Devil's advocate here but even the nikon 135 f2.8 ai(s) can be found for under $100 I got one in near mint for $60 so I understand you can't get a commission on those lenses but I stopped your video and facepalmed when you "compared" the zeiss to the 70-200 NIKON.... Really?? The 70-200 has 21! lens elements and is a ZOOM at 2.8 versus versus a 11 glass element Prime Zeis at F2 (double the light intake!) The 135 focal lenght will give you better subject isolation than the 85 odus, so therefore you could also have compared that look with an old nikon tele prime like the 200 F2 or even the 300 F2.8 for the "smooth" blurry background. I guess it's all about which apples and pears you line against the Zeiss, it will never be a lemon but in my mind, there are other lenses in its price class, Sigma 135 1.8 art or the 135 2.8DC or even the 135 Samyang, that could give away better run for the money than the 70-200.
My god, everytime you went between a Zeiss and Nikkor image it made the 70-200 look like a kit lens, comparatively of course. I'd love to see a comparison between the Zeiss 135 and the Nikkor 135 DC. Would be interesting to see if gaining autofocus with the Nikkor looses you much detail and micro-contrast
I have the zeiss 21mm distagon and it’s fantastic for landscapes. I guess you have tp use zeiss glass to appreciate what if does. I just purchased the Apo Sonnar 135mm. This thing is absolutely fantastic. Actually this review was the deciding factor in my purchase. Thanks for the great review as I now have this. The images with this on my D750 looks great
it's 2024 today and I am still shooting with the Zeiss 135 APO on my Z9, I also have the newer Milvus 135 but the 135 APO is already so good, anyways, the two Zeiss 135 give me such good result and I am holding off the purchase of the fantastic Nikon 135 Plena now. some times I do want fast AF when shooting model walking, moving around, but I serious love manual focus, that's with the real, high quality, true manual focus lenses, not with those Focus by wired AF lenses.
Wow, reading the comments, I'm alarmed at how many silly people say that a lens is "too sharp to shoot people." Like what?! Some of these people are blowing big bucks on full frame megapixel monsters like the d800/e/810 but want a lens just "soft enough" to hide imperfections. If you want soft images, why in God's name are you buying sensors that resolve "microscopic" level detail? If you want soft, go get a d90 and an old Tamron lens. If not, learn to retouch your subjects' skin. Not that difficult.
In total agreement. It’s always possible to soften results if you feel they’re ‘too sharp for portraits’ . Better still find a model with a perfectly flawless skin and complexion...easier than you think.
You're right about manual focus: it is easier than I thought it would be. I haven't got any of the lenses you were demonstrating, but I find the Nikon 105 mm f2.5 to be a lovely lens.
Hi, Matt! You should see if Sony will let you try out the Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8 (that has AF) via an LA-EA3 adapter on a A7RII. It is perhaps my sharpest lens (along with a Leica R 135mm f2.8). Regardless, very enjoyable vid. :)
I don't think the Sony 135mm will AF via the LA-EA3 adapter. I believe that lens is screw driven so will need the LE-EA4... not 100% on that, but pretty sure that's the case.
+Bruce Bachand I used it on my a99, and it's one of the few lenses I kept when I switched to the A7R2. It really is a remarkable lens too, and the focus is fine with the LA-EA4, although if they make a Batis version, I'd be awfully tempted, even if they make it f/2.
Matt, if you ever have the chance I would love to see your comparison of the Zeiss 135mm in comparison to the Samyang 135mm f2. This lens is considerably cheaper, but apparently still very good. Thanks
Samyang 135/2 - crazy shapr lens with superb micro contrast (even wide open), absolutely on par with Zeiss (if not better, when it comes to the chromatic abberation correction). For only 500$.
Hi Matt, not side to side, but tried them both. Zeiss, like all Zeiss lenses, has supreme built quality, but when it comes to the optics, the Samyang is really stunning, you should check it personaly for yourself ;) Meanwhile you can visit lenstip.com and look for Samy review.
I did consider buying the Zeiss 135mm f2 but went for the 85mm Milvus instead. Optically the Milvus has similar sharpness to the 135mm but what put me off the 135mm is that it has more limited use indoors where I might not be able to get framing I would like in a small room. The 135mm is an amazing lens though.
I believe that this video is basically about comparing the 135mm APO to the 85mm Otus ; the Nikkor 70-200 is thrown in for comparison as many viewer of this channel / video may owned or used it ( Plus , it can be zoomed to 135 mm focal length of the APO). Like many other viewers, I would say a prime like the Nikkor 85mm F1.4 would be better lens from the Nikon camp , but then again it's not a Zeiss vs Nikkor or Prime vs Zoom , so the type of Nikkor does not matter . My 2 cents .
i've always thought this was one of your best vids. now that everyone is raving about the Z version of the 70-200, maybe it's time for a new shootout comparison. i'm sure many would love to see how it renders compared to these Zeiss benchmark lenses :-)
I have the Zeiss APO 135 f/2 and it’s the finest lens I own and use. But for a cheaper option, I have used a Zeiss 150mm Sonnar CF for Hasselblad on a Nikon D850. The results are incredible if you don’t mind shooting in stop-down mode with aperture priority. It truly is comparable to the Zeiss, but of course, it’s yesterday’s $2200 lens. And it shows. I paid $375 for it at National Camera Exchange and it’s in mint condition. Supposedly the 120mm for Hasselblad is even better, so I hear. But the Zeiss 135mm is fantastic, without a doubt.
Thanks a lot, Matt! I use this lens with my Sony A7, and manual focusing is a piece of cake. I'm not a pro, but seriously manual focusing is a joy to use. Compared to Samyang 135 f2, they're pretty close in terms of sharpness. However, the skin tone, colors, build quality, bokeh are all better on the Apo.
www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=924&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1058&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0 The Zeiss is noticeably sharper wide open however the Samyang is performing really well considering the price you pay for it.
For the 135mm most definitely use MirrorUp mode, and you are guaranteed the SHARPEST images! Combined with a D800/E/810 you will get max image quality edge to edge.
i own the zeiss with cinemod conversion by duclos. it's absolutely beautiful, however for videography it's essential to use with a tripod since due to the lack of image stabilization.
+aljawad have compared the otus to the nikkor previously. Nikkor is one of their best - and extremely practical - but not up to the otus in terms of image quality
Great appreciation for the 135mm!! It may sound a bit loaded, but how about doing 85mm vs. 135mm showdowns of lens producers (Fujifilm, Sony, ...), for which is the better portrait barrel [overall] per mfr.
Could you imagine a 135mm f/1.4? lol. It would be like 10 lbs. The 135mm f/2 is already the hardest lens to focus I own. (Nikons DC lens) Paper thin DOf. When you nail focus even the Nikkor has crazy detail. Really, really sharp. I'm sure the Zeiss bests it wide open, but these lenses even have great bokeh at smaller apertures. With the 135mm DC lens, f/2.8 or f/3.5 is still real nice and creamy.
Hey, Matt, maybe you could say something about old Minolta lenses? People say 28-135/4-4.5 is awesome and I tend to disagree with that. And while we speak about Zeiss 135, how it compares with new Samyang 135?
Been manual focus for years BUT digital cameras do not use split screen or assist in anyway like the manual focus film cameras did. Found auto focus not always as good as shooting manual.
Matt, I've been watching your videos for the last two weeks - hats off, I've learned more in those two weeks than the last two years. Quick question, could you comment on the APO Planar 135 versus the Milvus 85. The price in the US is now practically the same! Thanks.
I have the Zeiss ZE 85mm for canon. Im getting the Sony A7r II and have an canon adaptor. Should I sell my 85mm and get the Batis 85 or keep my Zeiss ZE?
Hi Matt, thanks for the review. But Rokinon/Samyang 135mm is pretty sharp and even better than Canon 135 L's, so it would be interesting to compare the zeiss and rokinon. Can you make a video for the Rokinon. Haven't seen such a comparison so far! Cheers
Insane how much detail it has at 100%. Great for cropping for sure. However, for model shooting it's just a bit TOO sharp. All the tiny skin bumps and everything look a bit distracting if you ask me. Would love to see thing in a street setting. Shots that sharp on a street must be amazing :)
+MZ72 Yeah, I'd like to hear about this too, as an excellent condition used Nikon 135/2 can be had for about $800...it's probably not as good as the Zeiss 135/2, but how much is the question.
+rafael coreas Rokinon will have around 170-180 degrees of focus. Zeiss has 270 degrees. Also you might expect some stiffness or possibly play in the focus ring with the Rokinon. This makes Zeiss my highest keeper rate lens in terms of manual focusing. Optically Rokinon is great for the test charts and quite competitive at 1/3rd the price. It's no Zeiss both in use and in terms of output.
+smage85 hmm.... I own the 85 samyang, and concerning focus, i wouldnt want any longer focus throw. I am absolutely able to finetune focus, which is for sure even easier with a longer throw, but when then you need to tweak focus fast, you have a disadvantage again. I would not want a longer focus throw. Id say there is no better.
+rafael coreas Ill buy it as soon as i can afford it....right after...damnit. 400 dollars more for an a7 body..hmmmm. If you have focus peaking, just buy it! Im very happy with the 85 1.4 and im sure i will be with the 135
WOW! The APO is a sharp as a tac. It actually shows so much detail you better have a model with perfect skin or be good with photoshop. LOL It brings out the red eyes ( visine ;-) I will have to invest in some Zeiss glass. I've got the Nikon 70-200 showed in your video and by itself it is a fantastic lens, but the Zeiss is in a different league.
+hawg427 Yeah, you have to consider what you need more: extreme sharpness, or what the 70-200 has: stabilisation, autofocus and zoom. If you have time to slow down and get the shot, and you have the money, then the Zeiss lenses look great!
I am so on the bubble with the 135mm... I own the 85mm OTUS & my fear is no sooner would I buy the 135 APO that Zeiss would come out with a OTUS variant that would blow it out of the water
Interesting you should engage such a lovely model to test lenses. I love her big eyes. My problem with those expensive high end lenses is the price and manual focus. You need a photoshoot type environment and the model "holding stills " pretty much. I also wonder if you need this kind of sharpness at 1.4. I use a lot of f3.2 or f4 and when I zoom in I can count the eye lashes or skin pores. I guess for many it is the "feel good" that makes them fork out this kind of money for "the best lens there is".
hey Matt, thanks for the "Remarkable" Review. I love seeing your comparisons, they are top-notch. However my Question : is the OTUS 85 better than the LEICA APO 90mm f/2 or the Famed Leica 50mm f/2 APO (world's best 50mm lens in production or any focal length lens for that matter) ? ... yes you said that Otus 85 is better than all leica & hasselblad lenses, but still would like to have a confirmation from you once again, and one reason why it is so ? ... thanks a lot.
+Chirag Parikh you are saying 'world's best 50mm lens in production or any focal length lens for that matter' regarding the Leica - is that a quote or you have tested lots? I have not done head to head of every lens, but best I have ever seen
Hey Mattthe word on the net is that the Rokinon 135 f2 is as good if not better than the 135 f2 APO.... you think you can put these two heads up?thanks for the vids!
Thanks Matt really interesting video.I struggle to handhold longer non-VR primes and get sharp results - could you give your take on getting the best out of these lenses in combination with something like a D810 in terms of ISO, shutter speed, any special focusing technique you use? Cheers
hi ! I'm planning on getting a tamron 70-200 (G2 version) and a Zeiss milvus 85mm 1.4 . Do you think that would be enought for portraits or should I include the Zeiss milvus 135mm 1.4 or replace the 70-200 with the 135. the only reason I'm thinking about the 70-200 is the versatility as I'll not only be doing portraiture. thank you and great video !!
In order to actually show us these minute differences in sharpness Matt you DO NEED 4K video. It is next ti impossible to actually SEE difference between these lenses using something as low resolution as 1080p. Please take a step into the 2016 by releasing videos in 4K. No point doing this in such low res.
+Neopulse00 A Zeiss master (interviewed by Matt) once said that the 135 is actually more an Otus. The reason it was not called that way, is because they did not invent that lineup back then when it came out.
