it render beautiful sharp images again. My first successful lens repair.
Well done! It's a great feeling when you restore a lens to good condition, but the task is definitely not for the faint of heart!
@@zenography7923 Definitely! I practiced on a 50mm 1.8 first and one of the elements fell on the floor and shattered. Also the fungus just refused to come off of one the elements using the water diluted Leica formula.
@@HansBaier Try hydrogen peroxide and isopropyl alcohol in the future. Finish with water.
@@vikmanphotography7984 Ibused a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and ammonia, and finished with IPA
Cracking video! now looking to add the zuiko 135 f3.5 to my kit, already have a 28mm f2.5, 35-70mm f4 and of course a 50mm f1.8
All nice lenses - enjoy!
@@zenography7923 I picked up a Zuiko 135 f3.5 for £20, a little beast for not many pennies!
the best pentax 135mm is probably from the early k-series... the SMC pentax 135mm f2.5.
I wanted the SMC Pentax K 135mm f2.5 for many years and finally found one last year in mint condition. I have the Takumar 135mm f3.5 as well but the K mount f2.5 is next level !
I surprised you never mention Nikon. The nikkor Q 135 2.8 and the newer 135 2.8ai render so beautifully and the bokeh is very smooth.
Not mentioned only because I don't have any Nikons! They do sound nice though...
@@zenography7923 that's what I mean. You need to get some nikkors man! The 50 1.4ai, the 135 2.8Ai, the 200 f4ai with 9 aperture blades. The 50 f2 auto renders b&w like a Leica. It's been called the Japanese summicron
@@Jupiter2ignite I agree Chris, it's a fairly obvious gap in Z's line outs, however as a 40 year Nikon user and regular ebayer, I think the old mf Nikon lenses are a bit more expensive than lots of others - they can be used on todays Nikon slrs and are still great, but all sorts of other brand users can use them quite easily - not so the other way around. Inspired by these vids I bought a Pentax spotmatic just for the 28mm it came with, and a so called adapter - the takukmar felt lovey but only worked as a very limited macro, a pity, but i know now not to trust the claims of adaptor ads
@@1davidpeter gotta be careful with the flange distance of different camera/lens mounts and make sure the adapter is of the correct depth to compensate.
Best of luck with future adapting!
Zenography if you want a Nikkor 135mm f2.8 to compare let me know as I’m got one you can borrow
I have an older Takumar preset 135mm. No aperture click and no unnecessary aperture mechanisms like all the early Takumar preset lenses so physically small. Superb Takumar build quality. The only downside is that you can't get that close.
That sounds a very nice lens - compact is always better in my book!
Zenogrphy is great 👍
I recently got a Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm and I'm loving it, I bought it on a whim because it was only £15 but I've found it more useful than I thought it would be. I'm still getting used to the focal length but I've got a handful of nice arty photos (well I think they are) out of it, most of them taken from in a moving car! :D
Have and use the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar, but my favourites are the Triotar, the Jupiter 37A, the 20-aperture blade Tair and the Revuenon. From these, the Triotar is the winner.
Don’t know if this will be viewed or not. I just got the Minolta and have the Jena on the way (coming from Germany). I also have the Canon FD version. Really love this focal length. I was blown away the first time I used the Canon FD 135. Excited to get the Jena.
The Minolta is a beautiful lens. I know I got a MC3 copy, but the build isn’t as nice as my other 2 Minolta lenses. And, definitely not as nice as the Canon. But, definitely better than a lot of modern glass.
I love the images I get from it. Both color and B&W.
I've heard the Canon is nice, but how does it compare to the CZJ?
@@zenography7923 thank you for replying. I honestly didn’t expect it.
I haven’t really had the opportunity to use it yet….for more than a few test shots. However, from what I’ve seen it’s easily as sharp as the Canon. But….I’d say the colors are a bit punchier. Maybe. It’s definitely lighter and a fair bit smaller. More testing is necessary. I brought all my Contax Zeiss glass and the CZJ 135 with us on our trip. So, I’ll be shooting it more when we go to visit some state parks.
As I’ve used the Minolta more I’m less of a fan. It’s ok. For me it seems to have issues with nailing focus, even with focus zooming and peaking. Some shots are amazing, while others fall flat on there face. I got so frustrated with it I took it off and put on the MC 50 1.4 and was able to capture some nice images.
If you’re interested in testing the Canon I’d be happy to mail it to you. I’m curious as to what you’d think of it. I got mine for sub $100. So, I’ve got no complaints. Matter of fact, for what I’ve spent on my 3 135s I really can’t complain. Lol.
@@zenography7923
So, after using the CZJ for this last trip, I can say it’s as nice as the Canon. I am going to test both here at home. But, I definitely prefer the CZJ and Canon over the Minolta. But…I’ll probably test it at the same time. The colors of the CZJ just blew me away. They definitely pop more than I remember the Canon. But, I’ll know more after I take some shots with them.
for me, zuiko is the clear winner.
i also love my jupiter 37am 135mm f3.5 lens
The Zuiko is fantastic, no doubt about it, but the CZJ 135 f3.5 certainly gives it a run for its money! I haven't used the J37 - yet!
I have the Minolta one. So far, I love it
Thank you so much for taking the time to produce yet another informative video!
And thank you for watching!
@@zenography7923 truly my pleasure! ✌
I have severely neglected my Pentax SMC 135mm f3.5 (not the Takumar). Going to take it out for some deer shooting on Tuesday (Dunham Park).
I have an Olympus teleconverter on the end which pushes it up to around 200mm too. F3.5 is more than wide enough for plenty of blur. Might do a quick video about it actually, as the teleconverter doesn't need an adapter and only cost £5-10. The lens was only £15 too.
Not the sharpest optics, but has replaced my Fuji 50-230mm. F3.5 at 200mm (300 on my XE2) is great for blur.
I have the same version of the CZJ 135mm and I love it. My other favorites are the Canon FD 135mm which I have both the 3.5 and the top of the range 2.5 aperture version.
Hey there. Is the FD 135 3.5 worth buying?
@@juanpilanz As long as it is in good shape absolutely it is worth it. the 3.5 version was one of my favorite lenses for years. It is also way lighter if that matters for your purposes.
Daniel Stewart awesome, thanks! I decided to get one in the end
I have 2 of the 4 here - the Minolta and Takumar. Very good lenses on the cheap. I have only shot the Minolta on film though. Gotta get an adapter after watching this. Thank you for this wonderful video.
My Minolta is honestly my favorite portrait lens for when I have the time to focus manually. Between the color rendering, subtle CA, long focus throw, no rough spots in the bokeh, and OOF highlight shape, none of my modern lenses feel quite right in comparison. (And I have about 8k in glass to pick from)
I found it pretty impressive too!
You have got to get yourself a Pentax 135 f2.5. Its M42 mount. Its one of my all time favorites and is surprisingly better than their f3.5 variants.
I'd love to try one!
@@zenography7923 I have the Super Takumar f2.5 M42. It is an ideal portrait lens.
Please please review some vintage telephoto 200mm and 300mm lenses too.
Some great stuff here! I have the Takumar myself, very happy with that one. Super compact, very sharp and renders wonderfully on both digital and film. Great for concerts and stage performances.
The F numbers aren't that important with tele lenses as you mentioned. As long as there's enough light. One of the nicest lenses I own for smooth bokeh is my old Leica 135mm Elmar, and that's only an F4!
I agree - a lovely lens which also has a pull-out hood.
The same is true of the Jupiter 11 - f4 max, 2 metres minimum focus distance - but it makes some great images!
Well, I have none of these. I do, however, own a 135 mm 1:2.8 Praktica with m42 mount. Picked it up for 20 euros at a flea market.
I have a M42 Helios 135 mm 2.8. It says made in Japan on it and has a built in slide out lenshood.
Very sharp with great colour rendition and excellent contrast.
I bought it in a junk shop for £10 with a Zenith Em.
A pretty good find!
These can be found under a number of brand names and are rebranded lenses made by either chinon out of Japan or samyang from Korea. Still great lenses at a really good price.
Found a Minolta One in mint condition at a thrift shop for 9$! Just ordered an adapter ring. So Stoked to try it out.
One of the nicest 135s I've used - enjoy!
@@zenography7923 After some testing i can fully agree that the Minolta MC Expert 135mm lens is an incredible vintage piece of gear! So worth that tiny bit of money, if i knew the lens beforehand i could easily have payed the double!
I just bought the MD version of the Minolta 135mm F1:3.5 lens, as an odd consequence of senility, I accidentally purchased another one with a faulty, nonetheless free Minolta X9 camera for £19.99, so when I fix the camera, it will be free with the lens sale.
The other I will keep for my gorgeous Minolta XD-11. (US model designation for the XD-7 sold in Europe).
I agree about the Pentax and Takumar lenses I have the Takumar 135 3.5 , the Pentax 135mm 3.5 m lens wit the built in hood as well as the Pentax 150mm M 3.5 lens again with the built in hood . The M lenses are so small they look like a 50mm lens on the camera . I use them when I want background blur and a isolated image
The Takumar lens gave me the flattest and least attractive images of any other 135mm I've tried in M42. A lovely sharp lens at f5.6 and f8 and even F11. Outside of that range and it was a chromatic aberration monster with heaps of distortion. I got a second in mint condition at it was just as limited for those artsy styles of shots this movie shows so well.
I use a Takumar 135mm f3.5 on an old Canon 6D Mk2.
It's a great lens.
I'm now looking for a f2.5, curious to see the difference.
same setup here! :D
The Jupiter 37A 135mm should have made this list.
There's one more vintage bokeh monster for cheap: *Pentacon 135mm f/2.8* Sharp even wide open on modern 20mpx camera with all nice picture qualities of the 1970s. I'll do a review on my channel later. Plus comparison with its smaller, but also perfect brother Pentacon 100mm f/2.8 and not so good Super Marexar 135mm f/2.8, which I have never seen on the web at all, but accidentally managed to purchase over mobile ads app =)
I totally agree. Beautiful build quality ,great colours and sharpness at low budget. Good to know that there are so many good of them out there...
One of my first vintage lenses and it didn't dissappoint me!
The Pentacon of course is the exact same as the earlier Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Orestor 135 2.8
Before I hit the "Like" button and kicked it up to 136 likes, there were 135 likes! Ooh...woo...hoo. 135mm primes are a must have. I have the Jupiter-11 and an old Nikkor 135mm f/2,8 in my arsenal. :-)
I love the J11 but haven't tried the Nikkor. Sounds nice though...
Bought a cheap 135mm f3.5 Oly. Wee bit of fungus and the mount damaged. Epoxyied it to m43 adapyor and use it it on my em1 ii.
I love vintage lenses!
Check out Rodenstock Yronar 135/3.5 and Mamiya/Sekor 135/3.5 😊👌
Great Video
Thanks!
I’m afraid I’ve only a Hoya 135 mm. f2.8 , have yet to try on my canon dslr ..... nice vid sir regards Fred
I have a couple of Hoyas. The 35-75 f4 zoom is gorgeous. My 28mm f2.8 needs work and the jury is still out.
Thanks Fred, glad you enjoyed it!
You've been infected by the "likely" bug then?
A lovely vid. Well constructed, paced, researched, thoughtful.
Thanks.
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! What's the 'likely' bug?
@@zenography7923
It appears that "likely" has replaced probably. Personally, it grates and I am sure it is simply a manifestation of "hipness." It almost beats "so," and you wonder if you've missed some of the conversation.
I abhor trendy language for the sake of it.
