Sony 135 GM vs Zeiss 135 Apo Sonnar ZE

[TheOwl360]

I own both lenses and decided to run an unscientific sharpness test.

I lined up a bunch of books on a bookshelf, using the front edge of the shelf to even out the books as much as possible.

I leveled the tripod and used Sony RM-VPR1 Remote Commander and silent shutter on the camera to mitigate shake. The tripod/head were not moved between lens changes.

I used manual focus and focus peaking with both lenses, checked it on an external 5" monitor.

The Zeiss was fitted with a Metabones V5, which at least partly impacted the field of view and depth of field.

I imported the files into Lightroom and enabled profile corrections before increasing Vignetting slider to 200 on all shots and reducing all Sharpening and Noise Reduction sliders to 0, except Radius, which has a minimum of 0.5.

I used a Nanlite Forza 60 to add light.

I adjusted exposure slider to try to balance it between shots.

Unscientific Conclusion: I see no difference in sharpness between these two lenses.

 

[Tristimulus]

Guess the real life differences will be dramatic - most users will benefit hugely from auto focus. Especially when photographing moving subjects and not bookshelves... ;-)

So in my book the 135 GM is the one to get.

 

[TheOwl360]

Guess the real life differences will be dramatic - most users will benefit hugely from auto focus. Especially when photographing moving subjects and not bookshelves... ;-)

So in my book the 135 GM is the one to get.

If one can afford it, the Sony is definitely the better prime. However, if sharpness is the main metric being considered and the consumer doesn’t care about AF, then they may want to consider the Zeiss as well.

 

[Jeff2013]

I have owned and shot both lenses (now, just have the GM lens) and my experience is similar to yours.

A less expensive alternative is the Rokinon 135mm f2, which is in the same league as far as sharpness, if one has the luxury of time and stillness to focus it.

 

[PWPhotography]

That means Zeiss lens is excellent. Personally believe an outdoor test from a distance against a concrete building or a brick wall is more meaningful than indoor test from a relative close distance.

I did such test between 135 GM and Batis 135 (before sold it) side by side at my test sites. I see they have similar sharpness at respective wide open, while GM is 1+1/3 stop faster.

135 GM @f1.8 left vs 135 Batis @f2.8 right at 1:1 ratio. Applied respective lens profile, -100 highlight, +100 shadow for easier viewing while all others default in Lr (including default +40 sharpening).


top middle


bottom middle


far left


far right


middle center at another scene

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

 

[TheOwl360]

I have owned and shot both lenses (now, just have the GM lens) and my experience is similar to yours.

A less expensive alternative is the Rokinon 135mm f2, which is in the same league as far as sharpness, if one has the luxury of time and stillness to focus it.

Right. But I may hold onto the Zeiss because I like the character of the lens (color, micro contrast) and for certain applications, such as video, its mechanical focus may be preferable.

I’m also of the mind to marry my lenses and keep them around even when/if I upgrade. The main reason for this is I don’t want to go through the trouble of reselling and taking a loss.

 

[TheOwl360]

That means Zeiss lens is excellent. Personally believe an outdoor test from a distance against a concrete building or a brick wall is more meaningful than indoor test from a relative close distance.

I agree and intend on doing such a test asap (Covid 19 quarantine isn’t helping).