Jump to content

135mm lens comparison

KwyjiboVanDeKamp
 Share

Recommended Posts

ivanovyurga Newbie

ivanovyurga

Posted
Posted

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
cosinaphile Enthusiast

cosinaphile

Posted
Posted

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
joelwesterlund Newbie

joelwesterlund

Posted
Posted

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
FX-A1 Newbie

FX-A1

Posted
Posted

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
FX-A1 Newbie

FX-A1

Posted
Posted

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
jedorme Newbie

jedorme

Posted
Posted

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
mjones41 Newbie

mjones41

Posted
Posted

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...
bigbadwolf Contributor

bigbadwolf

Posted
Posted

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...
Palafren Newbie

Palafren

Posted
Posted (edited)

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • mapoett
      How clean a lent

      By mapoett · Posted

      Yes Is some small amount leftover from the spot i cleaned. Inside only very less point of dust,yes my be are from manufacture Is very microscopic. anyway on pictures i not see dust and i not see the spot i clean. thankyou so much for your reply Is beautiful im Happy.Have a good day
    • jerryy
      How clean a lent

      By jerryy · Posted

      Are you certain the spot is on the inside and not some small amount leftover from the spot you cleaned? Maybe try a different brand of lens cleaner, but make sure it is safe for lenses so that the lens coatings are not removed. Even weather resistant lenses can get dust inside, the seals can only keep out so much dust and zoom lenses are known to get dusty on occasion. More so than prime lenses do. Weather resistant means more sealing, but achieving perfect sealing is tough to get. It is also possible the dust has been there from the time it was manufactured and you are only now noticing because of the white dot. Does the dust show up in any of your photos? As far as cleaning cost goes, your local camera repair shop will be able to give you some estimates, prices will be different depending on where you are.
    • pw-pix
      How clean a lent

      By pw-pix · Posted

      You may have to wait for next Easter and try again then.
    • mapoett
      How clean a lent

      By mapoett · Posted

      Hello, After a long travel i see a micro white point on lent. I try with a product clean but not gone. After i try 50 time very gentle in many days. The micro point are gone but still a micro micro point. The lent Is 16/80 fuji. After  if i look lent in the direct sun i can see some micro points of dust. Very less but the lent on paper Is water resistent. So how can have micro point of dust inside? Anyway how i can clean or where i can go for clean my camera and how much can costly? Thankyou everyone   
    • MGboston
      XS-10 board cooked?

      By MGboston · Posted

      Update: the camera seems to have self-corrected. 🤷‍♂️  My working hypothesis is that moisture caused it to glitch, and after drying out, it's working again. 
×
×
  • Create New...