Nikon engineers spent years to get a quality of lens they could put their name on while meeting the strict standards that the resultant lens shall weigh no more than a plena. Truly commendable.
The Plena is an optical masterpiece. Nikon is finally taking advantage of the superior Z mount (shortest flange distance and widest throat diameter). This lens is the first of many to come, I suspect, that will be in a league of their own that the other manufacturers will not be able to match unless they change their mounts. Nikon is back to their roots of being an optics company - no doubt they can make the best lenses when they want to - its been their core business for 100 years. -PD
No doubt the Plena is a masterpiece. However, I doubt that the small geometric advantage of the Z-mount is an important factor. The geometry can be an advantage with wide-angle lenses, but there is not much of an advantage at standard and telephoto focal ranges.
Hopefully Sigma will release a 135/1.8 DG DN soon, and Viltrox is rumored to have a 135/1.8 almost ready for release. Once those are out it would be great to revisit this comparison but add in the Sigma, Viltrox, and of course the already existing Samyang 135/1.8. See how the 3rd party lenses stack up against the 1st party options.
@@edwardnoble9897 Might be possible. The old Sigma 105/1.4 was a massive 1.6kg but the Nikkor was 985g. A modern Sigma DG DN version at around 1kg could happen.
@@edwardnoble9897 yes so true I am now 66 almost 67 and muscles a lot less but even after a shoot no pain no gain .yes a dream lens would be for me A sigma 105 mm F1.2 but for the Z mount when Nikon accepts Sigma to make that one !
As a multiple system user myself I consider the the 135 Plena along with the 85 F1.2 and 600 PF is in fact one of the reason to own a Nikon mirrorless. and of course there is the Noct also.
Samyang makes a very nice 135 1.8 for Sony. When on sale, it can be had for as little as $650, a lot cheaper than any of the big three, and it's a very good lens optically.
@@ilaion11 That may be. But it's also $650 when on sale, and it is a beautiful thing. There are also plenty of great 135mm f2.8 lenses on eBay for $10-20. They are a great starting point if one just wants to get a feel for the focal length. The vast majority are really good. I've only ever seen a couple lemons.
@@AAJJ007 I would opt for the DSLR Era Sigma 135 1.8 + adaptor instead of the Samyang. And unfortunately all Samyangs suffer from loss of sharpness, field curvature, severe lens distortion at close focus ranges. And it's not a matter of in camera corrections. This is what keeps their prices low., they are not designed to compensate for optical aberrations that arise with focusing closer. Sure, they are nice at normal ranges, but for serious portrait work, I cannot consider them.
Yeah, bokeh is very subjective. For 135 I would always go to my trusty old Sony 135 STF F2.8 T4.5. It is manual focus, it is "only" F2.8 in terms of bokeh and only T4.5 in terms of light ... but I don't get harsh round 2D balls for bokeh, but nice soft "faded 3D-style" balls :)...
Just got mine, a little early to say but the capabilities of the Xspeed 7 coupled with that sensor are producing amazing images, an instant winner for me.
135mm really are a great focal length. My work horse is my 70-200/2.8 but when I take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I work I always end up at around 135mm. Even when I don't look at the zoom ring and just dial everything in as I look through th viewfinder, more often than not I usually end up at 135mm or very close to it. It just *works* for portraits!
I used the plena for dog action shots on my Z8 and totally blown away by the consistency. The quality is outstanding and it so sharp it’s ridiculous really.
Nikon glass really is top notch, and I can't help but to think that it's because they're primarily an industrial optics company first and foremost. Nikon doesn't make as many products or rely on consumer cameras nearly as much as Sony or Canon. As a result of being an optics company I think that research and development carries over to their consumer glass. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony cameras/glass, and they're all SUPER good these days... But something about Nikon glass just always gave me that extra quality. I like that they tend to be heavier, and I hope they don't cut corners to make them lighter. Use a monopod or tripod if the weight is a problem, but don't make worse glass for the sake of weight.
now go to a dim lit room where the 1.2 was giving you, say an ISO of 2000, and set it at 1.8 and tell me how much you enjoy the Noise of an ISO 4000. :) glad you like the Plena, but comparing a 1.8 to a 1.2 is quite silly.
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll oh jeez. Think I don’t know that? What if 50 is too short? What if 135 is too long? Lenses for different situations my friend. And for modern cameras ISO 4000 is nothing. Expose properly and you’re fine.
Always wanted to get 200 f/2 but it's super heavy and impractical for some use.. Getting the Plena for my Z9, smaller size, great optics, same if not better bokeh to the 200 f/2, almost there with compressing subjects and backgrounds..
The 200 f2 still stands out as a lens with its own look with it's airy smoothness. Two completely different looks in my opinion. The 135s are incredibly sharp whereas the 200 f2 (Nikon anyway) is more than sharp enough but has that smooth look still. Both are excellent tools, but different in my opinion.
Yea. In my country. The plena cost double the 135gm. Its costly. But its a good tool nonetheless. Its also the latest. But from the bokeh test. Altho its more round but it has the onion ring going on.
@@TsvetanVR Not really without rebait (that sony runs at times) its 1729 i paid 1899 when it was released 4+ years ago. The canon is 2369 and the nikon is 2999. The GM is just cheaper in europe. Now i am sure when sony updates it (next year?) it will become more in the price line of the canon sony has been upping the price on the GM2's.
im so happy i went with nikon against what everybody always says, all i hear is nikon is a potatoe, just typical bashing but z6 and z8 are incredible i love them ill have them for a long time, im ordering the 135 noquestion.
not just good value but also a great performer. The Samyang bokeh is rounder than Sony and it has probably less LOCA than all of these 3 lenses (or equal to the best). Only reason to use Sony is lens color match or autofocus speed (which is I think unrivalled). The Sony is supposed to have best central sharpness at infinity but beyond a certain level you care for things other than sharpness. Btw image stabilization is very useful on 135mm even with IBIS on the bodies (though too much will of course rob edge sharpness)
It doesn’t autofocus very well. Struggles in low light… compared to Sony lenses or even my Sigma art 85 dg dn in the same not too demanding settings. It really felt like it is Sony autofocus from 2016. I can’t use it at fashion shows or for fasted paced reportage.
I agree. I would never consider a Sanyang normally but I had sold my GM and needed a 135 for a job so bought the Samyang. Its actually sharper with nicer bokeh then the GM and thats saying something!
I’ve had a great time using my Samyang 135 1.8, so I have almost none of the desire to buy the Sony GM. I know the GM is built much better but $699 for that Samyang was such a deal!
I suspect the Plena would effortlessly cover the GFX format with that vignetting figure on full frame. Of course, I wish Nikon would make a medium format around the 100mp sensor that would accommodate Z lenses through an adaptor.
Heck Z mount is big enough they could probably just put a 44x33 sensor in there and be good to go. I suspect several if not most of their new Z lenses would cover it pretty well. At the very least, it would give you the option of using any aspect ratio portrait or landscape and still using the whole image circle.
@@seth094978 I am sure most full frame lenses can cover most of this format if not all of it. For example, the Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 28 1.4, 40 1.4, 50 1.4 85 1.8, are all lenses that cover the GFX. I don't see why mirrorless wouldn't cover it as well. Most important, the more you go outside the 35mm sensor, the more obvious the character of the lens becomes, because vignetting becomes more pronounced, the field curvature as well, so this is exactly what some photographers are actually looking for, including me, while still retain good sharpness most of the field. So, win win.
I have the Fujifilm 90mm. It’s amazing. Seeing the specular highlights on the Plena being so perfect, I may need to test it out on the 90. The 90 has a very pleasing bokeh. Great review.
Canon EF 135mm f2L for me. I use it still even with my Sony camera via MC11 adapter. Love the look of that lens and seeing I paid $600 CAD for it, bargain!
Talk about bargain, I also have a manual focus Samyang 135 F2...... but I won't fool myself the Samyang is just as good as the Nikon 135 Plena though. LOL.
Pretending the Samyang 135 f1.8 for Sony does not exist is weak sauce. it is arguable as good as the sony 135 and has ZERO barrel or pin cushion distortion
Oh they are plenty of bad primes. Low contrast wide open, poor sharpness out of center, bad flare, a lot of LoCa. I mean for some portrait use it was good enough but compared to any modern lens they are poor.
Most of their apertures weren't quite this wide though... the Pentax Super Takumar 135 I have is a pretty neat lens with almost 3 dimensional rendering, but it's also F2.5, and it does have LOCA. I think there was a 1.8 but it was very rare and very expensive.
Jump ship mate. Fuji already lost its way. Even Nikon zf has more innovation, likr for manual shooting, than Fuji's latest. Fuji is just playing catch up to others' spec+lens, relies heavily to xtrans and film sim.
What I always love about Nikon is that they never sacrifice image quality. Even budget kit lenses are the best considering price category. Cameras might have some drawbacks (for example, I don't like Nikon menu system which is cumbersome and very non-intuitive), but again, images from cameras are of excellent quality (crisp, contrasty but still true to life). In my opinion, Nikon is the most honest among camera manufacturers. They are not that good in making hype around their products, but instead provide consumers with equipment capable of great image quality. But again, I'm not saying I absolutely love everything they do (for example, I don't understand why they don't offer Canon R8 competitor, losing a lot of potential buyers), but you can't go wrong purchasing Nikon if you are concerned regarding price to image quality ratio.
I bought the plena last week and although due to weather haven't been able to play with it too much outside, the photos I have taken surely make me happy!!
Again Nikon killing it lately with their fantastic lenses. But as a Canon user, I’m very disappointed with the performance of its lens here. Canon L series glass used to be the benchmark of the industry. Not so much anymore it seems. While they also don’t allow for third party glass on their R mount either. I’ve lost a little faith in the brand that I’ve been using for much of the last 20 years I’m afraid.
I wonder. Nikon and Canon are still playing catch up with Sony on sensors. I keep hearing rumors that Nikon is working on its own sensors, but so far it's all vaporware. But Nikon has always had great glass, and some recent offerings sure fit this trend.
@@uncle0eric Nikon has been using Sony sensors for a long time and I'm not sure why they would stop now. Their success with the Z9 and Z8 show it's possible to build great cameras with sensors from the competition.
I like the format and concept of this video. I'd be quite interested to see the 50mm 1.8s tested. Not a trio of sexy lenses, but a comparison of these bread and butter lenses could be interesting.
I'll wait and see what the canon R5 mk2 has to offer but I think I'll go with nikon as a regular hybrid camera. They really nailed their lens lineup this far. I really want to try sony and nikon just to compare. So far canon RF has blown me away compared to old dslr cameras. The fullframe era is like switching to fiber internet or a fast m.2 SSD from an old HDD.
Your test samples told me a lot, great job. But still I don't get mocking the weight of Plena, it's just normal for such a lens, almost the same as conpetition, this thing is kinda cringy to me. It's not The Noct, "yo momma" of lenses.
I'll stick with the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and Sigma fp L + 90mm f2.8 in APS-C/crop mode (pretty much how I use the fp L a majority of the time, still get 25-26mp of great image quality and lesser impact on the slower readout that doesn't bother me anyway). I'm a travelling photographer that focuses a lot on lifestyle portraits, mostly in rural areas/villages, and then a lot of time in East/Southeast Asia. I've had the chance to use both the Nikon 135mm f1.8 and the Sony 135mm f1.8. I stopped using both less than an hour in because they failed at giving me what I needed for the job. That is to say, I need a lens that has the reach to let me capture an intimate shot without standing out too much and destroying the moment with someone staring at a massive lens. I immediately noticed a difference when I went back to my E-M5.iii+75mm f1.8 and fp L+90mm f2.8. I blended back into the background as much as a foreigner can and was able to get natural shots again. That's 150mm reach at f1.8 of light or 135mm of reach with f2.8 worth of light, both of which have a good enough depth of field (a 75mm at f1.8 is shallow, same with a 90mm at f2.8, crop factor doesn't change that, it just pushes in changing the reach, changing the distance you stand from the subject, and changes compression due to that distance change). That isn't to say they're bad lenses, they're amazing. It's just for me, they're not the right tools for the job. The advantages of being able to stand out less and just the weight/size difference when I'm walking/hiking mile after mile daily in rural areas, makes any loss in image quality that no one has ever noticed fine. I'll try the Panasonic 100mm f2.8 with my fp L APS-C mode setup, but the difference in size and losing an aperture ring will have to be beaten by 15mm of reach.
Yeah the 75/1.8 is a fantastic lens. It is pretty much the only reason I have considered upgrading my E-M5ii instead of jumping ship to Fuji or something.
This video makes a starving artist like me drool. Lol I would love a Plena on my Nikon Zed5, but I would use the money for a ZedF over the lens. But those are my top 1 and 2 on my camera wishlist. Followed by the Tamron 35-150mm. Big kit-dreams over here. Y'all rock 🤟
Trying not to buy the Plena - as I need it and it is just the most attractive lens. Just how long can I resist not having this lens - guess it's only matter of time before I am in touch with Grays of Westminster !!
I never understood how ppl said canon has the best glass when I thought it was Nikon, they always had top notch high quality lens with excellent sharpness
Would have still liked to have seen the Sigma 135 tested on each body through adapting it 🤣 Also, not totally true, the Sony 135 CAN be adapted onto the Nikon using the Megadap FE-NZ mkii adapter - not a perfect adapter but certainly useful if you run multiple bodies.
Yeah it's not a great look for Canon but I recently heard something along the lines that they're opening things up starting with crop lenses@@lackoliver55
Guess we learn all these brands can make nice lenses that work well almost looks like the release date has more effect. the GM is already in its 5th year and once they finally fix the worst of the GM's (85 now the 2470 is fixed in mk2) we could see a 135GM2 in 1 or 2 years.
I've paired the Sony 135 and 55 1.8's on my two A9s for the past 4 years now, mostly for kids and Family portraits, and neither the cameras or lenses miss a beat. I'm sure the Canon and Nikon are just as good though. You really can't go wrong with today's mirror-less systems, as long as they're in your budget
I recently purchased the Nikon Plena and it is a truly fabulous lens. Its only weakness is that it is rather large (especially with the long hood) and somewhat heavy, although it balances pretty well on the Z9 body. For a lighter setup, I do have the Zeiss Batis 135 f2.8, which is much lighter and smaller, but just about as sharp with virtually no chromatic aberrations even in the most challenging lighting. Balances perfectly with the smaller Sony bodies (like A7Riii). The Batis 135 is also totally silent in operation, while the Plena has a faint whirring sound when racking through the full focus range (no whirring with short focus adjustments).
I would have liked to know more about the AF speed and accuracy. For a 135mm especially, it is used for action shots, like shots of dogs running towards the camera. Since I have used it, I know that the Sony 135 f1.8 GM is very fast and accurate. The Plenta seemed pretty impressive here
135mm was my favorite. Then I saw this mystical Canon 200mm EF 2.0 and its a god tier lens mounted on a Sony with EF mount adapter. Insanely expensive used.
I know what you are saying, I only mean those extreme situations, like unprepared, sudden operations. But that's what you pay for G Master's premium for, for those 5% of the time rare conditions, they don't fail as well.@@spanishprisoner
This makes be laugh because over on my channel I just did a vintage lens adaptation for the Nikon Zf video and the lens I ended up loving the most was the Konica 135mm F 3.5 from the 80s. Not nearly as nice of bokeh as the Plena but you can't win every time. LOL
Hard to design a bad 135 I think. But what these comparisons should look at is everything they didn’t look at here. Which is the overall rendering and the in focus to out of focus transitions, and the related brightness in such areas.
Hard to beat a 135mm prime. All of these lenses are great and this test demonstrates how finely tuned each of these lenses really are. Canon’s coatings are both aggravating at times, but can be ethereal when used to the photographer’s advantage. The Canon used in backlit portraits can look truly spectacular and is a benefit or compromise (depending on how you look at it) for not having that sterile, perfection that can come with some lenses.
I have the Sony 135mm for a few years now and it's one of my favorite lenses I have. Never fails me even wide open, even on fast moving subjects coming towards me. Tack sharp on Sony A7RV
@@PH61a I totally agree. Added to this all of Sony's recent GM and G lenses have been superb. No need to get blown around by individual reviews for cameras and lenses - I'm very happy on E mount
Great work guys. I have the Sony 135 and my copy is simply the sharpest lens I have ever used over a long lifetime of photography. All these lenses seem pretty fantastic though whatever system you use.
I know its apsc, but god damn the 90 f2 is legit one of the best lenses i have ever used, and ive used medium format fuji lenses. Its honestly amazing and definitely worth a test, i think you should review it again on a modern body like a xh2 and compare to the fullframes
