7 BARGAIN 135mm Vintage Lenses - £30 - £80!

[@amermeleitor]

The old vintage 135mm taught me the beauty of this focal length. Perfect portrait lens. The 135 and 85mm are my favorites

[@TreDeuce-qw3kv]

For years I shot with a 24mm, 50mm, and a 135mm, but the 135mm was always mounted until i felt the need to do a landscape, interior, or street shoot. Looking back over the years, most of my best and favorite pics were captured with the 135. These days, short zooms, long zooms, and short to long zooms with auto functions and stabilization efficiently help us capture the image we might have lost with our old manual cameras and lenses, but we have lost something, understanding the process. Even those of us who understand, get lazy and use the digital auto nannies and don't shoot with intent, rely on post processing to 'Fix' things. I have most of the feature lens, but use them on digital cameras now for their glass, character, and involvement. Thanks for the post.

[@SMlFFY85]

I got my CZJ 135mm for £15 a few months ago, so bargains can still be had. Super easy to service too, so no one should be scared of unscrewing it and fixing any problems they might have.

[@GeorgeK356]

I have a number of 135mm lenses, from a cheapo Optomax f2.8, a Helios f2.8, a Zuiko f3.5, a Voigtlander f3.5 in a DKL mount, a Minolta f3.5 and one or two more. It's a great focal length, one that just about everyone who was serious about photography "back in the day" got as their second lens. Consequently there must be literally thousands of millions of them out there at prices to suit everyones pocket. My Voigtlander lens is really interesting, I bought it on a whim to go with a Bessamatic SLR I was refurbishing, it is so good I even hung onto the camera ond the 50mm f2.8 color Skopar lens that came with it as well as this 135mm. Great episode again, showing that you don't have to spend a fortune to enjoy vintage lens photography. George

[@zenography7923]

Thanks George, glad you enjoyed it!

[@dgmwitz]

In between a 135 and an 85 - I love my Nikkor 105 f2.5 pre AI, the bokeh is ridiculous and it's pretty sharp wide open considering the lens is 52 years old :)

[@GeorgeK356]

Another uptick for the Nikon 105mm f2.5, a legendary lens. I waited ages for the right one to come along and really enjoy using it.

[@wolfgangwust5883]

Legendary lens without doubt.

[@thomaseriksson6256]

That was my favorite lens . Not find a better lens yet.

[@urbananjar]

My 105 night be order then that. I bought it used in the midnseventlies. Silver and black Nikkor-P from Nippon Kogaku. Hexagonal aperture might turné someone off.

[@philipslighting8240]

I got a Super - Multi - Coated M42 Takumar 135 f2.5 a while ago its a stunning lens so sharp wide open with fantasic almost 3D look to the images. Mine is Mint I was lucky I snapped it up for £32 the seller advertised it as a f3.5 by mistake.

[@Cotictimmy]

I have the Nikkor 135 f3.5 Ais. It took me by surprise - I just wasn't expecting it's images to look so good.

[@Whywas6scared]

In my experience, you can get extremely cheap lenses for basically nothing if you're prepared to do a bit of work on them. For example, I recently bought a Hexanon 50mm f1.7 for £3, Hexanon 200mm f4 and Hexanon 30-70mm f3.5 zoom together for 99p and a Hexanon 135mm f3.2 together with a Konica Autoreflex T2 and Chinon CS + Soligor 50mm preset lens all for £27 (all + postage). What's the catch? They all had some degree of fungus inside. However, after a bit of head scratching and patience, I was able to dismantle them all and clean off the fungus with nothing more than a few Zeiss lens wipes in most cases. The quality glass probably made this possible.

[@zenography7923]

Absolutely - if you can do a bit of dismantling there are bargains galore!

[@sclogse1]

You can set your lens on the warm area of your gas stove if you have one, for about 20 minutes. I will kill any fungus that's still hiding in the lens, or fungus that you aren't going to go after. I did this to my Minolta with a dot of fungus on the rear element. That particular lens has a rear element that comes out past the body in its focussing, so, it was perfect for this. Nothing happened to my aperture or focus ring. Fungus dies in heat.

[@NathanStarrVideo]

Recently bought a Meyer Optik Gorlitz Orestor 135 2.8. Very nice build quality, 15 aperture blades and swirly bokeh. Worth a look. I paid 60 for one in good condition.

[@zenography7923]

Nice!

