Nikon engineers spent years to get a quality of lens they could put their name on while meeting the strict standards that the resultant lens shall weigh no more than a plena. Truly commendable.
I used the plena for dog action shots on my Z8 and totally blown away by the consistency. The quality is outstanding and it so sharp it’s ridiculous really.
now go to a dim lit room where the 1.2 was giving you, say an ISO of 2000, and set it at 1.8 and tell me how much you enjoy the Noise of an ISO 4000. :) glad you like the Plena, but comparing a 1.8 to a 1.2 is quite silly.
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll oh jeez. Think I don’t know that? What if 50 is too short? What if 135 is too long? Lenses for different situations my friend. And for modern cameras ISO 4000 is nothing. Expose properly and you’re fine.
I bought the plena last week and although due to weather haven't been able to play with it too much outside, the photos I have taken surely make me happy!!
135mm really are a great focal length. My work horse is my 70-200/2.8 but when I take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I work I always end up at around 135mm. Even when I don't look at the zoom ring and just dial everything in as I look through th viewfinder, more often than not I usually end up at 135mm or very close to it. It just *works* for portraits!
Always wanted to get 200 f/2 but it's super heavy and impractical for some use.. Getting the Plena for my Z9, smaller size, great optics, same if not better bokeh to the 200 f/2, almost there with compressing subjects and backgrounds..
The 200 f2 still stands out as a lens with its own look with it's airy smoothness. Two completely different looks in my opinion. The 135s are incredibly sharp whereas the 200 f2 (Nikon anyway) is more than sharp enough but has that smooth look still. Both are excellent tools, but different in my opinion.
Just got mine, a little early to say but the capabilities of the Xspeed 7 coupled with that sensor are producing amazing images, an instant winner for me.
I suspect the Plena would effortlessly cover the GFX format with that vignetting figure on full frame. Of course, I wish Nikon would make a medium format around the 100mp sensor that would accommodate Z lenses through an adaptor.
Heck Z mount is big enough they could probably just put a 44x33 sensor in there and be good to go. I suspect several if not most of their new Z lenses would cover it pretty well. At the very least, it would give you the option of using any aspect ratio portrait or landscape and still using the whole image circle.
@@seth094978 I am sure most full frame lenses can cover most of this format if not all of it. For example, the Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 28 1.4, 40 1.4, 50 1.4 85 1.8, are all lenses that cover the GFX. I don't see why mirrorless wouldn't cover it as well. Most important, the more you go outside the 35mm sensor, the more obvious the character of the lens becomes, because vignetting becomes more pronounced, the field curvature as well, so this is exactly what some photographers are actually looking for, including me, while still retain good sharpness most of the field. So, win win.
Nikon glass really is top notch, and I can't help but to think that it's because they're primarily an industrial optics company first and foremost. Nikon doesn't make as many products or rely on consumer cameras nearly as much as Sony or Canon. As a result of being an optics company I think that research and development carries over to their consumer glass. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony cameras/glass, and they're all SUPER good these days... But something about Nikon glass just always gave me that extra quality. I like that they tend to be heavier, and I hope they don't cut corners to make them lighter. Use a monopod or tripod if the weight is a problem, but don't make worse glass for the sake of weight.
not just good value but also a great performer. The Samyang bokeh is rounder than Sony and it has probably less LOCA than all of these 3 lenses (or equal to the best). Only reason to use Sony is lens color match or autofocus speed (which is I think unrivalled). The Sony is supposed to have best central sharpness at infinity but beyond a certain level you care for things other than sharpness. Btw image stabilization is very useful on 135mm even with IBIS on the bodies (though too much will of course rob edge sharpness)
It doesn’t autofocus very well. Struggles in low light… compared to Sony lenses or even my Sigma art 85 dg dn in the same not too demanding settings. It really felt like it is Sony autofocus from 2016. I can’t use it at fashion shows or for fasted paced reportage.
I agree. I would never consider a Sanyang normally but I had sold my GM and needed a 135 for a job so bought the Samyang. Its actually sharper with nicer bokeh then the GM and thats saying something!
As a multiple system user myself I consider the the 135 Plena along with the 85 F1.2 and 600 PF is in fact one of the reason to own a Nikon mirrorless. and of course there is the Noct also.
Great! Love them all, but have been enjoying the Plena first hand (since I don’t have the other mounts, haha). Always like your reviews and comparisons!
Yea. In my country. The plena cost double the 135gm. Its costly. But its a good tool nonetheless. Its also the latest. But from the bokeh test. Altho its more round but it has the onion ring going on.
@@TsvetanVR Not really without rebait (that sony runs at times) its 1729 i paid 1899 when it was released 4+ years ago. The canon is 2369 and the nikon is 2999. The GM is just cheaper in europe. Now i am sure when sony updates it (next year?) it will become more in the price line of the canon sony has been upping the price on the GM2's.
I have the Fujifilm 90mm. It’s amazing. Seeing the specular highlights on the Plena being so perfect, I may need to test it out on the 90. The 90 has a very pleasing bokeh. Great review.
Hopefully Sigma will release a 135/1.8 DG DN soon, and Viltrox is rumored to have a 135/1.8 almost ready for release. Once those are out it would be great to revisit this comparison but add in the Sigma, Viltrox, and of course the already existing Samyang 135/1.8. See how the 3rd party lenses stack up against the 1st party options.
@@edwardnoble9897 Might be possible. The old Sigma 105/1.4 was a massive 1.6kg but the Nikkor was 985g. A modern Sigma DG DN version at around 1kg could happen.
@@edwardnoble9897 yes so true I am now 66 almost 67 and muscles a lot less but even after a shoot no pain no gain .yes a dream lens would be for me A sigma 105 mm F1.2 but for the Z mount when Nikon accepts Sigma to make that one !
