Thanks for your nice video. I’ve tested loads of 135’s and the Sonnars are definitely among the very best. There’s little difference between the 135/3.5 and the 135/4. Just a little caution for future Sonnar buyers: many of these lenses are decentered. It will mostly still give excellent results, but one corner maybe sharper than the other. So make sure you have a good one.
I like your honest and down to earth approach to reviewing lenses! I got my copy of this wonderful lens a few months ago in a lot of old photography gear. It had a bit of fungus inside the front element but as you say, it’s an easy lens to work on. The focus is a bit stiff but I prefer that to sloppy movement. Produces beautiful images on my old Pentax K110d. I love it so much that I just sold my Pentax M135 f3.5. This Zeiss, for me, is the ultimate vintage 135.
@@paularger2841 thank you, these lenses are good value for money, and as you said easy to work on, I feel unfortunately people right off this lens because of the relatively slow maximum aperture, but they are missing out on a great lens
Thanks for the reply! I don't feel confident enough to separate the helicoids and reassemble them to achieve infinity focus though. I would hate to mess up a great lens.@@lassemogensen7099
Beautiful photos, I just picked up a mint carl zeiss jena ddr 135mm f3.5 in a case for just £10..😲😳 I'm looking forward to using it on my old m42 screw mount slr film cameras and with an adapter on my Lumix g3 m4/3 mirrorless system.
I know that the 6 element super takumar is highly rated, I mistakenly bought the 4 element super takumar at a good price ( which is supposedly a budget version) I've reviewed that lens and it was surprisingly good, I can only assume that the 6 element version is even better, but unfortunately haven't come across a copy at a reasonable price, yet.
great shots! with regards to camera sensors-yes there is a difference mainly with the mood of the photo and the color intensity. the Sony's always have a lovely green's and more true to life colors. the Canon's like more tan and yellows. and the Fuji's...they create a beautiful ethereal image sometimes.
Thanks for the comment, there are definitely differences between sensors , you've clearly looked closely at the images , I feel each camera has it's merits
@@fistfulloflensesi find it very interesting how some lens models and manufacturers work better on some sensors than others. and yes, lots of looking at images on flickr etc have taught me how different sensors behave.
@@fistfulloflenses have not tried micro 4/3! i mainly used APS-C until a few years back when i switched to FF. havent really looked back, but there are some wonderful 4/3 systems out there!
@@christopherleecowan very true, they always seem to be pretty good, it was such a popular focal length for so long, the manufacturers had plenty of experience producing great 135s
Nice one Karl! Honest answer? I couldn't tell you which image was shot on the different bodies. Perhaps the same shot taken at more or less the same time with each camera would be conclusive, but there again does it really matter when the results are that good?
@@photographyforenjoyment thank you Alan, good to hear from you,I've thought about doing comparison shots , but feel it could get a little bit tedious. Glad you're enjoying the channel.
Thanks for your nice video. I’ve tested loads of 135’s and the Sonnars are definitely among the very best. There’s little difference between the 135/3.5 and the 135/4. Just a little caution for future Sonnar buyers: many of these lenses are decentered. It will mostly still give excellent results, but one corner maybe sharper than the other. So make sure you have a good one.
Thanks for tip about decentred lenses, and thanks for watching.
I like your honest and down to earth approach to reviewing lenses! I got my copy of this wonderful lens a few months ago in a lot of old photography gear. It had a bit of fungus inside the front element but as you say, it’s an easy lens to work on. The focus is a bit stiff but I prefer that to sloppy movement. Produces beautiful images on my old Pentax K110d. I love it so much that I just sold my Pentax M135 f3.5. This Zeiss, for me, is the ultimate vintage 135.
@@paularger2841 thank you, these lenses are good value for money, and as you said easy to work on, I feel unfortunately people right off this lens because of the relatively slow maximum aperture, but they are missing out on a great lens
Stiff focus is very easy to fix. I did that with mine in half an hour. I think there are several instructions here on UA-cam for that.
Thanks for the reply! I don't feel confident enough to separate the helicoids and reassemble them to achieve infinity focus though. I would hate to mess up a great lens.@@lassemogensen7099
I have Nikkor 135 f3.5 AIS. That is excellent wide open too. ❤️
This one and the Sonnar are the best vintage 135’s.
Beautiful photos, I just picked up a mint carl zeiss jena ddr 135mm f3.5 in a case for just £10..😲😳
I'm looking forward to using it on my old m42 screw mount slr film cameras and with an adapter on my Lumix g3 m4/3 mirrorless system.
Great, the bargains are still there to be found, I still shoot film occasionally, I've got a roll to develop at the moment, thanks for the comment
I'm a bit confused if Choosing this lens or the Super takumar 135mm f2.5 6 element version.
I know that the 6 element super takumar is highly rated, I mistakenly bought the 4 element super takumar at a good price ( which is supposedly a budget version) I've reviewed that lens and it was surprisingly good, I can only assume that the 6 element version is even better, but unfortunately haven't come across a copy at a reasonable price, yet.
great shots! with regards to camera sensors-yes there is a difference mainly with the mood of the photo and the color intensity. the Sony's always have a lovely green's and more true to life colors. the Canon's like more tan and yellows. and the Fuji's...they create a beautiful ethereal image sometimes.
Thanks for the comment, there are definitely differences between sensors , you've clearly looked closely at the images , I feel each camera has it's merits
@@fistfulloflensesi find it very interesting how some lens models and manufacturers work better on some sensors than others. and yes, lots of looking at images on flickr etc have taught me how different sensors behave.
@@campbells0upswhat is your opinion on the micro four thirds sensors, I've not tried any yet?
@@fistfulloflenses have not tried micro 4/3! i mainly used APS-C until a few years back when i switched to FF. havent really looked back, but there are some wonderful 4/3 systems out there!
Love the video!
Thanks Rhys, good to hear from you and glad you enjoyed it 👍
It's hard to go wrong with a good vintage 135 mm
@@christopherleecowan very true, they always seem to be pretty good, it was such a popular focal length for so long, the manufacturers had plenty of experience producing great 135s
Another great video!!
Thank you, I'm glad you're still enjoying the channel, makes the effort worthwhile 👍
Nice one Karl! Honest answer? I couldn't tell you which image was shot on the different bodies. Perhaps the same shot taken at more or less the same time with each camera would be conclusive, but there again does it really matter when the results are that good?
@@photographyforenjoyment thank you Alan, good to hear from you,I've thought about doing comparison shots , but feel it could get a little bit tedious. Glad you're enjoying the channel.
I think it also shows that sensor size is not that important, and as you said it's the end results that matter
I has the yashika version...very good
@@peetsnort yashica version, that's interesting do you mean this lens with a contax yashica mount?
Aperture 3.5 for a 135mm Lens are alright !
@@cameraprepper7938 yes I agree, because of the focal length you still get quite a bit of background blur, at f 3.5