Thanks
Love this video, I keep coming back to it. Thank you! Do you think there is a difference in optical quality between Carl Zeiss Jena 135 "electric" versus the non-electric type?
I like my Meyer Optic Gorlitz 135mm f/2.8
If you have to choose between the takumar and the zuiko, despite any price difference, which one would you get?
I bought an old Praktica camera with a Hanimex 135mm f3.5 lens. Unforntunatlely it has some play between the barels and the focus ring is not smooth (I should disarm it to fix this problems). I use it with my fuji XT5 and the images are quite pleasent. Do you know anything about this lens? Had you ever tried one? Thank you!
Do you know of a Sunagor 135 mm f2.8 with multiple blade diaphragm (13) and is called Series 1.
Cheers Nigel.....
Great lenses..thanks...
I have the super multi coated takumar 2.5 but I can't change the aperture when in the adapter. It is set to manual. It works well when not in the adapter. I read something about adapters with and without flange. Can you help me, please?
Good analysis, Nikon 135mm F2.8 AIS is missing in this list. Bought based on the suggestion of Angry photographer and really worth adding to the lens collection. :-)
I haven't tried that one - I've heard it's nice though! Thanks for tuning in.
I've found a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar but it's the zebra version of it, I hope it will perform nice anyway. Will need to compare it to my Jupiter 37A.
I've also found a Pancolar 50mm 1.8, zebra version but this one has exacta instead of screw mount, I think I will sell this one.
I've spent €10 for each.
It's the first time I find cheap lenses and cameras
You've done very well to find those lenses for such low prices. The CZJ Pancolar for Exacta is, if it's the f2 version, a slightly different and not quite so nice lens as the later M42 1.8. Still, you could sell it for a good profit and get a later one, if you wanted!
@@zenography7923 it's the f1.8 exacta mount, I don't have cameras or adapters for this mount, that's why I think I will sell it.
Thanks for your videos, they are excellent and original!
The name of the actor you remind me of finally hit me! Steve Buscemi, a very talented guy.
One of my favourite actors, without a doubt!
Hello, and thank you for a beatyfull rewievs! Can you suggest me some Carl Zeiss planar 120 mm 5,6 lense for ultimate sharp macro photography? Or you have another adwice about vintage macro lens with extra characteristics? Thank you!
As a youth I used to sell a lot of these lenses. Jessops in Leeds. Back then I was a Yashica/Contax fan boy. But defected to Nikon. FE2.
Can't say I blame you, the fe2 is a very nice camera - I still enjoy shooting mine today!
@@zenography7923 yup. It was/is a beauty. Loved the feedback of click stops on shutter speed selector dial. Nikon nailed it.
Thank you very much again (I am the one to whom you suggested to have the Leica Summar cleaned: meanwhile I am really very much grateful for your suggestion/ the lens performs very much better). Now I want to ask you about the Jena Sonnar of this review: how it performs with landscape and particularly infinity focus?
I'm glad the Leica cleaned up nicely - they're very nice lenses and are worth servicing, and it's good for many more years now! As for the Sonnar, as a 135 it's perhaps a bit long for landscapes, but it's a very fine lens and I've never had a problem with infinity focus. I think it should work fine!
@@zenography7923 Thank you very much again
@@zenography7923 Thank you very much again (now starts the hunt for a clean and working copy)
Very good video, I enjoy your commentary. I'm thinking about the Minolta for crop sensor but wonder if I would get good results considering crop factor,. Thanks for the video.
Haven't tried it myself, but I'm sure it would work fine. The effective focal length would be doubled, so a 135 would become an effective 270, which may be a bit too long...?
@@zenography7923 I think you meant the effective focal length would be a 1.5 x crop factor making it a 202.5mm lens.
@@dagr8ape a 135 on APS-C is a bit long for most things though I do periodically use my 70-200 2.8 @200mm for outdoor portraiture. I'd feel more comfortable recommending either a Jupiter 9 85mm or a Minolta MC 100mm 2.5 for most people.
