Your video was the straw that "broke the camel's back" toward me buying this lens. Love your straight forward, no nonsense, approach. Thank you, ACho! All the best!
Adrian Cho Photography Hi Adrian. Loved the the production that you put together on the 135 GM by Sony. I currently own the 24-70 GM and the 85mm GM, too. My camera is the A9II. It’s been somewhat of a tough decision for me to make, only because I’ll be having to give up my 85mm GM in turn for the 135mm. For the sole reason of cost. The GM lineup isn’t cheap, and I won’t be able to purchase the 135mm and keep the 85mm too. Someday, perhaps, I’ll be able to have both. My 85 is in like new condition, with the box and all of the extras. I contacted Adorama, where I bought my gear, and they quoted me a $1,100 buy back price. I bought into it brand new, so I’ll be losing money. But I really want to give the 135 a shot. The only draw back is that I’ll need quite a bit more room to work with 135 but I feel that it’s worth it, for the experience that I’ll get in return. I absolutely love the 85! The images that it produces are nothing less than stellar! I shoot mainly portraits, and some events, on the side, too. Thank you, again!
I love it for landscape, close-up, portrait, arcitecture, street and allround photography, recently I used aa a close-up lens both at fullformat and in APSC mode on my Sony A7RIV, the pictures turned out very well, so it is good for nature close-up photography as well :) Happy New Year and gear ;) Before the Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, I had the Canon EF 135mm 2.0 L which is a very good lens, but the Sony are much better and that tells a lot ! The only thing I want are a 1.4X teleconverter for the Sony, I had a 1.4X for the Canon and I loved that combination, which I used many times. My kit of lenses are Sony 24mm 1.4 GM, Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8, Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 G and a lot of "classic" anaolog manually focusing lenses from Canon FDn, Leica R and Tamron.
I have the A7riv and been looking at this lens for this exact reason, a higher f stop, and it is 200mm in crop mode, and a lot lighter. I recently was asked to leave a sporting event because my 100-400mm wasn't allowed. So a lot of reasons to invest in this lens than a 70-200.
Really like your review, the idea of shooting wildlife with 135mm is truly inspiring! I'm hesitating to purchase it, but looking for information if this lens mounted on A7c can deal with ronin dji 3rs mini (regarding size and weight)?
Sometimes I put my 135mm GM on my a6600 just for fun. Gives me effectively a really fast 200mm lens. I also have 2 A7R4 cameras and longer lenses. But, the 135mm GM is an incredible lens.
Very interesting video, I’m torn up between the 135mm and the 70-200mm f/2.8… for dog photography mainly (portraits and action) - which one of the two would you recommend me, knowing that I own a Sony Alpha 7II ?
Hello Adrian, interesting video. I have a question for you: why do you use the crop mode in the field instead of cropping later in post? For sure the crop mode allows the buffer of the camera to work faster but don't you loose flexibility? Thank you, Ciao! Danilo
Hi Danilo Torre. I think you’ll have your answers if you watch this video: ua-cam.com/video/IC1NVkJIoS0/v-deo.html. If you still have questions after that I suggest you pop on over to my new Discord server where we can chat about it: clickon.link/wildlifephototalk.
good review, i also use this combination for portrait & wildlife , and i think its my favorite lens. I struggle to choose between the sigma 35mm 1.2 and the 135mm gm.
Joshua Kraemer I’ve never seen a comparison and to be honest I’ve seen very few people using the 135 for wildlife. Can I ask you why you might be interested in the Sigma over the GM?
Great video! I've been thinking about getting the Sony 135mm f1.8 GM and use it with the A7RIV. How does it perform with the 1.4x teleconverter on the A7RIV? Looking to get a bit more range and wanted to know if using the teleconverter with an extra stop while also shooting in crop mode is still worth it. Thanks!
HI Pete. Thanks for watching. Unfortunately you can’t use any of the teleconverters with the 135 GM. You can only use use teleconverters with the longer lenses like the 100-400, 200-600, 400, 600, or 70-200 f2.8.
Hi Mark. I agree with you. That's partially because in Africa you can often get pretty close to the animals. An even more interesting lens but one that is somewhat less flexible is the Sigma 105 f1.4. Unfortunately I couldn't bring mine on my recent Africa trip because of the weight. The 135 is still the best overall especially given the size, weight, AF speed, and image quality.
It is bad that the animal eye af disables the "tracking" focus in the options, the tracking that it is basic for wildlife photography is missing if you used animal af?
Yes this only happens with the A7RIV. The A9 (and A9II) allow Animal Eye AF and tracking to work at the same time. I’ve confirmed with Sony that it’s not a bug on the A7RIV that it doesn’t allow this. I am guessing it is a limitation with processing power.
Michael, you can’t use the 135 GM with extenders so that’s one advantage that the 70-200 has. However once you start using them, you’re at f4 or f5.6 and the 70-200 becomes a very different beast compared to the 135 at f1.8. I had the 70-200 in the past but never did a direct comparison against the 135 but from the images I’ve taken, there’s absolutely no comparison at all. The 135 walks all over the 70-200. That’s what one would expect given that you’re comparing a zoom and a prime. For more data, take a look at the MTF charts from the Lensrentals tests on the 70-200 GM here: www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-comparison-of-the-sony-fe-70-200mm-f2-8-gm-oss/ and compare them to the ones for the 135 at the link that I included in the description for this video. I believe the general consensus is that the 70-200 GM is not the best of the GM lenses and doesn’t compare well even to the Canon and Nikon equivalents whereas the 135 is one of the sharpest lenses around, if not the sharpest (at least considering only lenses with autofocus capability).
Adrian Cho Photography Great info. I’m currently shooting the a9ii and a7riii. I have both the 400, my best lens, and the 200-600. The iso performance of the a9ii is phenomenal. Your presentations now have me thinking of getting the a7iv. My holdback has been iso performance. I’m glad I ran across your site and will spread the word. Thanks
Michael Cohen the problem with ISO performance is everyone has different tolerances for noise. For sure the A7RIV won’t be as good as the A9II (or A9) for ISO but it would be unreasonable to expect it to be given the additional resolution. I think the only thing you can do is try it. Usually I don’t shoot above ISO 2000 with the A7RIV and typically I’m way, way below that.
Hi Adrian, I've been playing around with this same combo for wildlife and notice that it sometimes produce a lot of moire in feather and fur details. Have you encountered anything like that in your use? It's especially apparent for fur that is backlit, for example. I can usually fix it in Lightroom with local adjustments, but this can be time consuming. Thanks!
Khoa Tran that’s an interesting observation. I have not noticed that specifically whether in backlit shots or not. In fact I’ll be making a video soon that will be talking about some lighting things including backlit shots so I’ll have to take a look for this.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks, I'll be sure to watch that video when it's out. I just want to make sure it's not something wrong with my sensor because I don't see anyone else mentioning such an issue.
Khoa Tran I’ve not heard of it happening at all. Have you thought about posting on one of the forums along with a sample showing what you are seeing, just to see if anyone else is seeing the same issue?
I just received the Sony FE135mm (after watching your vlog) and while it's good and sharp like you mentioned, the weight is near borderline for me -- quite heavy for long/single hand use. I have read that Batis 135mm f2.8 (E-Mount) produces photos of similar quality (except the lower stops), similar in AF speed (a tad slower), but is much lighter and therefore suitable for traveling use. Do you have a chance to use Batis 135mm f2.8 for wildlife and how would you compare the two? Thanks!
Hi Serryth. I struggled a lot with the same decision and in the end I still decided to go with the Sony 135. I didn't get a chance to try the Batis in the flesh. For me the weight is OK and I'm willing to take it for the better performance.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thank you so much for your honest comment. :D Just wanted you to know that it was what you said about FE135mm basically replaced the 70-200mm as the APSC mode turned the 135mm into ~200mm that pushed me over. Like your wildlife photos!
