Sony 135mm 1.8 vs. (vs.?) 70-350

abe4652 · Aug 18, 2020

After further shooting and research, I have to amend my prior thoughts.

The 70-350 is a very good lens. Remarkably sharp even at 350mm (for a variable zoom lens). But, technically, far, far away from the allegedly miraculous MTF of the 135mm.

So, I wondered if, for any given situation, how much worse, really, would a shot at 135mm with the 135mm be, in comparison with the 70-350 at 350.

At first, I thought I wasn't really seeing much increased benefit of the 135mm in terms of sharpness in this context.

But now, after lots more, I find that because the 135mm is so much sharper, plus being that for any given situation the f stop will be much larger (1.8 vs. 6.7), an we end up at much lower ISO and therefore image quality, I am actually not seeing radical differences in IQ between each image.

dbronson · Aug 18, 2020

Just so I understand your post...it is your opinion that an image shot with the 135mm at f1.8, is as good as 350mm at f6.3 meaning, you cropped the 135mm to 350mm and the results are similar?

Can you post your shots? I'm curious, and a bit skeptical...but maybe you're right?

cxsparc · Aug 18, 2020

Apples to Nuclear power plants comparison?

If you want the subject size to be large and need the 350 mm due to this, an upscaled shot of the 135mm will fail bigtime unless the 350 are real lousy.

Post samples illustrating your unclear point.

If you are onLy into subject separation and can move closer to the subject for similar size then of course the 135m wins

Two crops attached.

one crop of SEL55210 at 210 at f9, where we know this lens is not hot, less so at tele end. And downscaled to similar subject size of the FD135!

Another from a FD135/2.8 lens stopped down to F4. Sharp as heck, lots of CA.

The FD135 wins here clearly if you are willing to remove the CA, though it is an unfair test.

Now the 70350 is supposed to be MUCH better than the SEL55210 so please provide some samples of your setup.

--
German/English Nex/A6000-Blog: http://luxorphotoart.blogspot.de/

Bender79ita · Aug 19, 2020

Basicly you are saying that an image shot with a 1" sensor size (or so) crop at 3.3mp, with no stabilization, from a FF image circle at f1.8, is better then a full aps-c circle of 24mp at f6.3 with stabilization.

Unless my math is wrong, isn't that what 24mp with a x2.7 crop factor will be?

brilly · Aug 19, 2020

cxsparc said:
Apples to Nuclear power plants comparison?

If you want the subject size to be large and need the 350 mm due to this, an upscaled shot of the 135mm will fail bigtime unless the 350 are real lousy.

Post samples illustrating your unclear point.

If you are onLy into subject separation and can move closer to the subject for similar size then of course the 135m wins

seems to be talking cropped 350mm vs 135mm from same position

would have to see it to believe but i guess could be possible if iso considerations were taken into account

cant see it personally but happy to be proved wrong!

edit: looking at your posed example tbh i think the 55-210 is very slightly better - depends on focal point though.

example doesn't show any iso benefits but that would favour the 135...

paul wassermann · Aug 19, 2020

To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

brilly · Aug 19, 2020

paul wassermann said:
To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

the point is the isos wouldn't need to be matched and neither would the aperture anyway if the dof was sufficient

dbronson · Aug 19, 2020

paul wassermann said:
paul wassermann wrote:

To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

The OP suggested that since the 135 is a much faster lens, and sharp wide open, the iso would be lower than with the 70-350 lens and this what I'm curious about. I think with same aperture and iso, the 135mm would lose...but its the former argument that I'm curious about. I have 135 f2, and the 70 350 so I may just try it myself . According to the OP, The sony 135 is as good, albeit at a lower iso, when cropped to 350 equivalent.

paul wassermann · Aug 19, 2020

dbronson said:
paul wassermann said:

To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

Click to expand...

The OP suggested that since the 135 is a much faster lens, and sharp wide open, the iso would be lower than with the 70-350 lens and this what I'm curious about. I think with same aperture and iso, the 135mm would lose...but its the former argument that I'm curious about. I have 135 f2, and the 70 350 so I may just try it myself . According to the OP, The sony 135 is as good, albeit at a lower iso, when cropped to 350 equivalent.