Oh they are plenty of bad primes. Low contrast wide open, poor sharpness out of center, bad flare, a lot of LoCa. I mean for some portrait use it was good enough but compared to any modern lens they are poor.
Most of their apertures weren't quite this wide though... the Pentax Super Takumar 135 I have is a pretty neat lens with almost 3 dimensional rendering, but it's also F2.5, and it does have LOCA. I think there was a 1.8 but it was very rare and very expensive.
135mm was my favorite. Then I saw this mystical Canon 200mm EF 2.0 and its a god tier lens mounted on a Sony with EF mount adapter. Insanely expensive used.
I know what you are saying, I only mean those extreme situations, like unprepared, sudden operations. But that's what you pay for G Master's premium for, for those 5% of the time rare conditions, they don't fail as well.@@spanishprisoner
The Plena is an optical masterpiece. Nikon is finally taking advantage of the superior Z mount (shortest flange distance and widest throat diameter). This lens is the first of many to come, I suspect, that will be in a league of their own that the other manufacturers will not be able to match unless they change their mounts. Nikon is back to their roots of being an optics company - no doubt they can make the best lenses when they want to - its been their core business for 100 years. -PD
No doubt the Plena is a masterpiece. However, I doubt that the small geometric advantage of the Z-mount is an important factor. The geometry can be an advantage with wide-angle lenses, but there is not much of an advantage at standard and telephoto focal ranges.
I'll wait and see what the canon R5 mk2 has to offer but I think I'll go with nikon as a regular hybrid camera. They really nailed their lens lineup this far. I really want to try sony and nikon just to compare. So far canon RF has blown me away compared to old dslr cameras. The fullframe era is like switching to fiber internet or a fast m.2 SSD from an old HDD.
I recently purchased the Nikon Plena and it is a truly fabulous lens. Its only weakness is that it is rather large (especially with the long hood) and somewhat heavy, although it balances pretty well on the Z9 body. For a lighter setup, I do have the Zeiss Batis 135 f2.8, which is much lighter and smaller, but just about as sharp with virtually no chromatic aberrations even in the most challenging lighting. Balances perfectly with the smaller Sony bodies (like A7Riii). The Batis 135 is also totally silent in operation, while the Plena has a faint whirring sound when racking through the full focus range (no whirring with short focus adjustments).
I've paired the Sony 135 and 55 1.8's on my two A9s for the past 4 years now, mostly for kids and Family portraits, and neither the cameras or lenses miss a beat. I'm sure the Canon and Nikon are just as good though. You really can't go wrong with today's mirror-less systems, as long as they're in your budget
I would have liked to know more about the AF speed and accuracy. For a 135mm especially, it is used for action shots, like shots of dogs running towards the camera. Since I have used it, I know that the Sony 135 f1.8 GM is very fast and accurate. The Plenta seemed pretty impressive here
I like the format and concept of this video. I'd be quite interested to see the 50mm 1.8s tested. Not a trio of sexy lenses, but a comparison of these bread and butter lenses could be interesting.
Jump ship mate. Fuji already lost its way. Even Nikon zf has more innovation, likr for manual shooting, than Fuji's latest. Fuji is just playing catch up to others' spec+lens, relies heavily to xtrans and film sim.
It does make me wonder how these 3 lenses, would do against the Fujifilm 90mm f/2, which is of course going to lose but is a great lens. And the big daddy of DSLR 135mm lenses the 135mm f/2 APO Plannar, which is superb optically (even on my GFX100), but of course is a real plain to focus.
"Similar to f/3" ONLY in depth-of-field, NOT in terms of exposure, for which of course f/2 is f/2 regardless of platform. Fun fact: less DOF is NOT always better, and I appreciate the fact that my 90mm f/2 Fujinon gives me f/2 light-gathering power while still offering the bonus of keeping both eyes in focus on a portrait subject etc. Still, I think Chris made a good case for keeping this video simple and sticking to a heads-up comparison among three lenses with identical specs for the three most popular mounts.
I have the Sony 135mm for a few years now and it's one of my favorite lenses I have. Never fails me even wide open, even on fast moving subjects coming towards me. Tack sharp on Sony A7RV
@@PH61a I totally agree. Added to this all of Sony's recent GM and G lenses have been superb. No need to get blown around by individual reviews for cameras and lenses - I'm very happy on E mount
Hard to beat a 135mm prime. All of these lenses are great and this test demonstrates how finely tuned each of these lenses really are. Canon’s coatings are both aggravating at times, but can be ethereal when used to the photographer’s advantage. The Canon used in backlit portraits can look truly spectacular and is a benefit or compromise (depending on how you look at it) for not having that sterile, perfection that can come with some lenses.
Great work guys. I have the Sony 135 and my copy is simply the sharpest lens I have ever used over a long lifetime of photography. All these lenses seem pretty fantastic though whatever system you use.
I had the 135 f2 DC it was unusable for professional work! the fokus was not accurate and the focussing to slow… depending on what you shoot maybe a nice lens but for me at least it was way to slow and not reliable in quality, if I am doing more artsy stuff I use my Mamyia RZ anyway…
One more thing. I've had the Sony GM since it's release. The front filter holder with the filter ring grooves literally unsticks and falls off. Read many instances of this on line. There is no way to buy a part for it so it's a huge cost to fix it. This affects the lens hood and lens cap.
I’ve had a great time using my Samyang 135 1.8, so I have almost none of the desire to buy the Sony GM. I know the GM is built much better but $699 for that Samyang was such a deal!
I know its apsc, but god damn the 90 f2 is legit one of the best lenses i have ever used, and ive used medium format fuji lenses. Its honestly amazing and definitely worth a test, i think you should review it again on a modern body like a xh2 and compare to the fullframes
Since AF is usable on the entire field of view, I think you should focus on the corners when testing them. Field curvature matters if you shoot flat objects. For most situations, you want the lens to focus where the subject is and it's interesting to evaluate sharpness on all the field.
