What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

Started Jul 24, 2013 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
toxinoz Regular Member • Posts: 295
Re: Olympus OM 135/2.8

Nice images. I also have the old Zuiko 135, but find the focus seems a little off (OK in viewfinder, calibrated for my eyes, but not so when I see the images on screen). Maybe I am doing something wrong (other than failing to focus)?

-- hide signature --

J White
Olympus user since OM1

 toxinoz's gear list:toxinoz's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ
Spiridakis Michael
Spiridakis Michael Senior Member • Posts: 2,560
Tokina RMC 135mm f:2.8
1

I got this little gem I post a link to see pictures, it is in my plans a mini review - so if anybody knows some things for the history of tokina's RMC lens it is very welcome.

here is the link . TOKINA RMC 135

-- hide signature --

www.spiridakis.gr

baxters Veteran Member • Posts: 5,022
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

1) Rexatar 135 f2.8. Probably the first lens I ever bought and this was back in 1971. I keep this lens for sentimental reasons. It has no value otherwise. You cannot even find adapters for it easily. I made my own.

Rex 135

2) Next up on the money list is a Sear 135mm f2.8 in FD mount. It cost me $5.

Sears FD 135. Heat from the cornfield is causing the wind mill to be fuzzy.

Sears FD 135. A little closer subject. This lens is a purple fringer, but you can't see it here.

3) Takumar M42 135mm f3.5. So it's not f2.8, but it's light and sharp. I got it with a Tak 50mm f2, and a Tak 35mm f3.5, all three for $35.

Takumar (Pentax) 135mm f3.5

4) Final lens is the heaviest. Canon FD 135mm f2.5 SC. This one cost me the biggest money. $45 USD before shipping.

Canon FD 135 f2.5

I always say that 135 f2.8's are common and should be inexpensive. Don't spend a lot a money trying to emulate a new 150mm f2.8.

 baxters's gear list:baxters's gear list
Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6
eques Senior Member • Posts: 2,237
Minolta MD 2,8/135

drpoop wrote:

Minolta Rokkor 135 f 2.8

This thing is heavy as a turd, but fun to use

Seems to be the famous 4 lens construction.

Mine is light weight and quite compact. IQ is better than the Panasonic 45-150, even wide open. However, I don't use it very often.

It was EUR 65, for me the rumored EUR 2935 for AF is a bit much. Still, I might have considered it, if it was in the quality and price range of the Olympus 1,8/75.

Peter

 eques's gear list:eques's gear list
Ricoh GR Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +3 more
Robiro Veteran Member • Posts: 6,087
Carl Zeiss 135mm f2.8
1

A few shots with Carl Zeiss 135mm f2.8 on GH2. Bought it on eBay for 65 British pounds. The first Praktica-m4/3 adapter I bought had issues (could not focus to infinity properly) so I had to buy the second one which actually goes beyond infinity focus, which allows precise focusing.

The single problem is that it purple finges a lot. All the images are JPEG-processed. I took them before starting to use SilkyPix 5 on a regular basis. If I was taking them now, the output would be quite different.

 Robiro's gear list:Robiro's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH
leendertcv OP Regular Member • Posts: 210
Re: Tokina RMC 135mm f:2.8

Very nice pictures!

 leendertcv's gear list:leendertcv's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Lumix G 42.5mm F1.7 +1 more
dotweb Senior Member • Posts: 1,586
Re: Tokina RMC 135mm f:2.8

Spiridakis Michael wrote:

I got this little gem I post a link to see pictures, it is in my plans a mini review - so if anybody knows some things for the history of tokina's RMC lens it is very welcome.

here is the link . TOKINA RMC 135

-- hide signature --

www.spiridakis.gr

Very well done. Good quality on the images, looks like a really good combination.

ps - the photographer did a good job

Thanks for sharing!!

//Steen

-- hide signature --

Steen
dotweb.dk
SLIK 700 pro AMT/Olympus gear E-1, E-3, E-400, OM-D, EP-L1

 dotweb's gear list:dotweb's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus E-400 Olympus E-1 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +5 more
uberzone
uberzone Regular Member • Posts: 278
Canon FD 135mm F2.0

The Canon FD 135mm F2.0 is one of my favorite FD lenses, it should have been and 'L'. Amazing image quality and a it has a built in lens hood (no $70 accessory *cough* Olympus *cough*). This lens is a bit more expensive than some of the other options, but I think it is worth it.

 uberzone's gear list:uberzone's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Rokinon 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye CS +16 more
Sudo Nimh Regular Member • Posts: 281
Chose Super Takumar 135mm/3.5 over Nikkor-Q 135mm/2.8

I'm stretching your question to let me recommend the Super Takumar 135mm/3.5, with M42 mount. I sold my Nikkor-Q 135mm/2.8 because it was so soft wide open, and the images from both lenses were comparable at f/4.

The Super Tak's handling was far superior. Not only is it smaller and lighter, but its action is smooth, while my Nikkor 135 had a tight focus ring that made manual focus a chore. I've read similar complaints from other users of old Nikkor 135s.

You can find sample images on flickr that are much better than what I could post.

I don't want to bash the Nikkor, because its images were beautiful when it wasn't wide open. But I had a hard time finding any significant difference in image quality between the Nikkor and the Takumar, while the difference in handling was significant.

