The Best 135 - £20 Or £200?

Here are some of the nicest vintage fast 135s I've shot.
Some are cheap, some are expensive, but how do they stack up against each other? The answer may surprise you. It certainly surprised me.
A 135mm lens gives an aesthetic no other lens can give, and I think every photographer should have one. If you want one of the nicest, check out the video!
Go on, you know you want to.
To support this channel on Patreon please go to:
www.patreon.co...
Thanks for watching!

[@TheCruisinCrew]

I have a Super Takumar 135 f/2.5 and another Super Takumar 135 f/3.5, both M42 mounts, as well as a super cool Schneider Kreuznach 135 f/3.5 with DKL mount. The Schneider is very sharp, but has a very limiting minimum focusing distance of something like 14 feet (over 4 meters)... interestingly my favorite of the bunch is the Super Takumar 135 f/3.5... it's significantly smaller and lighter than the f/2.5, but equally sharp and has a much better minimum focusing distance of just .5 meters (which at 135mm gives a quite usable close-up capability, with a very comfortable working distance)!

[@ablesentry7070]

Gotta say, Nigel, the video quality lighting is top-notch [Hoya 135mm, and Sigma 70-210mm for Fujifilm XE3 btw, love 'em!]

[@perin99]

Great video. I'm still loving that Minolta MD that you recommended a few months ago. I've had most of the popular 135s and I'm sticking with this one.

[@kruno7150]

Well, in fairness it's hard to find bad 135mm lens :) My favorite is Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm f3.5 and biggest surprise is LDP 135mm f3.5 (triplet, made by Komine, paid 8eur). Other than that, I do agree for Pentacon, their newer (MC) version with less blades is also nice and even cheaper than rebranded Orestor. I have more than 40 135mm lenses (don't ask) but as i use mostly 35mm-100mm range, most of 135s are still waiting for a test

[@Romoro86]

Yeah, and Soviet copy of Sonnar called Jupiter 37 is doing quite good too, if you find a sharp one wide open, it totally resolutes 24mp crop sensor and gives a great picture.

[@timoteiafanasie4894]

Yeah, I have the Pentacon copy with 15 blades, f2.8. It's a bokeh beast 😊

[@ryanbeer5262]

Lol, this makes me feel better, I think I'm only at 7 ;⁠-⁠)

[@GeNTooFReaK]

The later version of the Pentacon 135mm f2.8 is available in two variants which look exactly the same. One with 15 aperture blades and another one with only 6 aperture blades. So when stopped down you get round or hexagonal bokeh bubbles. Both look great, it's just a matter of taste. But at least in Germany the 6-blades version seems to be more common and therefore easier to get hold off.

[@Zionist-Occupied-Government]

I have read in many photography forums that it's difficult to find a bad 135mm lens because they are one of the easiest lenses to make.. I don't know how true this is but I have over 20 different types and every one takes nice clear images. The best ones I have are the Tair, Rollei HFT and the Leitz.. but Tokina and Zeiss Jena are still good.. Oh and the Pentax PKA is also excellent.

[@ブラウンクリストファー]

I picked up a Minolta-GFX adapter just to mount the 58/1.2 but it became an excuse to start building out a lens lineup, and for portraits on a budget that means 135mm! The absolutely cheapest I could find was a pocketable 1966 era Minolta MC Tele Rokkor-PF 135/2.8 which had some fungus but cost me a grand total of 1400yen (shipped!) Not only did the image circle suffice, but by simply removing the baffle it now looks like this lens covers 6x6! I am still having a hard time believing the image quality because it is sharp from wide open, apparently all over the frame, and on a 50MP medium format camera. Since 135 frames like a ~100mm the downside is the close focus limit plus weak/non-existent lens coatings (it loses contrast at the drop of a hat). Maybe it's the Fuji film recipes, but considering this lens cost 1/75th the Canon 135L I once depended upon for my street shooting, how is it that outside of backlit subjects I can not tell the results apart!?

[@bretttimmons2653]

What do you think of the OM Olympus 135 f2.8?

[@JikoMuskato]

I do have the Auto Exaktar 135mm 2.8, which looks similar to the "made in Japan Helios" lens you have. It's physically a bit longer and has no built-in lens hood but the focus ring looks almost identical with the same kind of "pyramids" on it and the silver ring on the top part. It also has six aperture blades.

[@petelindsay3001]

Love my Hanimex lens

[@tibebar]

Très bonne vidéo comme toujours. J'ai testé plein de 135mm m42 (pentacon 15 et 6 lames, Jupiter, tair et d'autres encore...) Finalement je reste sur l'OM ZUIKO 135mm 2.8. petit léger superbement construit et très efficace.

[@ryanbeer5262]

Great video. Unfortunately i have none of these & I'm already at 7 135s, definitely my favorite telephoto fl. Probably only 2 i slightly overpaid for, the Yashinon 135 2.8 & an ISCO 135 3.5. i just couldn't resist the 4.5 foot cf on the isco.

[@scrptwic]

Nigel I two vintage 135mm 3.5 lenses a Takumar M42 135 mm , 3.5 with a screw on metal hood . A Pentax 135mm 3.5 metal M ( manuel focus ) lens with a metal sliding lens hood built into the lens. I also have Cosina 135mm 2.8 lens

[@timoteiafanasie4894]

I have the exact Pentacon lens. It's extraordinary. First photo i shoot with it - pffffff!!!! I didn't recognize my own room 😂😂😂

[@UncleDansVintageVinyl]

I've heard very good things about that Jupiter 11. I'll need to find one. I love Jupiters in general.

[@gyorgyfrank]

Ah, yes the mighty jupiter-11, this is my favourite lens recently. I find f4 enough most of the time, in return it is small and sharp wide open. When there is not enough light you can use higher iso film, otherwise 2.8 might be also not enough.

[@94slingshot]

I use the Canon FL 135 f/2.5 on my Fuji’s, primarily the X-E1, if s wonderful lens. I bought this lens along with the Canon FL 35mm and a Canon FX camera in a PX in Vietnam in 1967.

[@bariziem]

I have the newer Pentacon 2.8 135mm, auto MC version. This version has 6 blades, but it's still really nice lens. Much cheaper than the 15 blades version and it has better coating

[@Romoro86]

Ah, my lovely Jupiter 37a (135 f3.5) is missing again, unfortunatelly i cant send it to you for a test(

[@ice9phil]

the Haminex has the same look and serial number sequence as my Lentar lenses. The 135 tele Lentar is a bargain too. 16 blades and can be had on ebay for less than $35

[@MrSimonj1970]

135s seem like a good idea, but most people rarely use them in my experience. 85mm is a lot handier and gets most of the shallow DOF/bokeh.

[@selkiemaine]

Interesting! I have the later Pentacon/Prakticar 135 f/2.8 MC. It's much more modern in appearance, has the aperture ring next to the camera, and has 6 blades. I think it's pretty darned good - still 5 elements in 4 groups and an identical field of view, so I wonder if it's optically similar to the earlier version. The MFD is actually a little worse, but that could simply be due to a redesigned helicoil. I really don't have the budget now to buy a second older example and A/B them, so I wonder if anybody knows? By the way, at least in the US, those earlier Pentacons are $200. The newer lenses like mine are far less - and have a built in hood.

[@aidanhowgate5437]

I think the Hanimex could be a Topcon lens. I've had one, they're pretty good!

[@joecarey7123]

I have a question, folks. I own a Minolta 135 f2.8 MC tele Rokkor-PF and the lenses have an amber coating. Is this a radioactive lens? It renders beautifully, btw.

[@bigshooter461]

I have sooooooo many 135mm lenses and most of them are very sharp stopped down the Pentax f2.5 is very nice, the Canon FD 135 F2.5 is also very nice but so many really cheap lenses like Opticon f2.8 are interesting to shoot too, Minolta has a killer sharp Celtic.

[@caw25sha]

I prefer a bit shorter, 85 or 105. Have you thought about making a trilogy of videos?

[@Ryan_Wiseman]

For my Minolta MC Rokkor-X 135 f/2.8, I've noticed that it tends to be very sharp around f/4-f/8; a bit too soft at 2.8 for landscapes, but perfect for closer shots. For landscapes, I don't mind slightly stepping down for that optimal sharpness since iIt has so much character, so it gets a pass on being a great character lens so long as you don't mind shooting at a slower aperture. For whatever reason, Minolta and Nikkor lenses at 135mm tend to look best when they have a max f-stop of 3.5, and I'm curious to why this tends to be the case with some of the budget lenses? Still love this focal point, but I'll make sure to spend more than $40 on my next 135mm, since I really want this lens to work amazing open all the way.

[@tony-in7gm]

The little 135 would be Tokina.

[@JamshidKiani-u8u]

لطفأ عکس مشخصات لنزها را روی فيلم بگذارید. سپاس