The moment you mentioned different camera mounts, I thought, why didn’t they agree on a universal mount compatible with all brands when transitioning from DSLR to mirrorless?... Missed opportunity for Consumers and Manufacturers.
Hard to design a bad 135 I think. But what these comparisons should look at is everything they didn’t look at here. Which is the overall rendering and the in focus to out of focus transitions, and the related brightness in such areas.
I'll stick with the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and Sigma fp L + 90mm f2.8 in APS-C/crop mode (pretty much how I use the fp L a majority of the time, still get 25-26mp of great image quality and lesser impact on the slower readout that doesn't bother me anyway). I'm a travelling photographer that focuses a lot on lifestyle portraits, mostly in rural areas/villages, and then a lot of time in East/Southeast Asia. I've had the chance to use both the Nikon 135mm f1.8 and the Sony 135mm f1.8. I stopped using both less than an hour in because they failed at giving me what I needed for the job. That is to say, I need a lens that has the reach to let me capture an intimate shot without standing out too much and destroying the moment with someone staring at a massive lens. I immediately noticed a difference when I went back to my E-M5.iii+75mm f1.8 and fp L+90mm f2.8. I blended back into the background as much as a foreigner can and was able to get natural shots again. That's 150mm reach at f1.8 of light or 135mm of reach with f2.8 worth of light, both of which have a good enough depth of field (a 75mm at f1.8 is shallow, same with a 90mm at f2.8, crop factor doesn't change that, it just pushes in changing the reach, changing the distance you stand from the subject, and changes compression due to that distance change). That isn't to say they're bad lenses, they're amazing. It's just for me, they're not the right tools for the job. The advantages of being able to stand out less and just the weight/size difference when I'm walking/hiking mile after mile daily in rural areas, makes any loss in image quality that no one has ever noticed fine. I'll try the Panasonic 100mm f2.8 with my fp L APS-C mode setup, but the difference in size and losing an aperture ring will have to be beaten by 15mm of reach.
Yeah the 75/1.8 is a fantastic lens. It is pretty much the only reason I have considered upgrading my E-M5ii instead of jumping ship to Fuji or something.
Guess we learn all these brands can make nice lenses that work well almost looks like the release date has more effect. the GM is already in its 5th year and once they finally fix the worst of the GM's (85 now the 2470 is fixed in mk2) we could see a 135GM2 in 1 or 2 years.
Yeah it's not a great look for Canon but I recently heard something along the lines that they're opening things up starting with crop lenses@@lackoliver55
This makes be laugh because over on my channel I just did a vintage lens adaptation for the Nikon Zf video and the lens I ended up loving the most was the Konica 135mm F 3.5 from the 80s. Not nearly as nice of bokeh as the Plena but you can't win every time. LOL
Canon EF 135mm f2L for me. I use it still even with my Sony camera via MC11 adapter. Love the look of that lens and seeing I paid $600 CAD for it, bargain!
Talk about bargain, I also have a manual focus Samyang 135 F2...... but I won't fool myself the Samyang is just as good as the Nikon 135 Plena though. LOL.
Waiting for your full review on the zf. Confused between the zf and xt5, zf is retailing here for roughly 2100$ including 40f2 kit lens along with an extra battery..two sd cards..a battery charger and smallrig grip😅..and the xt5 with 18-55 kit lens for ~2300$. it’s a no brainier for me to go with the zf..but still that old sensor and it’s relatively new camera.. so waiting for some authentic reviews and opinions.
135mm is the lenght I keep going back to Vintage, for artistic looks. There are loads of sharp Sonnar designs. It is an easy optical formula, that ended up really well even during old times. I simply don't justify spending over 1K on a 135mm for that reason.
I’m a big fan of the Batis 135mm. Love the colors, contrast, rendering, size and weight of that lens. I’ve also used the Sony 135mm and I definitely thought it created magic but was just a bit heavy and big for my needs. I get plenty of satisfying background blur from the Batis at f/2.8.
It's a different beast. More than a stop slower and smaller and lighter. It's plenty expensive new though but can sometimes be had for a more reasonable sum second hand.
I second the Batis 135mm, yes it's not as fast (aperture) as these but it's lighter, has built-in stability and very sharp with plenty of background blur. As mentioned, it was/is expensive new but used can be had for reasonable money.
I think another video comparing these to the DSLR versions (sigma, zeiss, Samyang) would be awesome since a lot of us are asking: is the increase in price going native really worth it? As an amateur, I am more cost sensitive than a pro since I will not be making money on this. I can get a 135 and a 85 DSLR lense for about the same as one of these mirrorless 135mm lenses.
Samyang makes a very nice 135 1.8 for Sony. When on sale, it can be had for as little as $650, a lot cheaper than any of the big three, and it's a very good lens optically.
@@ilaion11 That may be. But it's also $650 when on sale, and it is a beautiful thing. There are also plenty of great 135mm f2.8 lenses on eBay for $10-20. They are a great starting point if one just wants to get a feel for the focal length. The vast majority are really good. I've only ever seen a couple lemons.
@@AAJJ007 I would opt for the DSLR Era Sigma 135 1.8 + adaptor instead of the Samyang. And unfortunately all Samyangs suffer from loss of sharpness, field curvature, severe lens distortion at close focus ranges. And it's not a matter of in camera corrections. This is what keeps their prices low., they are not designed to compensate for optical aberrations that arise with focusing closer. Sure, they are nice at normal ranges, but for serious portrait work, I cannot consider them.
Hi guys, always love your work and appreciate the frigid temperatures right now might be limiting, but in this kind of comparison it would be great to see ‘actual use’ cases. Perhaps a ‘Jordan running face’ might be a great portrait session idea?