Serryth I was looking again tonight at the Batis 135, revisiting some of my previous research about it, and apart from the fact that it’s 1 1/3 stop slower than the 135 GM, it’s definitely not as sharp as the 135 GM. Additionally, while the Batis 135 is two-thirds of the weight of the 135 GM, it’s no smaller in size. As I mentioned, I personally didn’t feel that tradeoff was worth it. I understand it’s still a little heavy but when you consider that you can get ~200mm out of it, I think it’s a pretty good deal. If you’ve had a chance to get some good wildlife shots with the 135 GM I suspect you’ll be pretty impressed with it. Especially for people who can’t afford the 400 or 600 GM, the 135 GM is a way to experience some of that GM telephoto magic at a lower price bracket.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks! The reason that made me waiver was that I found a used Batis at ~1k (half the price of the FE135mm)! So I was agonizing about should I spend that money on the FE 135mm, or potentially get two lenses with the same money. Then your comment pushed me over (the cliff, ahhhh... ) Haha...
@@AdrianChoPhotography The Sony FE 135mm f1.8 is here and I took it out on the sunset of the Super Moon to shoot heron and seagulls on a nearby lake. As you said, it is super, super sharp! I can see the craters on the moon, and the heron was great too. Thank you so much! :D
Your video was the straw that "broke the camel's back" toward me buying this lens. Love your straight forward, no nonsense, approach. Thank you, ACho! All the best!
Hey Tony, thanks for watching. So what do you think of the lens?
Adrian Cho Photography Hi Adrian. Loved the the production that you put together on the 135 GM by Sony. I currently own the 24-70 GM and the 85mm GM, too. My camera is the A9II. It’s been somewhat of a tough decision for me to make, only because I’ll be having to give up my 85mm GM in turn for the 135mm. For the sole reason of cost. The GM lineup isn’t cheap, and I won’t be able to purchase the 135mm and keep the 85mm too. Someday, perhaps, I’ll be able to have both. My 85 is in like new condition, with the box and all of the extras. I contacted Adorama, where I bought my gear, and they quoted me a $1,100 buy back price. I bought into it brand new, so I’ll be losing money. But I really want to give the 135 a shot. The only draw back is that I’ll need quite a bit more room to work with 135 but I feel that it’s worth it, for the experience that I’ll get in return. I absolutely love the 85! The images that it produces are nothing less than stellar! I shoot mainly portraits, and some events, on the side, too. Thank you, again!
tony haltmar so how has the 135 GM worked out for you and have you seen the new Sigma 85?
Really beautiful results!
I love it for landscape, close-up, portrait, arcitecture, street and allround photography, recently I used aa a close-up lens both at fullformat and in APSC mode on my Sony A7RIV, the pictures turned out very well, so it is good for nature close-up photography as well :) Happy New Year and gear ;)
Before the Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, I had the Canon EF 135mm 2.0 L which is a very good lens, but the Sony are much better and that tells a lot !
The only thing I want are a 1.4X teleconverter for the Sony, I had a 1.4X for the Canon and I loved that combination, which I used many times.
My kit of lenses are Sony 24mm 1.4 GM, Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8, Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 G and a lot of "classic" anaolog manually focusing lenses from Canon FDn, Leica R and Tamron.
Just ordered the Samyang 135mm f/1.8, as a second lens for wildlife, to go with a 200-600mm. Thank you!
Thank you so much brother 😍 I was confused between Sony 70200f2.8 and 135f1.8 but now for me 135mmf1.8 will be more useful .
Glad to hear it was helpful. Let me know how it goes. Believe me, the 135 GM is a beast.
Calm voice with good explanation on my favorite camera so far, ty, subbed 👍
Edwin, thanks for subscribing! Glad to know you’re enjoying your A7RIV.
I have the A7riv and been looking at this lens for this exact reason, a higher f stop, and it is 200mm in crop mode, and a lot lighter. I recently was asked to leave a sporting event because my 100-400mm wasn't allowed. So a lot of reasons to invest in this lens than a 70-200.