[@NathanStarrVideo]

​@@zenography7923Gives a similar look to the Pentacon featured in this video. Just an earlier version of that lens I guess. I was surprised to find the Pentax M 80-200 4.5 zoom has wild swirly bokeh. Very sharp for a vintage zoom and super cheap. Love the videos by the way. Take care

[@volvotl22]

I have used an m42 soligor 135 for astrophotography, with a thinned adapter, on a canon DSLR. Worked a treat. For astro work vintage manual lenses are excellent (and cheap).

[@Magnetron692]

Hello Nigel, many thanks!! Back in 1988 I had the Minolta MD 2.8/135 mm with excellent image quality. Slides and negative I still have. Nowadays I prefer the 4.0/200 mm - a little more reach. Very nice photos you made with these lenses!! Best wishes, Ralf

[@zenography7923]

Hey Ralf, hope all's well, thanks for looking in once again!

[@Magnetron692]

@@zenography7923 I'm fine, thanks! Soon I can send you some more pictures made with my Minolta MD 4.0/200 mm, the 300-S teleconverter and the Novoflex shoulder pot.

[@scrptwic]

Nigel The Takumar 135 3.5 N42 mount , Pentax 135mm 3.5 M lens with the built in metal sliding hood and the Chinar 135mm 2.8 lens. I have all 3 lenses and have used them all at various times

[@Bernard-ux2eb]

Push the boat out a bit more and get a Carl Zeiss Contax Sonnar T* 2.8/135 in Contax/Yashica mount. Around £125-£145. The mechnical and optical quality is excellent.

[@mmadmic]

I love the Zuiko 135 3.5, little gem, even usable on small MFT camera such as Olympus PEN or Lumix GF.

[@theoldunsshot1005]

I have a CZJ 135mm f3.5 and on the name ring it has an "S" denoting it is a Sonnar lens. When used with my Sony Alpha A3000 it produces very sharp images with very beautiful colours. I also have the Pentacon 135mm f2.8 and I have only used this with film where it produces sharp images with nice colours. I don't tend to shoot wide open unless the light dictates it, but with this focal length the blur at medium apertures comes on any shots taken within 15 feet of the lens. Keep on doing what you are doing! Keith

[@weakrecession]

I own all three 135mm lenses you mentionned from Konica, the 2.5 (not 3.4), the 3.2 and the 3.5. Konica really never made bad glasses, but the 3.5 is really one to forget, nothing to write home about. The 3.2 is being praised by everyone and it is indeed a nice lens to use, especially if size and weight is a factor. But when comparing the image quality, colors, sharpness and background, the clear winner is the 2.5 version, which is an amazing 135mm lens, although rather big and heavy. But I don't care at all about weight and size to carry around, my only focus is picture quality.

[@sclogse1]

It helps to know where on your body to carry heavy stuff. Back packs that have padded belts for your waist put all the weight there instead of your arms or back.

[@gains77]

Good video! I have a Pentacon electric 2.8/135 and Its perfect for portraits!

[@zenography7923]

Absolutely, a really nice portrait lens.

[@spectralcav]

Another really nice 135mm is the RE. Auto Topcor 135mm f3.5, a beautifully made and finished lens from the 1960s. IQ is similar to the CZJ but the mechanical quality is a couple of steps above. It has a 2-part telescopic lens hood which is long enough to be truly effective. Usually offered in matt silver finish although later lenses came in black. Can be found for around £50 which is a total bargain IMO.

[@zenography7923]

I'll look out for one, thanks!

[@markbeadle6434]

Very nice some of those ! The only 135’s I have, you may of guessed are Soviet flavour. A Jupiter 11 in Zenit M39 and Jupiter 37A which a really is a superb lens I should definitely be getting that out this Autumn. Thanks for the reminder !

[@zenography7923]

No worries!

[@gravweldon7700]

A hidden jem across the pond is the M42 Sears 135mm f2.8. It's super sharp stopped down a bit and shsharp enough wide open. I am also a fan of the Takumar 135mm f3.5. Very light and sharp. Lens hood is a must with that one.

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the tip!

[@Lordvader330]

I use an OM 300mm 4.5 on my OM-1. I love it. Gives me a 600mm reach.

[@segarallychampionship702]

I have an Auto Weltblick 135/3.5. It doesn't do anything specific to the background blur, I think, but the image quality is roughly similar to the CZJ. Its sharpness also doesn't degrate significantly when wide open. It's all metal but the build quality isn't the best, the focusing ring and the top of the lens barrel are a little loose. It's made in Japan, but I don't know who made it.

[@segarallychampionship702]

One thing I never noticed before, it has an aperture that clicks only on the marked stops, it may be a Tokina lens?

