Jump to content

135mm lens comparison


Recommended Posts

Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f4 with aluminium tube / X-E2

If I remember right it was closed for 1 stop.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8

Fuji X-E1 OOC Jpeg

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i own the fujica 135 2.5 and an older nikon 135   2.8 that i use   with a first generation speed booster on the  xe2\ xe1

 

 

i prefer the fujica   for its lovely render and crispness....  ut the nikon has served indoor without flash  with the speedbooster   in a pinch

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the Jupiter-11, 135mm f4.  Very compact and sharp lens with a creamy defocus.  

 

Fuji X-a1 with Contax mount Jupiter-11

Hey man, would you mind posting a pic of your lens? (mounted on the camera too, if it's not too much to ask, but not as important)

- I find multiple versions of the lens that are very different looking, so I assume the design might differ as well

 

The second photo bokeh and the third photo background foliage ... damn ... it looks so old, film-like, and awesome :)

I just had to ask when I saw those! Nice stuff

 

Thanks in advance, either way :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of these lenses, which would be the most compact?  (including the adaptor)

 

The OM I assume?

Yes, it might be OM — it's 360g.

 

I had an Olympus OM Zuiko E.Zuiko Auto ­T 135mm f/2.8. Compact with very good resolution. My Canon FD 135/2.8 has better contrast, though. Otherwise same optical performance.

 

Here's more about it:

 

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/135mm.htm

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a test on Canon FDn 135mm f/2.8 vintage lens on Fuji X-A1. 100% crops are from tif file processed from a RAW file using Adobe Camera Raw. Sharpening and NR were zeroed in ACR. The f/2.8 and f/3.4 crops have some contrast added. Otherwise no adjustment done. The test scene had a low contrast so it was quite challenging for the lens.

 

gallery_1738_164_745450.jpg

 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only recently acquired one of the Fujinon 135mm f2.8 lenses after a frustrating attempt to find a Leica Elmar 135  that I could afford, but have to say I could not be happier.  I have adapted it to my X-E2 with a Fotodiox adapter that also has a tripod mount on the adapter.  So I find when I use it with my monopod, it really balances very well.  I'm just starting to use it & here are a few images taken wide open in an effort to test its' sharpness & out of focus results.  Also shown is a snap of the lens mounted on my X-E2.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey man, would you mind posting a pic of your lens? (mounted on the camera too, if it's not too much to ask, but not as important)

- I find multiple versions of the lens that are very different looking, so I assume the design might differ as well

 

The second photo bokeh and the third photo background foliage ... damn ... it looks so old, film-like, and awesome :)

I just had to ask when I saw those! Nice stuff

 

Thanks in advance, either way :)

 

Hi Joel, if you want to get a jupiter-11 on a Fuji-x you can either get a LTM39 or a Contax Yashica Mount.  

 

CY mount use - Nikon(s)-FX adaptor

LTM39 use - LTM-FX adaptor

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

i`ve done a little shoot-out (sooc, iso 200, noise 0, sharpness 0, total, crop left upper, crop center) in the german forum between...

 

schneider kreuznach: tele-xenar 1:3.5/135; 6 blade; m42; adaptor kiwi

at f-stop 3.5 / 8 / 11

 

voigtländer: color-dynarex 1:4/135; 6 blade; m42; adaptor kiwi

at f-stop 4 / 8 / 11

 

olympus om: e.zuiko auto-t 1:3.5/135; 8 blade; oly-bajonet; adaptor quenox

at f-stop 3.5 / 8 / 11

 

...imho the oly is clearly the best of these three.

 

since i own a mint vivitar series1 1:2.5/90 macro (bokina) this is now my prefered short telephoto lense because of its additional macro capabilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...

My two cents: Minolta AF 135 2.8, all shots aprox. f4 with K&F adapter on a X-T10

 

25706625044_9b7790dc84_h.jpgDSCF1634 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr

25705894544_75c55e8f9c_h.jpgDSCF1599 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr

26286289181_f9adb5e9bb_h.jpgDSCF1716 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr26265063761_b01617e4d8_h.jpgDSCF1684 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr25726223384_5360ff09e7_h.jpgDSCF1653 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr

 

And for comparison, this is a fujinon XF 60 mm macro. f425730136244_e72f8b3c41_h.jpgDSCF1641 by Manuel Bustos, en Flickr

 

Both lenses are tack sharp. May be the fujinon xf is even sharper... or not, I couldn't really say

Edited by Palafren
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • ...and, although, I don't use Lightroom, I bet there is a setting/mode in LR that will look at the RAW processing metadata in the RAW file and will show you LR's interpretation of the STRONG GRAIN setting, and other in-camera settings. Certainly CaptureOne the equivalent RAW processing engine, which I use, optionally does do this. You have to remember that the RAW file is not an image, its the data required for a RAW processing engine, like LR, CO, or even Windows Image Viewer, to create one, and they will all do it slightly differently. Software that doesn't have the capability of processing and rendering the RAW file at all may dig out the embedded JPEG thumbnail from the RAW file, and display that instead. BTW - I use CO, rather than LR, because it is widely believed to make a better job of rendering Fujifilm's weird X-Trans RAW files better than LR, and most other engine's.
    • I think I know what you mean now. I noticed the STRONG grain setting in the raw file when I was using X Raw Studio. On other software like Windows Image viewer or Lightroom the grain effect is not showing at all. Mystery solved!
    • Its difficult to imagine this could be anything other than a faulty camera. You seem to have done all the tests to eliminate other causes.
    • Hi Last week during a reportage, I shot bursts from about 5 fts with one of my two X-T5s, for a total of about 100 photographs. I had mounted a Fujinon XF8mm. Everything seemed to proceed regularly without any sign of problems. When looking at the sequences in the car I realized that many photos were completely black, that is, as if I had taken with the cap in front, alternating with some perfect ones and others completely white without any detail. Back in the studio I loaded them onto the Mac and noticed that of a sequence of around 100 photographs, 49 were completely flawed, that is, almost all of them were completely BLACK and some were completely WHITE. The problem was present both on the photo of the Slot 1 card (RAF) and on the Slot 2 card (JPG) in unison, so much so that I discarded the hypothesis that it could be a problem with the memory card. So, to recap: the errors on the 49 offending photos are exactly the same, for both cards in RAF and JPG. After turning the machine off and on again, it started working perfectly again, so much so that in the following days I carried out other jobs, even with gusts, without any problem. Obviously I am waiting for a response from the support to which I sent the offending sequences. I would add that if I analyze the EXIFs of the BLACK or WHITE photos, the values and data that appear are completely normal, that is, they report exactly the same information as the photos that came out well, as if nothing had happened. 1) Before each job, I always format the cards in the machine, with the specific function that can be called up from the menu and quick keys of the XT5 2) The XT5 has Firmware version 2.03 3) The Fujinon XF-8mm lens Firmware 1.00 The problem has manifested itself, for now, only once, intermittently, that is, some faulty photos alternated with perfect ones. In the following days, on the advice of the assistance center, I put on the intervalometer and shot the camera until the card was full for a total of 1600 shots. No problems, everything is fine. What do you think about it? Has anyone had this problem?

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

    • Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

       
×
×
  • Create New...