135mm f/2 lens recommendation

[narsuitus]

For years, I have not needed a 135mm lens for my Nikon SLR cameras (F2, F4, N70) because the following Nikon lenses have met my needs:

105mm f/2.5
180mm f/2.8
80-200mm f/2.8

Recently, I have been considering the purchase of one of the following 135mm f/2 lenses because I have been shooting more stage performances and need more light gathering:

Rokinon manual focus; 77mm filter; $550
Nikon auto focus; 72mm filter; $1400
Zeiss manual focus; 77mm filter; $1800

Any comments, suggestions, or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

 

[pbromaghin]

Good God, that's a lot of money.

 

[Jesper]

Have you considered a manual focus Nikkor? They are a lot cheaper (I paid about $150 for mine).
Does it have to be 135mm? The Nikkor 200/2 is excellent.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

There is a Samyang 135mm F2 ED UMC that can be bought new for about £415.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The Canon 135/2 FD was a real standout lens, but a bit of a sleeper, because it wasn't an "L". The EOS version, which I owned for some time, is an L and is also outstanding, but not necessarily moreso than the FD version. Considering the cost of the Nikon versions, it might be worth looking into the FD version and having a dedicated body for it, presuming you don't need it for one of those gizmos we don't discuss on APUG.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Consider the 135/2 AF-D DC Nikkor. You can focus it manually and the Defocus Control is excellent for controlling background or foreground bokeh while leaving the subject perfectly sharp.

I use it on my D700, but could just as easily use it on any F-mount Nikon.

 

[darkosaric]

Consider the 135/2 AF-D DC Nikkor.

+1

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

That's a lot to pay for just one more stop of light, and also a lot heavier of a lens. Monopod or slightly faster film not a viable alternative?

 

[karl]

The image quality on the 105 and 135 f2 DC lenses is really amazing. You can often find them used for around $700. I miss the 105/2 DC I used to have. Great lens. They share the same lens barrel, which is not particularly bulky.

 

[splash_fr]

I really like my Samyang 135/2111

 

[tom43]

I own The Zeiss 135 ApoSonnar. It is one of the best lenses you can buy for Money, no doubt. But together with the Nikon SLR cameras with AF it is hard to obtain perfect focus because of viewfinder limitations (e.g. With my D810, F6, F100, F80). In contrast it is usable with the FM3a. To be honest: For most films you will not see much difference between the mentioned lenses. Most Film types have not enough resolution. This might be different once you use high-res B/W film like Adox CMS 20 II....

 

[Fixcinater]

Have you considered the older 77mm Sigma 135/1.8? There were some others with 82mm filter threads, simpler lens construction.

 

[narsuitus]

Good God, that's a lot of money.

I agree! I am having a hard time justifing spending that much money to gather twice as much light.

 

[narsuitus]

Does it have to be 135mm? The Nikkor 200/2 is excellent.

The 200/2 is a good suggestion except that it is a G lens that does not have the aperture ring that is needed for proper exposure control on my older bodies.

 

[narsuitus]

There is a Samyang 135mm F2 ED UMC that can be bought new for about £415.

Good suggestion! I understand that the Samyang and the Rokinon are produced by the same Korean manufacturer.

 

[narsuitus]

The Canon 135/2 FD was a real standout lens, but a bit of a sleeper, because it wasn't an "L". The EOS version, which I owned for some time, is an L and is also outstanding, but not necessarily moreso than the FD version. Considering the cost of the Nikon versions, it might be worth looking into the FD version and having a dedicated body for it, presuming you don't need it for one of those gizmos we don't discuss on APUG.

Thanks for a very creative suggestion. However, I also plan on using the lens on one of those gizmos we don't discuss on this forum.

 

[narsuitus]

Consider the 135/2 AF-D DC Nikkor. You can focus it manually and the Defocus Control is excellent for controlling background or foreground bokeh while leaving the subject perfectly sharp.