Seeing is believing...I would love to see comparison photos between the two lenses. I have the 70-350 and really enjoy it but it is really only a "good light" lens and for maximum performance I find myself shooting at f8 to f11 alot with subsequent higher than desired ISO. (particularly when you figure in high shutter speeds).

abe4652 · Aug 19, 2020

dbronson said:
Just so I understand your post...it is your opinion that an image shot with the 135mm at f1.8, is as good as 350mm at f6.3 meaning, you cropped the 135mm to 350mm and the results are similar?

Can you post your shots? I'm curious, and a bit skeptical...but maybe you're right?

I won't go so far as to say similar, just that it seems there's far less reduction in IQ than one would expect given the great optical zoom difference.

abe4652 · Aug 19, 2020

Bender79ita said:
Basicly you are saying that an image shot with a 1" sensor size (or so) crop at 3.3mp, with no stabilization, from a FF image circle at f1.8, is better then a full aps-c circle of 24mp at f6.3 with stabilization.

Unless my math is wrong, isn't that what 24mp with a x2.7 crop factor will be?

Why do you say no stabilization for the 135mm?

On a A6600, it's stabilized.

dpeete · Aug 19, 2020

Body stabilization isn’t going to do much good at 135mm on an APS-C.

brilly · Aug 19, 2020

abe4652 said:
dbronson said:

Just so I understand your post...it is your opinion that an image shot with the 135mm at f1.8, is as good as 350mm at f6.3 meaning, you cropped the 135mm to 350mm and the results are similar?

Can you post your shots? I'm curious, and a bit skeptical...but maybe you're right?

Click to expand...

I won't go so far as to say similar, just that it seems there's far less reduction in IQ than one would expect given the great optical zoom difference.

wait a sec - so now you are saying 'not similar' whilst the whole opening post was basicaly to say they were similar

with no samples the thread doesn't mean much anyway

Bender79ita · Aug 20, 2020

abe4652 said:
Bender79ita said:

Basicly you are saying that an image shot with a 1" sensor size (or so) crop at 3.3mp, with no stabilization, from a FF image circle at f1.8, is better then a full aps-c circle of 24mp at f6.3 with stabilization.

Unless my math is wrong, isn't that what 24mp with a x2.7 crop factor will be?

Click to expand...

Why do you say no stabilization for the 135mm?

On a A6600, it's stabilized.

The lens is not. You never mentioned what camera would be used.

cxsparc · Aug 20, 2020

@abe/OP: simply post some comparison shots as many have requested here.
Otherwise this thread goes nowhere beyond personal subjective opinion.

dbronson · Aug 20, 2020

paul wassermann said:
dbronson said:

paul wassermann said:

To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

Click to expand...

The OP suggested that since the 135 is a much faster lens, and sharp wide open, the iso would be lower than with the 70-350 lens and this what I'm curious about. I think with same aperture and iso, the 135mm would lose...but its the former argument that I'm curious about. I have 135 f2, and the 70 350 so I may just try it myself . According to the OP, The sony 135 is as good, albeit at a lower iso, when cropped to 350 equivalent.

Click to expand...

Seeing is believing...I would love to see comparison photos between the two lenses. I have the 70-350 and really enjoy it but it is really only a "good light" lens and for maximum performance I find myself shooting at f8 to f11 alot with subsequent higher than desired ISO. (particularly when you figure in high shutter speeds).

i did a very quick test with an ef135 at f2, ( which is off topic from the OP, but i was curious, and the sony 135 is on my wish list) and the sony 70-350, same distance from subject ( about 100 feet), adjusted the iso, and the sony won hands down, except of course for noise. now, the canon lens is not a sony, and i think the canon front focused a bit, so its not as sharp as it could be...ran out of daylight so i will check again tonight. for now, here is quick resized comparison. sony lens f6.3 at 1000 iso, canon at 100 at f2.0 ( oh, and i hate the CA of the canon at f2.0 i typically stop down to f2.8, but for this test its at f2.0)

i think focus is off on left image, will do this experiment again later today.

going off on a tangent, here's the CA of the canon, compared to sony. no contest here.

the canon ef135 is legendary, but it has it character flaws. sorry to go way, way off topic.

brilly · Aug 20, 2020

dbronson said:
paul wassermann said:

dbronson said:

paul wassermann said:

To perhaps answer this question, shoot a series of pairs of images, each shot from the same spot, matching exposure, aperture, and ISO as much as possible, cropping the 135 to duplicate the FOV of the zoom and comparing the images side by side.