Note that my Nikkor was an old, pre-AI version. I would expect newer Nikkors, Ai and Ai-S versions, to have smoother focusing.

Russ Houston
Russ Houston Veteran Member • Posts: 6,372
Re: JCPenney Co 135mm f2.8

Atwater wrote:

Pentax mount, purchased new in about 1980. Very sharp-- surprisingly so. I'm away from my computer, so sorry, no examples to hand.

One of the first used lenses I bought for my Pentax dSLR was a Sears 135/2.8 for $5.  It was a nice lens and I got some decent shots with it.  Wound up giving it away to a local student (who later sold it, but c'est la vie).

-- hide signature --
 Russ Houston's gear list:Russ Houston's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 +7 more
jfinite Veteran Member • Posts: 8,099
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?
1

Here's a few (google doc, reattach the 'bit.' and 'ly')

http://bit. ly/9FQ6R1

Prices are out of date though. Short story; Minolta 135/2.8 - good and cheap, OM 135/2.8 - better and more expensive,  Nikon 135/2 AIS - best and most expensive

 jfinite's gear list:jfinite's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-30 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 +3 more
tjwaggoner
tjwaggoner Senior Member • Posts: 1,112
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

I've got one of these in the cabinet too. No body to use it on though.

-- hide signature --

Constructive Criticism is always welcome, however please understand that I am not a pixel peeper.

 tjwaggoner's gear list:tjwaggoner's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Olympus E-10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +2 more
Ulric Senior Member • Posts: 3,595
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

I have two 135mm legacy lenses in OM mount, one Makinon 135/2.8 and one Olympus Zuiko 135/3.5. The former has unfortunately developed a sticky aperture ring which makes it frustrating to use. It was never very impressive anyway, Makinon was one of the small low-cost lens makers in the 70s.

Here is one from the Zuiko:

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +9 more
tecnoworld
tecnoworld Veteran Member • Posts: 6,805
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

I have a contax/yashica which has been discussed here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/41901665

But I use it with samsung nx300, not having a m4/3 camera, but it should be great on 4/3 as well.

The worst part are ca, but they are easily corrected in pp.

 tecnoworld's gear list:tecnoworld's gear list
Samsung TL500 Samsung NX200 Samsung NX100 Samsung NX300 Samsung NX1 +15 more
Jake21 Contributing Member • Posts: 526
Re: What manual focus 135mm f2.8 do you have?

I too have been using a contax 135f2.8 (but on an em-5). I don't have sample photos but it is ok. THe biggest issue is I missed focus quite a few time

-

There is a comparison of 12 135mm on 5d2 (not totally relevant to em-5 since ca/resolution will differ a bit):

http://forum.mflenses.com/twelve-2-8-135mm-lenses-compared-on-5dmkii-t39463.html

-

Anyways it was never my favorite contax lens but the only 'long' lens I owned and it was cheap enough to hang on to after I switched to digital.

buddhaunderthetree Regular Member • Posts: 233
Re: Chose Super Takumar 135mm/3.5 over Nikkor-Q 135mm/2.8

I have the Pentax M135 3.5 and it's an outstanding lens for it's size and weight.  And it has a built in hood.  And it's usually dirt cheap.

Atwater Forum Member • Posts: 83
Re: JCPenney Co 135mm f2.8

Russ Houston wrote:

Atwater wrote:

Pentax mount, purchased new in about 1980. Very sharp-- surprisingly so. I'm away from my computer, so sorry, no examples to hand.

One of the first used lenses I bought for my Pentax dSLR was a Sears 135/2.8 for $5. It was a nice lens and I got some decent shots with it. Wound up giving it away to a local student (who later sold it, but c'est la vie).

-- hide signature --

Yup, some of those dept. store lenses were great.  I enjoyed the results I got from that 135mm on film more than any of my other lenses.  These days, my Oly 40-150 takes its place in my bag.

 Atwater's gear list:Atwater's gear list
Lytro Light Field 8GB Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus PEN E-P2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7
David Kieltyka
David Kieltyka Veteran Member • Posts: 4,683
Only one f/2.8 but other 135s...

The 135/2.8 is a Y/C-mount Zeiss. It performs fine on m43 aside from CA issues, which can be corrected.

My favorite SLR 135mm is the Pentax f/2.5 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar, M42 screwmount version. This is the one I use most often on my OM-D5.

I also have the Soviet-era Zeiss Jena f/3.5, which performs almost identically to the Y/C Zeiss but focuses closer...down to 1 meter. This one gets the second-most use on m43.

Optically the best 135s I own are the Leitz Tele-Elmar and Zeiss Sonnar, both f/4. I use 'em on Leica & Contax rangefinder film cameras.

-Dave-

 David Kieltyka's gear list:David Kieltyka's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Leica M8.2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 +6 more
Surefoot Contributing Member • Posts: 582
Re: Olympus OM 135/2.8

toxinoz wrote:

Nice images. I also have the old Zuiko 135, but find the focus seems a little off (OK in viewfinder, calibrated for my eyes, but not so when I see the images on screen). Maybe I am doing something wrong (other than failing to focus)?

-- hide signature --

J White
Olympus user since OM1

Beware that this is actually a pretty long telephoto, 270mm eq. That means you need at least 1/300s with a Panasonic body. Also a good holding technique is needed, forget holding your camera like a point and shoot...

 Surefoot's gear list:Surefoot's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-P5 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +9 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads