Looking at the flickr page for this lens and I am in utter disbelief...The COLORS that come out of this lens... insanely good. I don't know if its due to the photographer or solely the lens, but out of every single lens you've reviewed, this one produces the most pleasant photos hands-down guaranteed.
It's interesting that you changed your opinion. And while some criticize you for it, I won't. Everyone is entitled to reevaluate. I was about to buy a Nikkor 135 f/2 DC. On a lark, I borrowed a Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar lens. I liked it so much, I chose it over the Nikkor. I found a used one (still bloody expensive) and have yet to experience buyer's remorse. I can't say the same about a Samyang I once purchased. Looking at the high price of Nikon and Zeiss 85mm lenses, I jumped on the Samyang bandwagon with their 85mm f/1.4 Aspherical. I was very impressed and amazed that such image quality could be available for so little money. Yes, Nikon and Zeiss were better, but also cost many times more. However, one month after the warranty ran out, the aperture began sticking open, which overexposed anything shot stopped down. Can it be fixed? Of course. But it's cheaper to just buy a new one, which would reward crappy quality control. A bargain is no bargain if it doesn't work. I'd rather spend more and have a lens last a lifetime, rather than have to purchase a succession of cheap lenses in order to "save money". On the other hand, I do love a true bargain, which is why nine of my 17 lenses are old, manual focus Nikkors....and none of them have sticking apertures, despite being decades old.
my biggest frustration with manual focus is that I photograph families and use a lot of movement... most of the time the kiddos running at / away from me are just too fast!
When I was in that whirled, film photography, the myth was that Zeiss/Leica was on some list where they got first choice, _after_ the US military, of quality glass production, which is a unique and long term endeavor, so a limited availability...as few internal cooling waves as there is possible.
LEICA 90mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 5 Elements, and priced $4K. LEICA 75mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 7 Elements, and $3.8K LEICA 50mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 8 Elements, and $8K ZEISS APO-Sonnar 135mm f/2 has 11 Elements, and $1.5K. VOIGTLANDER 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar (for Nikon) has 7 Elements, and $550 only, no longer available new.
for its price to value relative to the 135mm nikkor, im still NOT...... its always been a great SHARP lens, its heavy, expensive, and a MF lens. nothing has changed
hi ! I'm planning on getting a tamron 70-200 (G2 version) and a Zeiss milvus 85mm 1.4 . Do you think that would be enought for portraits or should I include the Zeiss milvus 135mm 1.4 or replace the 70-200 with the 135. the only reason I'm thinking about the 70-200 is the versatility as I'll not only be doing portraiture. thank you and great video !!
Since they make these lenses in Japan, why don't they add AF? This would sweeten the deal for a lot of people, including me. I've read that this licensing allowing only Japanese companies to develop third party lenses for Nikon and Canon is keeping Zeiss from adding AF. Is this true? Also, I know you have Sigma lenses with all your heart, but did you test the 135 from them?
Theoria Apophasis I own the 100 actually (I should of said that). I don't mind the throw. How about rendering? I use it to take portraits sometimes. I alternate between it and the 85mm 1.4d.
I remembered you bagging on this lens a years back Ken. You said it had too many elements, renders flatter than the 135 DC nikkor and too expensive. What's changed to change your opinion to now praise?
Are you familiar with the Contax Zeiss lenses at all? I was thinking of getting their 135mm f/2, but might save up for this instead. I imagine this lens is better, but is it worth the price difference?
It sounds like you have a love-hate relationship with this lense. But in the end it all sounded like angry sex. But thanks for the good info and a great lens.
Theoria Apophasis I mostly shot in MF manual only for portrait, and or when I feel like going out and shooting anything that's not moving, changes are it will or would be on a tripod. So everything being the same, so if I'm hearing you correctly the Zeiss kicks the DCs ass?!
The Zeiss APO Sonnar version corrects chromatic aberration MUCH better than the Sony Zeiss Sonnar. Images taken with the Sony Zeiss Sonnar need to be corrected in Lightroom. It seems that the Zeiss APO version, as the name "APO" suggests, looks like the corrected version of the the Sony version while retaining the 11 elements in 8 groups Sonnar formula.
I have never tear apart the 135 Sonnar so I don't know how it looks like inside. But since it has no AF motor in it and requires a screw drive AF (similar to Nikon AF-D lenses), its 1kg full metal construction reminds me more of the older Nikon lenses than the plastic 105mm f/1.4E.