Too bad Zeiss never made a ZE/ZF.2 version of their Contax APO Sonnar 2/200. They otherwise repackaged several of their Contax Zeiss lenses for Nikon or Canon. In the end they charge +4.000 for Otus lenses, the 2/200 in that price range would have also found it’s clients.
acording to DXO the Zaiss 135mm zf2 on my d810 can deliver 35mg pix out of 36.3 there is onley one more lens on the marked that can do it the 85mm Otus the 55mm otus delivers onley 33mg pix the 50mm Art from sigma can deliver 31 and 35mm Art 29mg pix if we can trust DXO i do but how much you can see in reallife shooting is something different
Hi Matt! Could you Please PIT some comparison to some other older mf lens? There are various 85 or 135 bright Onet from 70's Andrzej 90's... Would that be possible?
too much different dof to compare that lens and their sharpness considering also aperture! and zoom lens has much more internal elements than a prime so obviously different diffractions etc. we would see otus 85 vs nikon 85 1.4 vs sigma 85 art vs canon 85 1.2. or for example zeiss 135 APO against nikon 135 DC...
it's not close to the otus, it's better. it's sharper wide open, has less distortion, and less vignetting, and costs much less. the otus also has more coma, astigmatism and the apo has better bokeh.
+Davis McKinney At f/1.4 the difference is noticeable in the corners, but when stopping down to f/2 you won't see a difference in sharpness. But there are more properties that define a lens. Chromatic aberrations are better controlled by the Otus, bokeh also looks better with harsh background highlights. Vignetting and distortion are better controlled by the Sigma. I have the Sigma 50/1.4 Art by the way (replaced my Sigma EX 50/1.4 at introduction) and it's my workhorse lens. I also have some Zeiss lenses (21/2.8 and 100/2) which I really enjoy to use.
+Davis McKinney "The Sigma outclasses here almost all other 50 mm devices, including the expensive Nikkor AF-S 58 mm f/1.4 G. How it compares to the sensational Zeiss Otus 1.4/55? The Zeiss was tested on the Nikon D3x which provides MTFs very similar to both EOS bodies, just about 1 lpmm higher. If you deduct that 1 lpmm from the results of the Otus it still remains a bit sharper than the Sigma by f/1.4. By f/2.0, though, the Sigma is better and then the Zeiss is leading again. The differences aren’t big, both lenses being exceedingly sharp, but the Zeiss prevails in that duel." www.lenstip.com/400.1-Lens_review-Sigma_A_50_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM_Introduction.html
8 лет назад
this would be awesome: Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 75/1.5 vs Helios 40-2 vs Cyclop H3T-1 vs samyang 85/1.4 vs OTUS Biotar - 1000 USD, Helios - 350 USD, Cyclop - 200 USD... And everybody know how much cost samyang and OTUS :D
+Md. Shahnewaz Islam That depends on what you want to use it. I own both, the Otus 85mm and the Apo 135mm (and 14-24mm/2.8 + 24-70mm/2.8). For many situations, the Otus 85 focus range is to long. Street Shooting: forget it! The 135 is a lot easier to Focus, than the 85mm Otus. It depends on what you want to shoot.My next lens is a Nikkon 85mm 1.4/1.8 or 70-200mm/2.8G or a better idea.
Taking in consideration that Sony Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 is 1.798$ and Zeiss Apo Sonnar 135mm f/2 is 2.122$, how the hell can you people say that SZ 135mm f/1.8 is a better performer than CZAS 135mm f/2? How do you people think? Not only that there is already a big price gap, but if you take away auto-focus system (let's put it at 100$) the gap becomes even bigger. Based on price/optical performance ratio, CZAS 135mm f/2 has no rival and based only on performance, it is one of the top 5 lenses in the world, making pixel on pixel at the most demanding cameras out there. Not only that but contrast, colors and sharpness overall it is at the top, in all charts and tests. The price of 2.122$ makes that performance while SZ 135mm f/1.8, is behind. You have auto-focus and f/1.8, good for you but even so, SZ 135mm f/1.8 is still under CZAS 135mm f/2! Keep up the good work Matt!