Thank you for the comparison!..I wish there is more of a 105mm option and or updates from these brands..like most people say its a good "sweet spot" between the 85mm and 135mm..haha
The Viltrox 75/1.2 is kinda like that for APS-C. About a 114/1.8 equivalent. Well constructed for a 3rd party lens, very sharp and optically strong overall, but weak minimum focus distance and the AF is on the slower side.
yeah I'd really love to see a comparison with the samayang 135, i really love their primes I remember them saying in the podcast though that samayang doesn't respond to requests for loaners so maybe that's part of the reason why they don't use them for comparison
Amazing how the Plena weighs exactly one plena
Nikon engineers spent years to get a quality of lens they could put their name on while meeting the strict standards that the resultant lens shall weigh no more than a plena. Truly commendable.
@@lackoliver55 no wonder it is more expensive
The Canon EOS 135 f2 was a real classic - have Canon lost their edge ?
@@soumyonath911 Wrong! The Plena is officially recognised by the Système International (SI) as a unit of mass for photographic equipment.
Yeah I love how Nikon took the time and effort to make sure the Plena weighs exactly one plena and the Noct weights precisely one Noct.
The Plena is a dream lens for now. 135mm 1.8 is pure perfection. one day I will own it, along with Nikon 85mm 1.2
I wish I had a Nikon mirrorless just to experience the Plena!
I wish I had a Plena for my Nikon mirrorless just to experience the Plena!😄
I wish i have a camera money to experience a Plena
I used the plena for dog action shots on my Z8 and totally blown away by the consistency. The quality is outstanding and it so sharp it’s ridiculous really.
I didn’t think a lens could awe me more than my Nikon 50 1.2, but the Plena does. I’ve had for about a month now and it’s stunning.
now go to a dim lit room where the 1.2 was giving you, say an ISO of 2000, and set it at 1.8 and tell me how much you enjoy the Noise of an ISO 4000. :) glad you like the Plena, but comparing a 1.8 to a 1.2 is quite silly.
Hhhhhhhhmmmmm loving my 50 f1.2...but....
I bought the Plena and its drop jaw beautiful.
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll oh jeez. Think I don’t know that? What if 50 is too short? What if 135 is too long? Lenses for different situations my friend. And for modern cameras ISO 4000 is nothing. Expose properly and you’re fine.
Love my 50 f/1.2 as well. Still haven't pulled the trigger on a Plena, but I have a feeling I'll get there eventually.
I bought the plena last week and although due to weather haven't been able to play with it too much outside, the photos I have taken surely make me happy!!
135mm really are a great focal length. My work horse is my 70-200/2.8 but when I take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I work I always end up at around 135mm. Even when I don't look at the zoom ring and just dial everything in as I look through th viewfinder, more often than not I usually end up at 135mm or very close to it.
It just *works* for portraits!
Nikon killing it with the latest series of lenses. Impressive how good the Sony holds up still!
Thanx :) I am waiting for a better weather to play more with my Plena
Always wanted to get 200 f/2 but it's super heavy and impractical for some use.. Getting the Plena for my Z9, smaller size, great optics, same if not better bokeh to the 200 f/2, almost there with compressing subjects and backgrounds..
The 200 f2 still stands out as a lens with its own look with it's airy smoothness. Two completely different looks in my opinion. The 135s are incredibly sharp whereas the 200 f2 (Nikon anyway) is more than sharp enough but has that smooth look still. Both are excellent tools, but different in my opinion.
The 200 is incomparable nothing can touch it .
So glad to see Nikon really making an amazing comeback...they had me worried for a bit...now I've my eye on the Zf 😀
I’ve had the Zf since release. I haven’t had this much fun with a camera in a long time. I can’t see anything else being close in the price range.
Just got mine, a little early to say but the capabilities of the Xspeed 7 coupled with that sensor are producing amazing images, an instant winner for me.
Nikon's Z lenses were top class straight from the beginning. Not sure why you were worried.
Everyone's clickbaity "Nikon is going out of business!!!" videos aged like fine milk.
Up until a few years ago, their Balance Sheet indicated their trend line was “going out of business”…@@opalyankaBG
I suspect the Plena would effortlessly cover the GFX format with that vignetting figure on full frame. Of course, I wish Nikon would make a medium format around the 100mp sensor that would accommodate Z lenses through an adaptor.
Even better. A medium format with Z mount ua-cam.com/video/M3UN8LHgnLY/v-deo.html
Heck Z mount is big enough they could probably just put a 44x33 sensor in there and be good to go. I suspect several if not most of their new Z lenses would cover it pretty well. At the very least, it would give you the option of using any aspect ratio portrait or landscape and still using the whole image circle.
@@seth094978 I am sure most full frame lenses can cover most of this format if not all of it. For example, the Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 28 1.4, 40 1.4, 50 1.4 85 1.8, are all lenses that cover the GFX. I don't see why mirrorless wouldn't cover it as well. Most important, the more you go outside the 35mm sensor, the more obvious the character of the lens becomes, because vignetting becomes more pronounced, the field curvature as well, so this is exactly what some photographers are actually looking for, including me, while still retain good sharpness most of the field. So, win win.
Nikon glass really is top notch, and I can't help but to think that it's because they're primarily an industrial optics company first and foremost. Nikon doesn't make as many products or rely on consumer cameras nearly as much as Sony or Canon. As a result of being an optics company I think that research and development carries over to their consumer glass. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony cameras/glass, and they're all SUPER good these days... But something about Nikon glass just always gave me that extra quality. I like that they tend to be heavier, and I hope they don't cut corners to make them lighter. Use a monopod or tripod if the weight is a problem, but don't make worse glass for the sake of weight.
I believe the Plena is also better in terms of vignetting compared to the other 2.