Just order this big boy after the 400 prime !! What a lense !! Sooo sharp 🙏
Really like your review, the idea of shooting wildlife with 135mm is truly inspiring! I'm hesitating to purchase it, but looking for information if this lens mounted on A7c can deal with ronin dji 3rs mini (regarding size and weight)?
Sometimes I put my 135mm GM on my a6600 just for fun. Gives me effectively a really fast 200mm lens. I also have 2 A7R4 cameras and longer lenses. But, the 135mm GM is an incredible lens.
Very interesting video, I’m torn up between the 135mm and the 70-200mm f/2.8… for dog photography mainly (portraits and action) - which one of the two would you recommend me, knowing that I own a Sony Alpha 7II ?
Hello Adrian, interesting video. I have a question for you: why do you use the crop mode in the field instead of cropping later in post? For sure the crop mode allows the buffer of the camera to work faster but don't you loose flexibility? Thank you, Ciao! Danilo
Hi Danilo Torre. I think you’ll have your answers if you watch this video: ua-cam.com/video/IC1NVkJIoS0/v-deo.html. If you still have questions after that I suggest you pop on over to my new Discord server where we can chat about it: clickon.link/wildlifephototalk.
Interesting to know
good review, i also use this combination for portrait & wildlife , and i think its my favorite lens. I struggle to choose between the sigma 35mm 1.2 and the 135mm gm.
Hey Brae. Thanks for chiming in. Do you have any wildlife shots taken with the Sigma? I'd love to see some if you do.
Joshua Kraemer I’ve never seen a comparison and to be honest I’ve seen very few people using the 135 for wildlife. Can I ask you why you might be interested in the Sigma over the GM?
I will test in couple of weeks and let you know
And yet you didn’t
@@michael1326 it is great
Great insight Adrian, keep it up
Sam, thanks for watching!
Great video! I've been thinking about getting the Sony 135mm f1.8 GM and use it with the A7RIV. How does it perform with the 1.4x teleconverter on the A7RIV? Looking to get a bit more range and wanted to know if using the teleconverter with an extra stop while also shooting in crop mode is still worth it. Thanks!
HI Pete. Thanks for watching. Unfortunately you can’t use any of the teleconverters with the 135 GM. You can only use use teleconverters with the longer lenses like the 100-400, 200-600, 400, 600, or 70-200 f2.8.
thanks bro
Looking at the African photos on your website, all the really interesting photos were taken with this lens
Hi Mark. I agree with you. That's partially because in Africa you can often get pretty close to the animals. An even more interesting lens but one that is somewhat less flexible is the Sigma 105 f1.4. Unfortunately I couldn't bring mine on my recent Africa trip because of the weight. The 135 is still the best overall especially given the size, weight, AF speed, and image quality.
It is bad that the animal eye af disables the "tracking" focus in the options, the tracking that it is basic for wildlife photography is missing if you used animal af?
Yes this only happens with the A7RIV. The A9 (and A9II) allow Animal Eye AF and tracking to work at the same time. I’ve confirmed with Sony that it’s not a bug on the A7RIV that it doesn’t allow this. I am guessing it is a limitation with processing power.
📸
Great information. Other than weight, how would compare sharpness with 70-200? Also, how does it perform with extenders? Thanks
Michael, you can’t use the 135 GM with extenders so that’s one advantage that the 70-200 has. However once you start using them, you’re at f4 or f5.6 and the 70-200 becomes a very different beast compared to the 135 at f1.8. I had the 70-200 in the past but never did a direct comparison against the 135 but from the images I’ve taken, there’s absolutely no comparison at all. The 135 walks all over the 70-200. That’s what one would expect given that you’re comparing a zoom and a prime. For more data, take a look at the MTF charts from the Lensrentals tests on the 70-200 GM here: www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-comparison-of-the-sony-fe-70-200mm-f2-8-gm-oss/ and compare them to the ones for the 135 at the link that I included in the description for this video. I believe the general consensus is that the 70-200 GM is not the best of the GM lenses and doesn’t compare well even to the Canon and Nikon equivalents whereas the 135 is one of the sharpest lenses around, if not the sharpest (at least considering only lenses with autofocus capability).