I know your type... you don't like anything with aspherics like the Otus because you are allergic to onion rings! Personally, I like the Batis 2.8/135 more than this, the Alpha 1.8/135 or the Milvus 2/135 Zeiss. Why? Because it renders neutrally like Otus 100 (with which is shares a similar 14 elements/11 group design), it doesn't vignette (which is rare for Zeiss) and because it is manageable in size-n-weight. That and also because -- unlike the 25 and 40 Batis -- it was not artificially fattened to take a 67mm filter. 2.8? Doesn;t bother me, I shoot portraits at F3.5 or F4 on a 135 more than I shoot them at 2.8 anyway because I want the face in focus not just the eyes and lashes! BTW, the freaking Batis and Loxias are still COSINA just like the "Classics" and before that the Contax MM/CYs for those Teutonic snobs out there!
One of the best lenses EVER. I have an obsession with it.
I have this baby and it is everything you said and more.
glass sniffer
Every time you do the "made in Japan HOY!" I piss myself laughing
Looking at the flickr page for this lens and I am in utter disbelief...The COLORS that come out of this lens... insanely good. I don't know if its due to the photographer or solely the lens, but out of every single lens you've reviewed, this one produces the most pleasant photos hands-down guaranteed.
It's interesting that you changed your opinion. And while some criticize you for it, I won't. Everyone is entitled to reevaluate.
I was about to buy a Nikkor 135 f/2 DC. On a lark, I borrowed a Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar lens. I liked it so much, I chose it over the Nikkor. I found a used one (still bloody expensive) and have yet to experience buyer's remorse.
I can't say the same about a Samyang I once purchased. Looking at the high price of Nikon and Zeiss 85mm lenses, I jumped on the Samyang bandwagon with their 85mm f/1.4 Aspherical. I was very impressed and amazed that such image quality could be available for so little money. Yes, Nikon and Zeiss were better, but also cost many times more. However, one month after the warranty ran out, the aperture began sticking open, which overexposed anything shot stopped down. Can it be fixed? Of course. But it's cheaper to just buy a new one, which would reward crappy quality control.
A bargain is no bargain if it doesn't work. I'd rather spend more and have a lens last a lifetime, rather than have to purchase a succession of cheap lenses in order to "save money". On the other hand, I do love a true bargain, which is why nine of my 17 lenses are old, manual focus Nikkors....and none of them have sticking apertures, despite being decades old.
i had no doubts about samyang crap :)
How close is this lens to the contax 135mm f2 MMJ/AEG in terms of its micro-contrast and 3D pop?
my biggest frustration with manual focus is that I photograph families and use a lot of movement... most of the time the kiddos running at / away from me are just too fast!
use focus peaking! It helps a ton.
Tamron needs to make a 135 - tried the new sigma 135...focus felt slow
If Tamron makes a 135mm f/1.8 VC USD it would be incredible.
When I was in that whirled, film photography, the myth was that Zeiss/Leica was on some list where they got first choice, _after_ the US military, of quality glass production, which is a unique and long term endeavor, so a limited availability...as few internal cooling waves as there is possible.
LEICA 90mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 5 Elements, and priced $4K.
LEICA 75mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 7 Elements, and $3.8K
LEICA 50mm f/2 APO-Summicron has 8 Elements, and $8K
ZEISS APO-Sonnar 135mm f/2 has 11 Elements, and $1.5K.
VOIGTLANDER 90mm f/3.5 SL-II APO-Lanthar (for Nikon) has 7 Elements, and $550 only, no longer available new.
leica lenses are not comparable to the rest
Ken how is it compare to the Milvus 135?
On October 3rd 2015 you were not impressed with this lens that you thought the Nikon 135 F2 DC was better?????
for its price to value relative to the 135mm nikkor, im still NOT...... its always been a great SHARP lens, its heavy, expensive, and a MF lens.
nothing has changed
I did not know that about the Lead. Thanks!
Whats the best way for me to mount this on my XT2?
hi ! I'm planning on getting a tamron 70-200 (G2 version) and a Zeiss milvus 85mm 1.4 . Do you think that would be enought for portraits or should I include the Zeiss milvus 135mm 1.4 or replace the 70-200 with the 135. the only reason I'm thinking about the 70-200 is the versatility as I'll not only be doing portraiture. thank you and great video !!
Great Lens in every way.
Since they make these lenses in Japan, why don't they add AF? This would sweeten the deal for a lot of people, including me.
I've read that this licensing allowing only Japanese companies to develop third party lenses for Nikon and Canon is keeping Zeiss from adding AF.
Is this true?
Also, I know you have Sigma lenses with all your heart, but did you test the 135 from them?
You've changed your mind on this lens Angry - what gave?
no i didnt, the 135mm F2 DC nikkor is a much better value and generally more useful , and a lot cheaper......