Click to expand...

The OP suggested that since the 135 is a much faster lens, and sharp wide open, the iso would be lower than with the 70-350 lens and this what I'm curious about. I think with same aperture and iso, the 135mm would lose...but its the former argument that I'm curious about. I have 135 f2, and the 70 350 so I may just try it myself . According to the OP, The sony 135 is as good, albeit at a lower iso, when cropped to 350 equivalent.

Click to expand...

Seeing is believing...I would love to see comparison photos between the two lenses. I have the 70-350 and really enjoy it but it is really only a "good light" lens and for maximum performance I find myself shooting at f8 to f11 alot with subsequent higher than desired ISO. (particularly when you figure in high shutter speeds).

Click to expand...

i did a very quick test with an ef135 at f2, ( which is off topic from the OP, but i was curious, and the sony 135 is on my wish list) and the sony 70-350, same distance from subject ( about 100 feet), adjusted the iso, and the sony won hands down, except of course for noise. now, the canon lens is not a sony, and i think the canon front focused a bit, so its not as sharp as it could be...ran out of daylight so i will check again tonight. for now, here is quick resized comparison. sony lens f6.3 at 1000 iso, canon at 100 at f2.0 ( oh, and i hate the CA of the canon at f2.0 i typically stop down to f2.8, but for this test its at f2.0)

i think focus is off on left image, will do this experiment again later today.

going off on a tangent, here's the CA of the canon, compared to sony. no contest here.

the canon ef135 is legendary, but it has it character flaws. sorry to go way, way off topic.

no point to such 'quick and dirty'

no settings, unreliable focus, random resizing

should be easy enough for op to supply though seeing as they made the thread about their findings!

dbronson · Aug 20, 2020

abe4652 said:
dbronson said:

Just so I understand your post...it is your opinion that an image shot with the 135mm at f1.8, is as good as 350mm at f6.3 meaning, you cropped the 135mm to 350mm and the results are similar?

Can you post your shots? I'm curious, and a bit skeptical...but maybe you're right?

Click to expand...

I won't go so far as to say similar, just that it seems there's far less reduction in IQ than one would expect given the great optical zoom difference.

ok, i was a curious. i would love to see the sony 135 against the 70-350 . but since i dont a sony, i did some more testing with my canon ef135, which is no slouch, but my testing doesnt disprove your theory of the sony 135.

for those pixelators, here is the canon and sony both with similar settings to verify sharpness of my lenses. similar results, edge to canon ( imho)

and now a second set, this time trying out OP thesis. of, faster lens, lower iso, therefore cropping is similar to using the 350.

my tests dont prove or disprove the OP as i think the canon is soft at f2.0 , i just wonder if the sony 135 can be as good as the OP suggests. in my tests, canon isn't as good cropped to 350 equivalent.

Bender79ita · Aug 20, 2020

So we shall compare the licence plates, cropped and resized to the same size.

On the left the 70-350 1:1, on the right the 135 resized to match.

dbronson · Aug 20, 2020

Bender79ita said:
So we shall compare the licence plates, cropped and resized to the same size.

On the left the 70-350 1:1, on the right the 135 resized to match.

perfect. obvious results, but i think the sony 135 would be an even closer in quality as the OP suggests....the digital picture has this direct comparison between the canon and sony 135mm, and clearly the canon is no match to the sony wide open: the OP may have a point but i've yet to see his images.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...LensComp=108&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

i wonder if my canon 70-200 f4 would be up for the challenge? ie,. canon 200 at f4 vs sony at 350mm at f6.3 (is that 2 stops ? )

Sony 135mm 1.8 vs. (vs.?) 70-350

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts