Let's hear it for 135mm

[blockend]

Although I've had a 135mm Nikkor for almost 30 years, I've barely used it. I don't know why this should be but I tended to use shorter or longer focal lengths. Recently I acquired a Canon FD 135 and began to use it for the fun and the focal length has grown on me.

I don't know if I was prejudiced or just lazy. Back in the 70s 135mm lenses were often the first telephoto bought and manufacturers turned them out in their thousands, which made them cheaper than other lengths. I suppose they're a bit long for a portrait lens and rather short for a true tele but it's proving pretty good as a street lens so long as you get used to looking up ahead.

It's also not too long to hand hold and very compact. Anyone else use a 135?

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I don't have one now but my Canon FD 135 was great!

Jeff

 

[lxdude]

I have a 135 for my 645 format stuff! Does that count?

 

[Rick A]

I've owned 135mm's for years. It used to be 'the' tele in the 60's and early 70's, until lensmakers started building affordable teles and zooms

 

[Ole]

I have a 135 for my 645 format stuff! Does that count?

I don't think my 135mm Symmar for 4x5" counts, either.

But I do have a Leitz Hektor 135mm I use sometimes, on a FED camera.

 

[Usagi]

I use 135mm. Perhaps one reason is that I have kind a grown with a 135mm as next of 28mm and 50mm.

When I was child, my father had slr with a 28mm, 55mm and 135mm lenses. I learned taking photograph with these and later got that camera and lenses and used them over 10 years.

Even today, I prefer 28, 50 and 135mm lenses (or equivalent in larger format cameras) over a lenses like 35mm and 85mm. I have both but rarely found any use for them.

 

[CGW]

Crappy offbrand variable aperture 70-210/80-200 zooms killed them off--the same lenses I saw stacked in bins like firewood in downtown Toronto camera stores 5 years ago. There remains this urban legend that it's a poor choice for a portrait lens and inferior to 85/105mm models. I still use both an old MC Rokkor and Nikon Ai 135/2.8 just for the added working distance for street shots;it's also about the longest lens I like to handhold. They work quite well on short extension tubes or with good quality diopters for close-up work, too.

 

[bblhed]

I have a Pentax 135mm for my Pentax 6X7, it is my favorite lens for taking head shots of people.

 

[Rol_Lei Nut]

I never liked 135mm as a focal length, despite the high quality of many such lenses, but now I've put the one I have to good use for OT purposes (where it effectively becomes a very nice and compact 270mm).

I suppose there are at least 2 basic types of lens philosophies: the previous poster's 28 + 50 + 135mm and what I prefer, 35 + 85 (+20/21 +180/200mm).
Seems it depends mainly on what one considers a "normal" lens to be (35mm in cases like mine, 50mm for the "others"... )

 

[blockend]

135/2.8 just for the added working distance for street shots;it's also about the longest lens I like to handhold.

That's how I see it, I'd go as far as to say it's the perfect street portrait length, being holdable at reasonable shutter speeds and giving shallow but not microscopic DOF for manual focus.

 

[naeroscatu]

I have couple of 135mm that I never used but I found much better use of the 85 mm or 100 mm for street or portrait situations (hence the 85 mm is F1.8).

 

[CGW]

I have couple of 135mm that I never used but I found much better use of the 85 mm or 100 mm for street or portrait situations (hence the 85 mm is F1.8).

I like the 135mm mainly for the extra reach on the street and its ability to isolate a face in a group. Still, I get way more use from an old Nikon 85/1.8 and the tiny 100/2.8 E series.

 

[dynachrome]

135mm

I have many 135s. In most cases I use them outdoors. Some of my favorites include the 135/2.5 Canon FL, 135/3.8 Vivitar Close Focusing, 135/3.2 Konica Hexanon, 135/2.8 Nikkor QC, 135/3.5 SMC Pentax M, 135/2.3 Vivitar Series 1, 135/2.8 Sigma Pantel and 135/3.5 Minolta MD.

 

[TimmyMac]

Minolta 135/2.8 MD! I don't use it much but I almost always get keepers from it...

 

[MaximusM3]

Nikkor 135 DC, Leica Tele Elmar f4, Elmar APO f3.4. Love them, use them.