I use it on my D700, but could just as easily use it on any F-mount Nikon.

Yes, this is one of the lenses I am considering because it should work on my older film Nikon bodies.

I plan on using this lens at f/2 and need high image quality at this f-stop. How is the image quality of your lens when shot wide open?

 

[narsuitus]

That's a lot to pay for just one more stop of light, and also a lot heavier of a lens. Monopod or slightly faster film not a viable alternative?

The size and weight of the 135mm does not bother me. The 80-200mm I am using now is larger and heavier.

Right now, I am getting by using the lenses I have with fast film and with the lenses mounted on a monopod or a tripod. I am merely exploring the possibility of adding a fast prime lens that fits in the gap between my slower 105mm and 180mm lenses.

 

[narsuitus]

The image quality on the 105 and 135 f2 DC lenses is really amazing. You can often find them used for around $700. I miss the 105/2 DC I used to have. Great lens. They share the same lens barrel, which is not particularly bulky.

Thanks for the suggestion. I have added a used 135 f/2 AIS Nikon lens to my list to consider.

 

[narsuitus]

I really like my Samyang 135/2111

How is the image quality of your Samyang at f/2?

 

[narsuitus]

I own The Zeiss 135 ApoSonnar. It is one of the best lenses you can buy for Money, no doubt. But together with the Nikon SLR cameras with AF it is hard to obtain perfect focus because of viewfinder limitations (e.g. With my D810, F6, F100, F80). In contrast it is usable with the FM3a. To be honest: For most films you will not see much difference between the mentioned lenses. Most Film types have not enough resolution. This might be different once you use high-res B/W film like Adox CMS 20 II....

How is the image quality of your Zeiss at f/2?

I have never owned or used a Zeiss lens. However, I have heard so much about the "magic" of the Zeiss images (especially the Sonnar images) that I have wanted to try one. In your opinion, is the "magic" worth the price premium?

 

[narsuitus]

Have you considered the older 77mm Sigma 135/1.8? There were some others with 82mm filter threads, simpler lens construction.

No, I was not aware of the Sigma 135/1.8 lens. If it has good image quality wide open, I will consider it provided I can find one.

 

[apoglass]

The best optically is undoubtedly the Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO-Sonnar manual focus (which needs a proper focus screen perhaps assisted by a flip down 2x optical magnifier, optically magnified LCD with liveview such as the Zacuto Z-finder, or a magnified electronic viewfinder – if your focusing is to be accurate enough to make full use of all the sharpness that this incredible lens can deliver).

If you also want to be able to use the lens for Macro, the Cosina Voigtländer Macro APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5 SL is also a superb choice, but somewhat hard to find and now only available used.

The Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D AF DC can produce gorgeous softer and lower contrast portraits but is a much more difficult lens to use because it has significant aberrations wide open so is much more difficult to focus (harder to tell when it is in focus), you have to have the knowledge and skill to set the defocus correction adjustment of its variable spherical aberration, and if not stopped down (unlike the apochromatic lenses) you may have lots of work trying to fix chromatic aberration in post-processing. If to be used for autofocus, you need a Nikon camera that has a focus motor in the body. If the manual/autofocus ring cracks, you face a difficult repair problem.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

I place my opinion on the Ais 135/f2 which can be found for much less.

 

[scepticswe]

The Samyang is actually very close to the Zeiss in terms of image quality, as demonstrated here:
http://www.lenstip.com/442.1-Lens_review-Samyang_135_mm_f_2.0_ED_UMC_Introduction.html
I have it in Sony E-mount and wide open it produces images like these on my A7R


Samyang 135 f/2 meets Mira - b/w by scepticswe, on Flickr


Cherry by scepticswe, on Flickr


Flower pot by scepticswe, on Flickr


Rain splashed by scepticswe, on Flickr

As for CA, it does very well. I can't see any trace of it around the white petals in the last image (a typical scenario where one would encounter CA with a "lesser" lens)