Can you show us how fast a manual focus lens really work on moving subject what's the trick to perfect it beside practice
The Triotar 135mm F/4 is good too?
Ken, how would you compare this lens with the Zeiss 100mm MP? Strictly rendering (I know one is a macro).
teh 100mm has insane focus throw and unless youre a pro at MF use, youll hate it.
Theoria Apophasis I own the 100 actually (I should of said that). I don't mind the throw. How about rendering? I use it to take portraits sometimes. I alternate between it and the 85mm 1.4d.
Did you do a video on manual lenses?
I remembered you bagging on this lens a years back Ken. You said it had too many elements, renders flatter than the 135 DC nikkor and too expensive. What's changed to change your opinion to now praise?
it is overpriced, but so is all zeiss, its not the best value either. of course its sharp.
I think it would be a better choice over the GF100mm lens for the GFX for people who already own it
Thorium doped middle glass elements, and the end elements from leaded glass - stop part of the radiation ?
I can snag one if these for around $1000 now.
Are you familiar with the Contax Zeiss lenses at all? I was thinking of getting their 135mm f/2, but might save up for this instead. I imagine this lens is better, but is it worth the price difference?
Thoughts on the old 180mm and 200mm f2.8 Sonnars?
200 ive not used,...... both are too damn rare and expensive, i know the one isnt worth it , no way
You said nikon 135 is better lens? You prefer the softer glow for portraits?
treading on the realms of pure subjectivity here now
I hear that. I was awfully fond of my 135 leica R when I had it. I'm guessing softer wide open than nikon... but still very nice
Great great lens
How does this lens compare to the new canon 135mm f2 L lens?
Zeiss BLOWS it away. Had the Canon for a week, have ALL the Zeiss primes.
Ken, would the Zeiss classic lenses keep up with the higher mp cameras? like the upcoming Nikon 820?
it already works perfect on the 51MP GFX Fuji..... of course it will
Thanks Ken!
What adapter did you use to mount it on the Fuji GFX? Got my eye on that lens.
This aged well for sure
132f2 vs 100f2 CZ . can u tell me which have better IQ
Yes do have a class
Anybody own both the Zeiss 100mm mp and the 135mm apo?How do they compare in rendering?one is a macro I know.No specific purpose in mind.thank you
It sounds like you have a love-hate relationship with this lense. But in the end it all sounded like angry sex. But thanks for the good info and a great lens.
4:24 me when I realize I can afford this lens (not at the moment though...one day...one day...)
you can get the 135mm nikkor f3.5 for 150 usd that lens only four element and huge micro contrast it wont disappoint, it is so good i own to copy ;)
Contrary to popular belief, many things by Germans are still made in Germany, just probably not the things you can afford...
Zeiss owns Schott glasses so...
Better than the Nikkor 135mm f/2 DC? Price being not a factor.
better HOW? its sharper.... much so....... otherwise, its a MF heeeeavy lens
Theoria Apophasis I mostly shot in MF manual only for portrait, and or when I feel like going out and shooting anything that's not moving, changes are it will or would be on a tripod. So everything being the same, so if I'm hearing you correctly the Zeiss kicks the DCs ass?!
The Zeiss APO Sonnar version corrects chromatic aberration MUCH better than the Sony Zeiss Sonnar. Images taken with the Sony Zeiss Sonnar need to be corrected in Lightroom. It seems that the Zeiss APO version, as the name "APO" suggests, looks like the corrected version of the the Sony version while retaining the 11 elements in 8 groups Sonnar formula.
you forgot that the sony build quality is pure crap compared to the zeiss
I have never tear apart the 135 Sonnar so I don't know how it looks like inside. But since it has no AF motor in it and requires a screw drive AF (similar to Nikon AF-D lenses), its 1kg full metal construction reminds me more of the older Nikon lenses than the plastic 105mm f/1.4E.
have you try the Samyang 135 f2 ?
1:47 deep
I know your type... you don't like anything with aspherics like the Otus because you are allergic to onion rings! Personally, I like the Batis 2.8/135 more than this, the Alpha 1.8/135 or the Milvus 2/135 Zeiss. Why? Because it renders neutrally like Otus 100 (with which is shares a similar 14 elements/11 group design), it doesn't vignette (which is rare for Zeiss) and because it is manageable in size-n-weight. That and also because -- unlike the 25 and 40 Batis -- it was not artificially fattened to take a 67mm filter. 2.8? Doesn;t bother me, I shoot portraits at F3.5 or F4 on a 135 more than I shoot them at 2.8 anyway because I want the face in focus not just the eyes and lashes! BTW, the freaking Batis and Loxias are still COSINA just like the "Classics" and before that the Contax MM/CYs for those Teutonic snobs out there!