[@matthewneleigh567]

I got the Hanimex (two, in fact... one M42 and one FD mount) on your recommendation in another video. I haven't had a chance to really test them yet, but what I've seen looking through the viewfinder has me excited to take them for a spin, hopefully soon. I do really like the old Super Takumar 135mm f/2.5 but that tends to go for a bit more these days. I think I paid about $85 for mine but that was early 2020, just before everything shut down.

[@zenography7923]

It sounds like those lenses need an outing!

[@starlight25ism]

i got a rexatar 135mm 2.8 was very cheap, and works ok with a 2x telecoverter, it has nice bokeh, on an xe2 looks very well.

[@71janas]

I love my SMC Takumar 135 f/2.5 parried with my Canon R5. I have 9 Takumar lenses in all.

[@zenography7923]

That sounds like a nice collection!

[@HughJonesYate]

I love my Sanyo Kohki Komura 135mm f/3.5 - definitely worth checking out (I believe there is also an f/2.8 version too!)

[@inhucanh114]

Very happy when i saw this video. In 2024 i found the baeuty of vintage lens 🎉

[@Flburr99]

Another great video. Just purchased the Olympus Zuiko 135mm f/3.5 and Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Auto M42 in excellent condition for cheap, just waiting for them to arrive! There seems to be a plethora of vintage 50, 55, 58, 100, and 135mm vintage lenses. Were 85mm lenses not as popular as they are today? if not, why?

[@ryanbeer5262]

My favorite is the Nikkor Q 135 3.5. My next favorite for when i want a more modern render is the ISCO Gottigen. The Yashinon 135 dx is my only 2.8, doesn't get used enough but i love the images, so i cant bring myself to sell it.

[@zenography7923]

There's no harm in keeping the Yashica for now - its value will likely only increase!

[@sclogse1]

My Minolta Celtic 135mm 2.8 is just like your Minolta. Very very sharp lens, but still has the magic and a bit of warmth. I got one for about 33 dollars about a year ago. A prize. I do believe that Pentacon has 15 blades. Always worth mentioning. The great thing about these lenses, is if you shoot something closeup at f5.6, something two inches behind it is very out of focus. All good.

[@zenography7923]

That Minolta sounds very nice - quite a bargain!

[@ghjjkkggg]

Wonderful, love your reviews

[@rainerhorn3524]

The Konica Hexanon 135 came indeed in 3 different versions: A 2.5, a 3.2 and a 3.5. Now you know. The 2.5 version is also very nice.

[@f1remandg]

I has to be said, your so honest and although you know about the really expensive lenses, your not a snob, two or three things came to mind as I watched your very informative video, the first being IOS, you mentioned a very good point about the range available on modern digital and that gives all the ability to use the other benefits of these lenses that are restricted and is probably the reason that they never became the desired pro, artist, who needed the low stop to get that light in. The second point is that I think you should do a video on that very subject, there’s no point in people being deterred and losing interest p, just because they don’t have the finances to get that premium glass, otherwise there would be no need for a £1000 car and a £300,000 one, the latter being pure snobbery as they can never get the use from its capabilities on modern roads, eel certainly not in the U.K. . The Third and probably the most important is, have you ever been told that you photo was a little soft, or really anything by 98% of those you show it to, I’ve got some expensive stuff and have taken photos for years, I won a competition once, I go back to the Kodak 50s and my first SLR was a Minolta X700 life gets in the way sometimes, then Canon and all in between since, the point I’m tying to make is, it’s you that takes photos as a drill or a hammer, a plane is a tool for doing the things that require those tools, the end result is down to your skill, the nail still gets hammered in, the hole drilled, but the quality is down to you. The bent nail or the split would because you didn’t hit the point or pre drill the hole, the botched job. So understanding your tools and the things that can make it better, can make an average lens, brilliant in the right hands. DG

[@zenography7923]

I'll be careful with the hammer and nails! Thanks for watching mon ami.

[@mitchellwnorowski6747]

Luv my M.Zuiko 135mm f3.5 on my Olympus EM1 mark ii !

[@ronin6327]

Great lens pics! I'm just wondering if the Minolta MD 135 f2.8 is radioactive? Thanks in advance! :)

[@TristanColgate]

I have the Oly 135, but must admit I struggle with it. After picking it up and trying for a while I ended up getting the Oly 100mm, and that is now one of my very favourite lenses. I'm not quite sure why I don't get on with 135, it's either just because I'm mostly hand holding film cameras, it may just be the physical quality of that lens (it's just a tonne bigger than the 100mm, which is tiny.

[@zenography7923]

I have the 100 2.8 - one of my favourites!

[@robinj.9329]

Dear me! I'm on the far west coast of the USA. With no large city "Camera Shop" within easy driving distance. So, I end up having to buy my gear via the Web. I can imagine you must have several large such "Shops" in or close to London with large inventories of this kind of gear. How I'd love to be able to prowl around such a shop! I'm thinking that New York City, here in the states has many such shops. BUT........ I wouldn't be "Caught Dead" in a place like that, not today. I have a brand new, still in the box, Canon FD 100mm that was given as a gift years ago. And I've got a great Nikon 135mm that I found used in pristine condition. But that one was pretty costly. Oh well! I'm a life long film 🎥 photographer 📸. And, thought I do own two rather simple "Digital Image Capture" devices, I have hardly ever used them! In fact; I can't even bring myself to call them "Cameras"! It's the beauty of genuine Film Photography that has stolen my heart. And since age 9 or ten, I've been learning and improving my "Craft" for a lifetime. Cheers 🍻

[@ingmarhindenes7897]

Asmall correction on the Konica lenses. They made f 2.5, 3.2 and a 3.5. I think they also made a cheaper 3.5 Hexar.

[@rangersmith4652]

I just won an ebay auction (rather easily) on a Soligor 135mm f/2.8 with a bid of $20.50 US. It's replacing a Focal (US. K-Mart brand from the 80s, likely built by Cosina, Ricoh, or Chinon) unit of the same spec that has it iris stuck at 2.8. I'm going to try to fix the Focal as it is otherwise clean and decently sharp.

[@kainbre]

I definitely can recommend bokeh king among 135mm.. Tair 11-a

[@rayjoo9401]

i'm still owning CZJ, Rollei Sonnar, Rollei Tele-Tessar, Contax, Pentacon, Olympus, Fujinon, Vivitar and Konica. none of those 135mm prime lenses is disappointing.

[@Robthevampire666]

Thanks as always another good video do you know what is the difference between the Pentacon 135 2.8 Electric and Pentacon 135 2.8 Auto ?

[@zenography7923]

I'm not sure, but probably not a great deal. It may refer to automatic aperture control, as found on the later lenses.

[@chickenslothstudios699]

As always. Thanks for video. Still watching video. Only 135 I have is a bittco 2.8, and it's full of hazey stuff, and the disassembly ring is stuck.

[@zenography7923]

Sounds like a new lens is needed, and you can't go wrong at these prices!

[@fingereze7202]

I'm wondering, after watching the part you spoke about the Pentacon and the chromatic aberration when wide open... would this effect be worse or less on an APC type sensor? I'm thinking, it would be a little worse as the image is cropped and would be more pronounced, but it would be also cropping out the outer focal area edges of the lens, so that may lessen the CA overall? What do you think about this? Is the CA throughout the image or just mostly around the outer edges? Does that make sense?

[@zenography7923]

It's hard to say without trying, but I suspect you'd lose most of the worst CA with the loss of the edges and corners, as you say.

[@thomaseriksson6256]

I got a Zeiss Milvus 135mmF2.0 this summer. Looking for a good 85mm to my D700, D800E and my new D850

[@henrysiegertsz8204]

I have 2 Minolta MD 135mm F1:3.5's One actually attached to my XD-11 right now! Brilliant stuff as always Nigel, I always look forward to your content ❤

[@zenography7923]

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

[@amdfanatyk]

Do you know guy from Before Digital channel?

[@zenography7923]

I don't, but I'll check out his channel.

[@dunnymonster]

How about a video on 200mm f4 lenses? 😊

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the suggestion!

[@totenvt]

I'm surprised you havent mentioned the Vivitar 135 f2.8, i class this as being as good or better than the Nikon and Olympus offerings

[@sbcwinn]

What is the mount on the Hanimex lens?

[@markoskoda]

10:45 - F2,5, F3,2 and F3,5

[@madmechanic7641]

Awww.. I know you can't review everything but I thought the Jupiter 11A would've been there somewhere....

[@zenography7923]

I've yet to get one I'm afraid, but stay tuned!

[@___15]

jupiter 37 is better and has same price

[@ikpogs]

Can you use this for canon m50 as micro photography?

[@RuairiODonnellFOTO]

One request when reviewing lenses, could you mention the weight? I got a vintage 200mm F3.5 FD and it's fairly heavy, so much so I'm less inclined to put it in my camera bag when going out. I'd like big glass, but not have to lug a half kilogram around

[@zenography7923]

Sure, no worries.