Adrian Cho Photography Great info. I’m currently shooting the a9ii and a7riii. I have both the 400, my best lens, and the 200-600. The iso performance of the a9ii is phenomenal. Your presentations now have me thinking of getting the a7iv. My holdback has been iso performance. I’m glad I ran across your site and will spread the word. Thanks
Michael Cohen the problem with ISO performance is everyone has different tolerances for noise. For sure the A7RIV won’t be as good as the A9II (or A9) for ISO but it would be unreasonable to expect it to be given the additional resolution. I think the only thing you can do is try it. Usually I don’t shoot above ISO 2000 with the A7RIV and typically I’m way, way below that.
have both... 135GM is WAY sharper than 70200GM. Honestly its not close
I also prefer the 135mm. For me it is a 135-200mm f/1.8-2.8 😂
Hi Adrian, I've been playing around with this same combo for wildlife and notice that it sometimes produce a lot of moire in feather and fur details. Have you encountered anything like that in your use? It's especially apparent for fur that is backlit, for example. I can usually fix it in Lightroom with local adjustments, but this can be time consuming. Thanks!
Khoa Tran that’s an interesting observation. I have not noticed that specifically whether in backlit shots or not. In fact I’ll be making a video soon that will be talking about some lighting things including backlit shots so I’ll have to take a look for this.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks, I'll be sure to watch that video when it's out. I just want to make sure it's not something wrong with my sensor because I don't see anyone else mentioning such an issue.
Khoa Tran I’ve not heard of it happening at all. Have you thought about posting on one of the forums along with a sample showing what you are seeing, just to see if anyone else is seeing the same issue?
@@AdrianChoPhotography good idea, I will make a post about it on reddit or dpreview soon.
I just received the Sony FE135mm (after watching your vlog) and while it's good and sharp like you mentioned, the weight is near borderline for me -- quite heavy for long/single hand use. I have read that Batis 135mm f2.8 (E-Mount) produces photos of similar quality (except the lower stops), similar in AF speed (a tad slower), but is much lighter and therefore suitable for traveling use. Do you have a chance to use Batis 135mm f2.8 for wildlife and how would you compare the two? Thanks!
Hi Serryth. I struggled a lot with the same decision and in the end I still decided to go with the Sony 135. I didn't get a chance to try the Batis in the flesh. For me the weight is OK and I'm willing to take it for the better performance.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thank you so much for your honest comment. :D Just wanted you to know that it was what you said about FE135mm basically replaced the 70-200mm as the APSC mode turned the 135mm into ~200mm that pushed me over. Like your wildlife photos!
Serryth I was looking again tonight at the Batis 135, revisiting some of my previous research about it, and apart from the fact that it’s 1 1/3 stop slower than the 135 GM, it’s definitely not as sharp as the 135 GM. Additionally, while the Batis 135 is two-thirds of the weight of the 135 GM, it’s no smaller in size. As I mentioned, I personally didn’t feel that tradeoff was worth it. I understand it’s still a little heavy but when you consider that you can get ~200mm out of it, I think it’s a pretty good deal. If you’ve had a chance to get some good wildlife shots with the 135 GM I suspect you’ll be pretty impressed with it. Especially for people who can’t afford the 400 or 600 GM, the 135 GM is a way to experience some of that GM telephoto magic at a lower price bracket.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks! The reason that made me waiver was that I found a used Batis at ~1k (half the price of the FE135mm)! So I was agonizing about should I spend that money on the FE 135mm, or potentially get two lenses with the same money. Then your comment pushed me over (the cliff, ahhhh... ) Haha...
@@AdrianChoPhotography The Sony FE 135mm f1.8 is here and I took it out on the sunset of the Super Moon to shoot heron and seagulls on a nearby lake. As you said, it is super, super sharp! I can see the craters on the moon, and the heron was great too. Thank you so much! :D
Too much you, too little wildlife photography 😕 reported for misleading title