Jump to content

Zeiss Apo-Sonnar 2/135mm on SL


Ivar B

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wanted a slightly long and fast portrait lens for my SL and bought the Zeiss Apo 2/135 in ZF.2 (Nikon) Mount and I use it with the Novoflex adapter. First pleasant surprise was how easy it was to focus the lens with the SL. The viewfinder is really superb and manual focus lenses is not a problem at all.

 

The lens is also a really stellar performer - bitingly sharp from f2.

 

 

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!

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice shot. Even Zeiss accept that the 135 f2 APO is really an Otus without the name, It's an absolutely stellar lens. I have the 100 f2 MP, which while not as perfect as the 135 is also really great on the SL.

 

The SL is a wonderful platform for manual focus lenses. Try the Noctilux. It's fab on the SL.

 

Gordon 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am deeply impressed by this lens. It must match the performance of the Apo-Telyt 3.4/135mm I assume.

 

I owned this lens in the past but found it notoriously difficult to focus on the M, but I am sure this lens would have been superb on the SL also.

 

I will try out the Noctilux soon,

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I use now the Elmar 4/135 on the SL and the performance is really superberb. Give it a try and especially for Leica it is a damn cheap lens (approx. 300 to 400 Euro). Just have a look: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253192-leica-sl-image-thread-post-your-examples-here/page-77

 

all the best

Marc

 

Yes, I know this lens and it is a superb performer and tremendous value for money. I like the Zeiss in particular for its f2 stop, so I can limit debth of field for compositional purposes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I currently own the 135mm f2 apo zeiss, it is big and heavy, a stellar lens of course. Use it on the Canon 5dsr.

Now I'm thinking to either buy the 135mm3.4 telyt or the novoflex adapter. (as it is the Canon version I will need the AF novoflex adapter in order to be able to adjust aperture).

 

135zeiss+novoflex adapter would be about 2200USD value, while I can get a 135m f3.4 used for about 2600 to 2900USD.

It will be a 1kg combo vs a 450grams. I would not really miss the 2.5 or so stops.

 

Anybody had chance to compare?

Edited by orc999
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can first buy a cheap non-AF adapter to try the Zeiss. This gives you a first impression of size and image quality.

But generally image quality of adapted lenses is just as great as on the "original" body. I tried all sorts of lenses and was always happy with the results. The sensor can really cope with almost anything.

Instead of the latest 135 I use an old Elmar 4/135. Very inexpensive and very close in IQ to the latest Apo 135. It was in a way the first "apo" lens Leica made. It is the lightest 135, but it looks definitely old-fashioned.   (What I like   :p )

 

I use both the Nikon 2/135 DC and the Elmar 4/135. It depends on the occasion. It actually also depends upon the object - some like to be photographed by historic lenses, others feel better when their image is taken with a "serious" lens.

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Zeiss has a bit more contrast. But both are really wonderful optics. Obviously at f2 you'll get shallow DOF on the Zeiss that the Leica can't do. At 3.4/5 they're a bit different but neither is *better* although the Zeiss is more *perfect*. The main thing is the Zeiss is brilliant from wide open. If you have a use for f2 you'll carry the Zeiss.

 

Gordon

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Instead of the latest 135 I use an old Elmar 4/135. Very inexpensive and very close in IQ to the latest Apo 135. It was in a way the first "apo" lens Leica made. It is the lightest 135, but it looks definitely old-fashioned.   (What I like   :p )

...

Don't spread the information, this will only increase the price :D

 

OT: I had a lot of touble with focusing the latest 3,4/135 with the M9, the Leica service tried to get it right 5 times(!), but the 4/135 works perfect.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

thx chrismuc

So at f4 is there a difference?

how about the look? I only know it on the 5dsr, where indeed, it is just perfect. It is also very easy to focus, much easier then the other ZE/ZF lenses, more like the Otus.

Only downside is weight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thing is the Zeiss is brilliant from wide open. If you have a use for f2 you'll carry the Zeiss.

 

Gordon

True this. Brilliant lens. Had to sell it to fund a purchase of SL - deeply regretted it.

 

But...

Recently I had a chance to play with Samyang 135/2 (Nikon) on my SL. What a pleasant surprise!!

While obviously not made that well as Zeiss, I was not able to see a noticeable difference in optical quality! And I have only used it wide open @ f2

 

I actually think I might buy it - it was that good. And yes it is 4-5 x cheaper than Zeiss...

Definitely worth trying IMHO

 

Best regards / Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

The price difference to Nikon is much smaller. And the Nikon lens is AF on a Nikon camera.

So I would always prefer the Nikkor AF 2/135 DC to the Samyang.  