Thank you for sharing your deep knowledge of vintage lenses. However, I am afraid a new addiction is forming within me now. Well, I might as well go with it and subscribe.
There. It is done.
What camera did you use for this lens test. Just curious. Was it the Sony A7. Or another?
Great vid as usual. Thank you.
All these images were shot on a sony a7. Thanks for watching!
Thank you for doing these comparisons.they are really useful. I have been given a 135mm Jenna Triostar. I havent got an adater yet for my Fuji X -A5 but wondered how it compares to these beautiful lenses you review? Is it worth holding on to? I shoot mainly monochrome IR but this video has convinced me how magical colour can be. Thank you.
I'm glad you enjoyed the video! I haven't tried the Triostar I'm afraid so can't comment. Sorry I can't be of more help!
which is the best for you? I prefer lens withou chromatic aberration. 0.5 or 0.7 maximun.
How about minimum focusing distance, number of aperture blades, kind of coatings used, age, flare resistance?
I have the albinar 135 f2.8 but I need the adapter m or e mount
Hi, Thanks! How does the Minolta MD 4.0/200mm compare to its 135mm counterpart? Is it equally great? Best, Ralf
Hi Ralf, unfortunately I haven't tried this lens, but it's entirely possible one will find its way to me soon!
I’m really enjoying your videos and finding out about old lenses. Is there a reason you went for the f3.5 Jena opposed to the f2.8 version or was it simply a case of what you had?
It was just what I had in at the time, an impressive lens despite being just a bit slow. I'd love to try the 2.8 though...
Color science has more to do with the camera body you use and how it interprets the raw files. The lens plays I think a much smaller role than people think, unless its got a filter or something, but my understanding is that these are clear lenses, so they transmit color without really affecting it as much, but things like contrast would certainly be affected by the lens and to some degree that would affect how the raw file is rendered. Which body did you use to shoot the lenses with, or was it a combination of bodies to work with the different lens mounts?
I watchex a comparison (in an article of fstoppers I think) of a vintage 135mm lens with a modern Nikkor in the same camera, the vintage lens produced bluish tones.
Your picture in your video shows the Minolta MC PF not the MD version?
Missing two of the best 135s -- the Canon nfd 135mm f2 (a true bokeh monster) and jupiter 37am mc which is a super sharp, super smooth sonar design that updates the classic zeiss design.
I'll look out for them!
@@zenography7923 ps-love your podcast
Vivitar 135mm f2.8 : )
Although Optomax not great they do 10 blade f3. 5
I have a f2.8 with 6 apt blades....
Super bedtime stories my friend.....class video...
Hi…I own a Coslinar 135 mm 2.8. I can’t find any information on this lens. Do you know anything about this wonderful gem? Thanks in advance.
Gerie, I'm afraid I don't know it either, sorry! Thanks for watching.
Hello, if you only can take one to the video production or shooting, which one will you pick?
Thank you
CZJ, every time!
Which 135 lens is best for landscape photography? Pls my idol !
What camera body was used in these tests? Just curious. Thank you for all of these wonderful videos.
All shot on the Sony A7. Glad you enjoyed the video!
Very enjoyable video. You are shooting on a Sony a7 which is full frame. Do your remarks cover crop sensor such as Xe3 as well?
They'll all work fine on your fuji but there will be a crop factor because of the smaller sensor - the focal length of the lens will (effectively) increase by about a third, unless you use a focal reducer.
Multiple the lens focal length by 1.5 and that will be what you get on fujifilm. For the 135mm we will get 200mm.
Great video thanks a lot. I find a Konica Hexanon 135mm F3.2 with AR-FX adaptor. Do you suggest it or go with one of your picks? I will be using it with my X-T3. Thanks again.
The Hexanon 3.2 is considered to be the best of the Konica 135s and I can confirm it's very nice - I think the Olympus might be just slightly nicer though...
@@zenography7923 Thanks a lot.