For a hobbyist, the Samyang 135 f1.8 is an amazing value and without a doubt a must for Sony E-mount users
not just good value but also a great performer. The Samyang bokeh is rounder than Sony and it has probably less LOCA than all of these 3 lenses (or equal to the best). Only reason to use Sony is lens color match or autofocus speed (which is I think unrivalled). The Sony is supposed to have best central sharpness at infinity but beyond a certain level you care for things other than sharpness. Btw image stabilization is very useful on 135mm even with IBIS on the bodies (though too much will of course rob edge sharpness)
It doesn’t autofocus very well. Struggles in low light… compared to Sony lenses or even my Sigma art 85 dg dn in the same not too demanding settings. It really felt like it is Sony autofocus from 2016. I can’t use it at fashion shows or for fasted paced reportage.
God I love my Samyang 135mm f/1.8, got it on a prime day sale for like $600 bucks
I agree. I would never consider a Sanyang normally but I had sold my GM and needed a 135 for a job so bought the Samyang. Its actually sharper with nicer bokeh then the GM and thats saying something!
Hope it'll be available for Z mount soon.
Was waiting to hear the Plena weighs exactly 1 Plena. Was not disappointed.
Took a lot of work for Nikon make it weigh exactly one Plena. They always recognize that out of respect.
Sort of disappointed that they didnt said how much Nocts it weights. Oh well, not every measuring system have to be covered I guess...
As a multiple system user myself I consider the the 135 Plena along with the 85 F1.2 and 600 PF is in fact one of the reason to own a Nikon mirrorless. and of course there is the Noct also.
Love this comparison, thank you guys! As great as always :)
Great! Love them all, but have been enjoying the Plena first hand (since I don’t have the other mounts, haha). Always like your reviews and comparisons!
As a Sony user myself, i can appreciate the Nikon 135mm as it looks to be the best out of all 3.
As a Nikon user I can appreciate the Plena too. I just can't afford it....
Yea. In my country. The plena cost double the 135gm.
Its costly. But its a good tool nonetheless. Its also the latest. But from the bokeh test. Altho its more round but it has the onion ring going on.
@@sgpork Yeah checked here too in netherlands the GM 1529 euro at the moment and the nikon 2999 euro.. That is just too much of a price gap.
@@scb2scb2 Such a huge difference only means one thing - GM II is on the way.
@@TsvetanVR Not really without rebait (that sony runs at times) its 1729 i paid 1899 when it was released 4+ years ago. The canon is 2369 and the nikon is 2999. The GM is just cheaper in europe. Now i am sure when sony updates it (next year?) it will become more in the price line of the canon sony has been upping the price on the GM2's.
yea finally the 135 battle... 135 are usually the best lenses any company can make..
very interesting video and comparison here.
I have the Fujifilm 90mm. It’s amazing. Seeing the specular highlights on the Plena being so perfect, I may need to test it out on the 90. The 90 has a very pleasing bokeh. Great review.
Hopefully Sigma will release a 135/1.8 DG DN soon, and Viltrox is rumored to have a 135/1.8 almost ready for release. Once those are out it would be great to revisit this comparison but add in the Sigma, Viltrox, and of course the already existing Samyang 135/1.8. See how the 3rd party lenses stack up against the 1st party options.
Totally agree and a 105/1.4 dg dn under 1kg
@@edwardnoble9897 Might be possible. The old Sigma 105/1.4 was a massive 1.6kg but the Nikkor was 985g. A modern Sigma DG DN version at around 1kg could happen.
@@edwardnoble9897 hi I own the Sigma 105mm F1.4 Art and more than happy oh btw still DSLR D800 shooting
@@edwardphilipmarianafzger9800 hey, it's a great lens. I would just like something lighter for mirrorless like they did with the 85mm dg dn
@@edwardnoble9897 yes so true I am now 66 almost 67 and muscles a lot less but even after a shoot no pain no gain .yes a dream lens would be for me A sigma 105 mm F1.2 but for the Z mount when Nikon accepts Sigma to make that one !
The Samyang/Rokinon 135 1.8 is also insanely good aaaand mirrorless
Best mirrorless 135mm f1.8
@@Riskbreaker2009 I agree but not for action or sports (but much more than OK for portraits). Makes a perfect pair with 70-200 GM II
Masterful evaluation! Thanks!!
Shooting some nice indoor basketball with the Plena!
more of these manufacturer comparison videos. would love to see 24-70, 70-200, prime lens comparisons!
Man, even going back to like 1960, it's hard to find a bad 135mm prime.
Oh they are plenty of bad primes. Low contrast wide open, poor sharpness out of center, bad flare, a lot of LoCa. I mean for some portrait use it was good enough but compared to any modern lens they are poor.
@@jan.tichavskyyep. I have a Tamron Adaptall BBAR 135mm 1.8 that is really poor, poor sharpness
Most of their apertures weren't quite this wide though... the Pentax Super Takumar 135 I have is a pretty neat lens with almost 3 dimensional rendering, but it's also F2.5, and it does have LOCA. I think there was a 1.8 but it was very rare and very expensive.
@@atarkus8❤❤❤ *PENTAX*
135mm is my favorite focal length. I put my 135GM on my A7RV all the time and it never failed me once. Super love these
135mm was my favorite. Then I saw this mystical Canon 200mm EF 2.0 and its a god tier lens mounted on a Sony with EF mount adapter. Insanely expensive used.
@@83442handle 200mm is a bit too much compression for me, still cool though
@@spanishprisoner capturing a bird suddenly flies away in front of you. My sigma 150-600 failed lots of times because the AF is just not fast enough.
I know what you are saying, I only mean those extreme situations, like unprepared, sudden operations. But that's what you pay for G Master's premium for, for those 5% of the time rare conditions, they don't fail as well.@@spanishprisoner
I agree, 135mm is my fav. I used to do 50, then 85, and now the 135GM. Its great.
The Plena is an optical masterpiece. Nikon is finally taking advantage of the superior Z mount (shortest flange distance and widest throat diameter). This lens is the first of many to come, I suspect, that will be in a league of their own that the other manufacturers will not be able to match unless they change their mounts. Nikon is back to their roots of being an optics company - no doubt they can make the best lenses when they want to - its been their core business for 100 years.
-PD
No doubt the Plena is a masterpiece. However, I doubt that the small geometric advantage of the Z-mount is an important factor. The geometry can be an advantage with wide-angle lenses, but there is not much of an advantage at standard and telephoto focal ranges.
Is it me or is there onion rings in the plena's specular highlights? Seriously.. onion rings in that price of a lens?
@@Zakna Haven't seen any in mine - maybe you have a bad copy :(
-PD
@@venietvideo The physics is undeniable - look of angle of incidence.
-PD
@@photographydiscourse1185you can clearly see it in the videos example
I'll wait and see what the canon R5 mk2 has to offer but I think I'll go with nikon as a regular hybrid camera. They really nailed their lens lineup this far. I really want to try sony and nikon just to compare. So far canon RF has blown me away compared to old dslr cameras. The fullframe era is like switching to fiber internet or a fast m.2 SSD from an old HDD.
Samyang 135 1.8 is such a great lens. Wish that was tested against these.
Do a review on the Viltrox 75mm and 27mm pro lenses
I recently purchased the Nikon Plena and it is a truly fabulous lens. Its only weakness is that it is rather large (especially with the long hood) and somewhat heavy, although it balances pretty well on the Z9 body. For a lighter setup, I do have the Zeiss Batis 135 f2.8, which is much lighter and smaller, but just about as sharp with virtually no chromatic aberrations even in the most challenging lighting. Balances perfectly with the smaller Sony bodies (like A7Riii). The Batis 135 is also totally silent in operation, while the Plena has a faint whirring sound when racking through the full focus range (no whirring with short focus adjustments).
stm motor👎
1:10 For nikon Z shooters it is useful to compare lenses across different mounts, because they can adapt the sony 135 if they don't like the nikon 135
All my best shots are with my Sony 135mm on the A7RIV, but I'm personally not a fan of cat-eye. Props to Nikon!
No one is a fan of the cat eye bokeh. There is no argument to the contrary. Many aspects about bokeh are subjective, but not this one.
What is a prop, and why does Nikon need some?
I've paired the Sony 135 and 55 1.8's on my two A9s for the past 4 years now, mostly for kids and Family portraits, and neither the cameras or lenses miss a beat. I'm sure the Canon and Nikon are just as good though. You really can't go wrong with today's mirror-less systems, as long as they're in your budget
I would have liked to know more about the AF speed and accuracy. For a 135mm especially, it is used for action shots, like shots of dogs running towards the camera. Since I have used it, I know that the Sony 135 f1.8 GM is very fast and accurate. The Plenta seemed pretty impressive here
I like the format and concept of this video. I'd be quite interested to see the 50mm 1.8s tested. Not a trio of sexy lenses, but a comparison of these bread and butter lenses could be interesting.
I’m a Fuji shooter but I love watching these videos. The Nikon is stunning. Maybe someday…..
Jump ship mate. Fuji already lost its way. Even Nikon zf has more innovation, likr for manual shooting, than Fuji's latest. Fuji is just playing catch up to others' spec+lens, relies heavily to xtrans and film sim.
The XF 90mm f/2 is ridiculously good.
By far the most important feature of these lenses are how good they are shot wide open, in the center.
It does make me wonder how these 3 lenses, would do against the Fujifilm 90mm f/2, which is of course going to lose but is a great lens. And the big daddy of DSLR 135mm lenses the 135mm f/2 APO Plannar, which is superb optically (even on my GFX100), but of course is a real plain to focus.
Apo Sonnar
The Fuji 90 would kick arse and 2nd hand it’s an amazing lens for a fabulous price - Canon / Nikon and Leica users I know good glass when I use it 😎
The case is that shooting wide open the picture will be similar to 135mm F3 at full frame. So, it is not a fair comparison.
75 f1.2 Viltrox >>> 90 f2 Fuji
"Similar to f/3" ONLY in depth-of-field, NOT in terms of exposure, for which of course f/2 is f/2 regardless of platform. Fun fact: less DOF is NOT always better, and I appreciate the fact that my 90mm f/2 Fujinon gives me f/2 light-gathering power while still offering the bonus of keeping both eyes in focus on a portrait subject etc. Still, I think Chris made a good case for keeping this video simple and sticking to a heads-up comparison among three lenses with identical specs for the three most popular mounts.
I have the Sony 135mm for a few years now and it's one of my favorite lenses I have. Never fails me even wide open, even on fast moving subjects coming towards me. Tack sharp on Sony A7RV
Got the 135GM last night and put it on A1 and took it to the grocery store...Holy crap this lens pairs perfectly with the 50GM
Still one of my 3 favourite lenses together with the f1.2 50GM and the f1.8 14GM.
@@PH61a I totally agree. Added to this all of Sony's recent GM and G lenses have been superb. No need to get blown around by individual reviews for cameras and lenses - I'm very happy on E mount
Hard to beat a 135mm prime. All of these lenses are great and this test demonstrates how finely tuned each of these lenses really are. Canon’s coatings are both aggravating at times, but can be ethereal when used to the photographer’s advantage. The Canon used in backlit portraits can look truly spectacular and is a benefit or compromise (depending on how you look at it) for not having that sterile, perfection that can come with some lenses.
Great work guys. I have the Sony 135 and my copy is simply the sharpest lens I have ever used over a long lifetime of photography. All these lenses seem pretty fantastic though whatever system you use.
So darn sharp that I have to tone it down in post-processing! When I go for a softer look on portraits, GM135 is just too sharp haha
if you don't use AF, the zeiss Milvus is impressive !
It is!
AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D walks in, sits down, says "that's cute, you had a little contest for runner up to the bokeh king." ;)
I had the 135 f2 DC it was unusable for professional work! the fokus was not accurate and the focussing to slow… depending on what you shoot maybe a nice lens but for me at least it was way to slow and not reliable in quality, if I am doing more artsy stuff I use my Mamyia RZ anyway…
*the 105 f1.4 G on the other hand was really really good, but now I switched to Canon mirrorless :)
My experience in Sony G master’s filter thread come out twice. That’s negative
I dropped mine very hard on concrete and only then the filter thread came out. Super glued it and it's perfect again.
@@jeroenvdw mine never dropped but it came out twice and it covered under warranty. That’s is bad for Sony
@@pematamang9268 that sucks dude
I have the 135GM for my Sony and absolutely love it! Such a gorgeous lens! Really cool to see how it compares to the brands
I totally agree!
good video, but you did not compared the autofocus speed of this 3 lenses. i hope part 2 tomorrow
Did I miss the review for the New Pentax Camera?
ua-cam.com/video/I4ZpLIUzjPw/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared
Nikons Bokeh blows the competition out of the water. Amazing. But costly.
But lookit all the pretty onion rings in the specular highlights.. lol
At least they have round rings at all instead of flares and cat eyes lol
@@Shentao83 cats eyes fine. Onion rings horrible
@@Zakna Good for you 🤣
One more thing. I've had the Sony GM since it's release. The front filter holder with the filter ring grooves literally unsticks and falls off. Read many instances of this on line. There is no way to buy a part for it so it's a huge cost to fix it. This affects the lens hood and lens cap.
I love how Jordan has put his entire soul into the G9 II.
God I love the way Nikon renders images.
Get a room will ya. I don't need to see this kind of private interaction with camera
canon lens might be struggling from low corner sharpness because of the additional image stabilizing lens element in work
Bokeh on the canon in the LoCa shot is quite jarring in my opinion
I’ve had a great time using my Samyang 135 1.8, so I have almost none of the desire to buy the Sony GM. I know the GM is built much better but $699 for that Samyang was such a deal!
Same here, and I got mine the last Prime days when they had it for just $540.13!
@@trekkeruss i remember seeing that price and was so sad i bought it 2 months ago lol
I know its apsc, but god damn the 90 f2 is legit one of the best lenses i have ever used, and ive used medium format fuji lenses. Its honestly amazing and definitely worth a test, i think you should review it again on a modern body like a xh2 and compare to the fullframes
One day I will get a Z8 just for the Plena and the Noct.
Since AF is usable on the entire field of view, I think you should focus on the corners when testing them. Field curvature matters if you shoot flat objects. For most situations, you want the lens to focus where the subject is and it's interesting to evaluate sharpness on all the field.
How about the Samyang 135mm? 🤔
Could you do the exact same test with the 85mm lenses? But to be honest I am just interested in a comparison between the Nikkor 85 1.2 and the Plena
Great video, but I would like to see a Samyang included in these shootouts. Their lenses have really impressed me.
The moment you mentioned different camera mounts, I thought, why didn’t they agree on a universal mount compatible with all brands when transitioning from DSLR to mirrorless?...
Missed opportunity for Consumers and Manufacturers.
Love the Plena, on my list!
Hard to design a bad 135 I think.
But what these comparisons should look at is everything they didn’t look at here. Which is the overall rendering and the in focus to out of focus transitions, and the related brightness in such areas.
what about samyang 135mm f1.8?
Please do another video for 50 mm lenses (1.8 and 1.4) 🙏
I love the portrait of Jordan with the string of lights. I think you should submit that to this weeks Portrait Live series with Tony and Chelsea
I'll stick with the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and Sigma fp L + 90mm f2.8 in APS-C/crop mode (pretty much how I use the fp L a majority of the time, still get 25-26mp of great image quality and lesser impact on the slower readout that doesn't bother me anyway). I'm a travelling photographer that focuses a lot on lifestyle portraits, mostly in rural areas/villages, and then a lot of time in East/Southeast Asia. I've had the chance to use both the Nikon 135mm f1.8 and the Sony 135mm f1.8. I stopped using both less than an hour in because they failed at giving me what I needed for the job. That is to say, I need a lens that has the reach to let me capture an intimate shot without standing out too much and destroying the moment with someone staring at a massive lens. I immediately noticed a difference when I went back to my E-M5.iii+75mm f1.8 and fp L+90mm f2.8. I blended back into the background as much as a foreigner can and was able to get natural shots again. That's 150mm reach at f1.8 of light or 135mm of reach with f2.8 worth of light, both of which have a good enough depth of field (a 75mm at f1.8 is shallow, same with a 90mm at f2.8, crop factor doesn't change that, it just pushes in changing the reach, changing the distance you stand from the subject, and changes compression due to that distance change).
That isn't to say they're bad lenses, they're amazing. It's just for me, they're not the right tools for the job. The advantages of being able to stand out less and just the weight/size difference when I'm walking/hiking mile after mile daily in rural areas, makes any loss in image quality that no one has ever noticed fine. I'll try the Panasonic 100mm f2.8 with my fp L APS-C mode setup, but the difference in size and losing an aperture ring will have to be beaten by 15mm of reach.
Yeah the 75/1.8 is a fantastic lens. It is pretty much the only reason I have considered upgrading my E-M5ii instead of jumping ship to Fuji or something.
Honestly any of these 3 lenses would be a great buy, they are all amazing pieces of glass.
Guess we learn all these brands can make nice lenses that work well almost looks like the release date has more effect. the GM is already in its 5th year and once they finally fix the worst of the GM's (85 now the 2470 is fixed in mk2) we could see a 135GM2 in 1 or 2 years.
Would have liked to see how the samyang compares to them.
Samyang is better becuase you can get in whatever mount you're currently shooting in. lol
@@drew_hewitt as long as you don't need it in Canon RF or Nikon Z. Then yes. All of them.
lol true just a matter of time though@@lackoliver55
@@drew_hewitt We can dream. We all know Samyang has the mounts sitting around ready to go. Just waiting for Canon to stop being the fun police.
Yeah it's not a great look for Canon but I recently heard something along the lines that they're opening things up starting with crop lenses@@lackoliver55
This makes be laugh because over on my channel I just did a vintage lens adaptation for the Nikon Zf video and the lens I ended up loving the most was the Konica 135mm F 3.5 from the 80s. Not nearly as nice of bokeh as the Plena but you can't win every time. LOL
What about the samyang 135mm f1.8
Yes a great lens les vignette less distortion less weight abd cheaper
Canon EF 135mm f2L for me. I use it still even with my Sony camera via MC11 adapter. Love the look of that lens and seeing I paid $600 CAD for it, bargain!
Talk about bargain, I also have a manual focus Samyang 135 F2...... but I won't fool myself the Samyang is just as good as the Nikon 135 Plena though. LOL.
Another exceptional review and have a great 2024.
I see you showing off your Fractal Design build. 👌
Just got the 135GM yesterday, waiting for the 24mm F1.2 to drop for Christmas
It would have been nice to see the Rokinon/Samyang 135 f1.8 in the mix. Especially since it is available on multiple platforms.
Great review as always ...
It looks like Nikon is inching back to the top ( cameras and lenses ... )
It has always been at the Top for 100Yrs
Waiting for your full review on the zf. Confused between the zf and xt5, zf is retailing here for roughly 2100$ including 40f2 kit lens along with an extra battery..two sd cards..a battery charger and smallrig grip😅..and the xt5 with 18-55 kit lens for ~2300$. it’s a no brainier for me to go with the zf..but still that old sensor and it’s relatively new camera.. so waiting for some authentic reviews and opinions.
Still using Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 for A-mount on A7iv 😁
I didnt see the blurry corners on the canon 😞
135mm is the lenght I keep going back to Vintage, for artistic looks. There are loads of sharp Sonnar designs. It is an easy optical formula, that ended up really well even during old times. I simply don't justify spending over 1K on a 135mm for that reason.
I’m a big fan of the Batis 135mm. Love the colors, contrast, rendering, size and weight of that lens. I’ve also used the Sony 135mm and I definitely thought it created magic but was just a bit heavy and big for my needs. I get plenty of satisfying background blur from the Batis at f/2.8.
It's a different beast. More than a stop slower and smaller and lighter. It's plenty expensive new though but can sometimes be had for a more reasonable sum second hand.
I second the Batis 135mm, yes it's not as fast (aperture) as these but it's lighter, has built-in stability and very sharp with plenty of background blur. As mentioned, it was/is expensive new but used can be had for reasonable money.
I think another video comparing these to the DSLR versions (sigma, zeiss, Samyang) would be awesome since a lot of us are asking: is the increase in price going native really worth it? As an amateur, I am more cost sensitive than a pro since I will not be making money on this.
I can get a 135 and a 85 DSLR lense for about the same as one of these mirrorless 135mm lenses.
The new 135s are markedly better than the old ones. My 135GM is MUCH better optically that my copy of the Canon EF 135L was (and I loved that lens!).
Sigma's 135mm dslr lens would probably hold up in this exalted company. So would the zeiss 135mm f2 milvus/apo sonnar (manual focus beauty).
Samyang makes a very nice 135 1.8 for Sony. When on sale, it can be had for as little as $650, a lot cheaper than any of the big three, and it's a very good lens optically.
It's not that well corrected for close focus images.
@@ilaion11 That may be. But it's also $650 when on sale, and it is a beautiful thing.
There are also plenty of great 135mm f2.8 lenses on eBay for $10-20. They are a great starting point if one just wants to get a feel for the focal length. The vast majority are really good. I've only ever seen a couple lemons.
@@AAJJ007 I would opt for the DSLR Era Sigma 135 1.8 + adaptor instead of the Samyang. And unfortunately all Samyangs suffer from loss of sharpness, field curvature, severe lens distortion at close focus ranges. And it's not a matter of in camera corrections. This is what keeps their prices low., they are not designed to compensate for optical aberrations that arise with focusing closer. Sure, they are nice at normal ranges, but for serious portrait work, I cannot consider them.
Hi guys, always love your work and appreciate the frigid temperatures right now might be limiting, but in this kind of comparison it would be great to see ‘actual use’ cases. Perhaps a ‘Jordan running face’ might be a great portrait session idea?
I wonder if Nikon will replace the legendary 105mm 1.4, but the Plena seems like its a monster
7:55 is the overall chart intentionally unevenly lit? 8:15 f/4 looks darker. Shouldn't the f/1.8 be darker from vignetting?
Thank you for the comparison!..I wish there is more of a 105mm option and or updates from these brands..like most people say its a good "sweet spot" between the 85mm and 135mm..haha
The Viltrox 75/1.2 is kinda like that for APS-C. About a 114/1.8 equivalent. Well constructed for a 3rd party lens, very sharp and optically strong overall, but weak minimum focus distance and the AF is on the slower side.
The Nikon's corner looks brighter at f/1.8 than f/4. I presume this is an in-camera corrected raw? Has the Canon raw been corrected in DPP?
How can I get the "I Shoot RAW" T-Shirt?
I have the plena for 2 weeks now and it's the best lens i ever got my hands on, i don't even know how you can make a better lens...
Samyang's 135mm is native for mirrorless
yeah I'd really love to see a comparison with the samayang 135, i really love their primes
I remember them saying in the podcast though that samayang doesn't respond to requests for loaners so maybe that's part of the reason why they don't use them for comparison
Isn’t the Samyang 135mm FE considered best in class for Sony?
I'm just sad that there is still no Lumix 135mm f/1.8 to include in this shootout 😞
Should test the AF speed and accuracy