 

Actually I also prefer it to the Zeiss - I see no difference in IQ, it is AF, it offers DC = bokeh control (it actually is the king of bokeh), it has internal focusing and therefore a constant length and finally is much cheaper (used!), but I am biased as I used mainly Nikon for the last 15 years. The lens is from 1990 (first release), but the 135mm focal length was already extremely well constructed at that time (and the hood is built-in). OK. it looks maybe old-fashioned compared to other Nikon lenses, but it is extremely sharp - many did call it a "soft-focus" lens, because the DC label was incomprehensible to them. Nothing could be more remote from the truth/reality.   B) 

I often use it for landscape - not just portrait -  because ot its high quality and lack of distortion. (Ok, in the last month I used mainly my new 90-280. ;-)

 

If you wonder how such a little known lens should be so excellent and you cannot believe it: Have a look at the test in photozone

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/225-nikkor-af-135mm-f2-d-dc-review--test-report

And the SL is ideal to help you master DC (much better visual control with the EVF than on an OVF).

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

The price difference to Nikon is much smaller. And the Nikon lens is AF on a Nikon camera.

So I would always prefer the Nikkor AF 2/135 DC to the Samyang.  

 

Actually I also prefer it to the Zeiss - I see no difference in IQ,

 

I do not own Nikon camera any more, so AF means nothing to me. You are right in one thing - 135mm lens wide open ( f2 ) is difficult to focus properly without

AF - on a Nikon camera, but using it on SL is so easy. No problems at all!

 

I have never owned 135 DC, but I had 105 DC for several years which is very similar in design/IQ. While I liked it very much, I still think Zeiss 135

was/is much better lens - if focused is nailed. I could easily see the difference in IQ. Samyang is very close to Zeiss, so if we are talking about

the image quality only I prefer it easily to Nikon DC.

And again, considering the price - this lens is nothing but fabulous!

 

Here is the test of Zeiss 135 and comparation to Nikon DC 135 and Samyang 135:

http://www.verybiglobo.com/zeiss-apo-sonnar-135mm-f2-zf-2-review/

 

//Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply go to the testsites I know, there are already plenty. And I see the Zeiss has also weaknesses, e.g. vignetting wide open and the big size. The 2/135 DC has very little vignetting. (not in your site, but in all others ;-)

The Nikon is also better to use: it has internal focus (meaning constant length), the shade/hood is built in. And it has additionally DC.

So for me the Zeiss is no match, mainly because it is an old construction that gets very long at relativ close distance (and the size with shade/hood is simply a catastrophe. Did you notice, it is never shown with hood.).   (Of course this is not for everybody).

The new lens for the Sony (1.8/135) is a different story. (And much preferable in my eyes.)

 

I use it with the SL more than before with D800, because it is easy to focus manually and bokeh-control was almost invisible on D800, while it is really nice to see with the SL with 10x enlargement. And the internal focus means very light/smooth focusing.

 

As so often, there are slight differences in artificial tests, that completely disappear in practical daily use. I know that my pictures usually do not get the best out of the lens/camera (I almost never use tripods). So the Nikon gives me what I need. (Of course others need different things).

 

Samyang is making very quick progress, so in a few years they will be really strong if they go on like this. Maybe this will also change their price policy. But the ergonomics are terrible (maybe not for the cine lenses), just look at the lens with shade. And currently the 135 has an awful lot of vignetting (really lowest third). (much worse in other tests than in your site ;-)

 

I have the 2/135 DC and am very happy with it. It is strange but this old looking lens has features that Leica is going to offer for the first time in the new SL 1.4/50  (internal focus in primes, etc.)

 

This is all about test results. I am sure that in practical use I would not be able to tell the photos made with the lenses apart, or just in very special cases. Probably not even then, after all corrections have been applied. So maybe we all should buy Samyang lenses, but currently I simply do not enjoy them (personal preference).

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess and advantage of the zeis 135mm with the novoflex AF adapter would be automatic stopdown in focus.

Am I right?

the 135mm Leica M won't have that.

 

Yes, with the EOS/SL adapter, this should be the case as far as I know. I have the onw with the Nikon Mount, but that also works well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ orc999

 

enclosed Sony A7R II crops of the Leica M 135f3.4 Apo (1. crop) and the Zeiss ZE 135f2 Apo (2. crop)

 

- both @ f4

- both raw opened in ACR w/o any correction

- both saved as jpg (9)

 

nothing to comment, the difference it obvious

 

 

 

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!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the ZE version of the Zeiss Apo 135, and sometimes use it on a Monochrom with EVF. The ZE misses out on having an aperture ring, but (apart from the size) is a very nice lens.

 

Thanks, for the thread - It encourages me to take it out for a spin today.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

×
×
  • Create New...