 

[Steve Smith]

I have five of them. Two Nikon fit - one is a Series E, the other is a surprisingly good Hanimex. I have one for my Minolta XE-1, A 135mm Zeiss Sonnar in M42 mount on one of my Spotmatics and a Schneider 135mm on a Kodak Retina Reflex III. I think it is my favourite focal length on 35mm.


Steve.

 

[dnjl]

The FDn 135mm f2.8 is the longest lens I have in my kit. I don't use it that often, but it's a great tool for candid street photography and for portraits in general.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

I used to have a nice 135mm Takumar with my Pentax, and I still have a pre-war 13,5cm Sonnar for my Contax, but...

"135mm prime: Little owned, less used. Became a standard 35mm focal length when rangefinders were the main camera type because it’s the longest focal length that is feasible on a rangefinder. Now vestigial, like a male’s nipples."

http://photo.net/mjohnston/column57/

I can't resist a good satire.

 

[fstop]

I have one, don't use it much because its only 3.5,a 2.8 would be better. It fits in where you are doing hand held and need better speed than a longer lens at 4.5, but almost always comes up short making cropped enlargments a necessity, but in the end all that counts is that you got an image to work with.

 

[David Brown]

As others have mentioned, when you bought an slr in the 60s, it came with the "normal" 50/55/58 mm; and the next lens you bought was a 135mm. I have an old Sears that came with the camera I bought in high school, the usual Takumars, for the Spotmatic I used all through the 70s, and
Rokkors (both MC and MD) for the Minoltas that replaced the Pentax.

And I have yet another for the Minolta Maxxum, which will soon see duty on a new unmentionable compatible imaging device ...

 

[hpulley]

I love the Canon EF 135mm f/2.0, sharp, fast, great bokeh.

 

[fstop]

As others have mentioned, when you bought an slr in the 60s, it came with the "normal" 50/55/58 mm; and the next lens you bought was a 135mm. I have an old Sears that came with the camera I bought in high school, the usual Takumars, for the Spotmatic I used all through the 70s, and
Rokkors (both MC and MD) for the Minoltas that replaced the Pentax.

And I have yet another for the Minolta Maxxum, which will soon see duty on a new unmentionable compatible imaging device ...

010100110110111101101110011110010010000001100001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100011011000010110111000100000011101000110000101101011011001010010000001001101011000010111100001111000011101010110110100100000011011000110010101101110011100110110010101110011001000000011101000101001000011010000101001000001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100001001000000110011101101111011011110110010000100000011000110110100001101111011010010110001101100101001000000110100101101110001000000110010001101001011001110110100101110100011000010110110000101110

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I find it a strange focal length, honestly. I had a 135mm lens for my Pentax KX cameras, but have maybe used it for maybe a hundred frames in ten years.
1. It doesn't have enough reach to be something that gets really close. I prefer the perspective of a 50mm lens and just walking up to the subject matter.
2. The way it compresses the subject matter I find awkward. I have 100mm too and find that I use that much more often...

It's one of those lenses that just keep on hanging onto a spot in my camera bag, without actually getting used much. I should probably get rid of it and get a 200mm instead.

 

[lxdude]

010100110110111101101110011110010010000001100001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100011011000010110111000100000011101000110000101101011011001010010000001001101011000010111100001111000011101010110110100100000011011000110010101101110011100110110010101110011001000000011101000101001000011010000101001000001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100001001000000110011101101111011011110110010000100000011000110110100001101111011010010110001101100101001000000110100101101110001000000110010001101001011001110110100101110100011000010110110000101110

Easy for YOU to say!

 

[Steve Smith]

010100110110111101101110011110010010000001100001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100011011000010110111000100000011101000110000101101011011001010010000001001101011000010111100001111000011101010110110100100000011011000110010101101110011100110110010101110011001000000011101000101001000011010000101001000001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100001001000000110011101101111011011110110010000100000011000110110100001101111011010010110001101100101001000000110100101101110001000000110010001101001011001110110100101110100011000010110110000101110

I think you mean:
010100110110111101101110011110010010000001100001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100011011000010110111000100000011101000110000101101011011001010010000001001101011000010111100001111000011101010110110100100000011011000110010101101110011100110110010101110011001000000011101000101001000011010000101001000001011011000111000001101000011000010010000001100001001000000110011101101111011011110110010000100000011000110110100001101111011010010110001101100101001000000110100101101110001000000110010001101001011001110111100101110100011000010110110000101110


Steve.