[@Master-tu4kd]

Which Minolta do you mean the 2.8 Telesar or the Rokkor? Thanks

[@sclogse1]

I bet It's Rokkor..

[@averymcdaniel423]

I bought a Focal 135mm. It says that is an autufocus lens. It wont focus manually or automatically. It is a beautiful l lens though. I believe I bought a paper weight.

[@colnagocowboy]

Ive got (2) Zorki 4 im wondering if the Jupiter 11 135mm is a good buy

[@zenography7923]

I like the J11 and have made some very nice images with it, so the short answer is yes, go for it. You should be able to find one pretty cheaply too, with a little patience.

[@N0rdman]

That Hanimex 135mm looks identical to the Tokina of the same period, I would say it is a rebranded Tokina lens. I believe the Bokeh proves it, Tokina was always known as "Bokina".

[@zenography7923]

You could well be right there!

[@haak737]

Is there any vintage 135mm lens for Sony E mount?

[@zenography7923]

They will all adapt to e mount - you just need a cheap adaptor with your vintage lens mount (say M42, or K mount, or whatever it might be) at one end, and e mount (to go on your camera) at the other end. Good luck!

[@DominikMarczuk]

One that I see popping up rather frequently is the RMC Tokina 135 f/2.8. Have you had a chance to use it? Is it worth the ~40 quid it usually seems to go for?

[@zenography7923]

I haven't used that one I'm afraid, so can't comment. Tokina have produced some very fine lenses though!

[@DominikMarczuk]

@@zenography7923I've used at least five of the RMC Tokina line and I think they're great value for money. I'll think about this one. It's not my most used focal length so I'm usually a bit picky with the 135s.

[@DominikMarczuk]

To give this a bit of context, I've had at least four different vintage 135s so far and save for one (Konica Hexanon 135/3.5), they're all for sale: Pentacon 135/2.8, Sigma Z Pantel 135/2.8 and CZJ Sonnar 135/3.5. I'm going to have a look at the Minolta one though.

[@DominikMarczuk]

@@zenography7923I hope you're happy. You've convinced me to get the Minolta MD one. I went for the 4 element version as it's said to be the best. I'm rather impressed. It does require some sharpening and chromatic aberration removal when used wide open, but I like it.

[@zenography7923]

Glad you like it, enjoy!@@DominikMarczuk

[@cameraprepper7938]

About "Carl Zeiss" Jena, you have to remember that it was taken by the Soviet after the WWII ! All the all the skilled technicians and engineers escaped to West Germany with the most importand expensive machines and calculations of Lens designs. So most of "Carl Zeiss" Jena is very old designs or new Soviet Lens designs, NOT real Zeiss designs !!! I have not compared Jena Lenses to Zeiss West Germany Lenses, but I know that the Lenses from the real Zeiss is top notch. I have tried a Jena binocular and compared it to a 10x40 Zeiss West Germany binocular, the Jena was bad ! I would go for a 135mm Lens from major manufacturers from Japan or a Contax (West Germany) or Leica.

[@zenography7923]

I've had very nice results from the CZJ lenses, and tested back to back against a Western Zeiss lens in an earlier video, I found the CZJ slightly nicer to be honest, not that there was much in it!

[@cameraprepper7938]

@@zenography7923 With which Camera (megapixels !) ? Fx With24 megapixels full frame cameras, nearly every Lens is "identical" !

[@zenography7923]

Not sure about that, I've found quite a wide variation in vintage lens performance and character; I've found 24mp is easily enough to highlight differences in vintage lenses.@@cameraprepper7938

[@cameraprepper7938]

@@zenography7923 I use 61 megapixels Cameras and you can see more differences of different Lenses, some "vintage" Lenses disappoint very much and other surprises with lot of resolution power for their age of design. Try it !

[@chrisreich40]

The 't' in 'often' is silent.

[@caw25sha]

Do you think you'll be able to get the CZJ repaired?

[@infinityfabric]

My CZJ lens is the same variant as shown in the video. It's extremely easy to open, repair, and clean, perhaps the simplest lens I've ever seen. In my case, I haven't been able to keep the aperture blades fully open at F3.5, so I've disabled the aperture adjustment, keeping it fully open without any issues. It can also be adjusted to focus to infinity on Nikon. My only complaint is that in my case, the focus helicoids don't work very well when I want to focus up close, probably because I haven't aligned them properly.

[@zenography7923]

It's time to have a look inside then!

[@tomislavmiletic_]

Sprichst du eigentlich Deutusch ?

[@charleslawrence7327]

💩💩💩