Review: Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar T*

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

If only Zeiss made AF Canon lenses.

I think I can safely say that all of us agree with you on that point. This lens with AF and IS would be worth $3000+. It is crazy good optically.

You could just buy an a99, or A7R and E4 adapter paired with the Sony 135 sonnar f.18 and have AF

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463924-REG/Sony_SAL135F18Z_SAL_135F18Z_135mm_f_1_8_Carl.html

$1700

That 135mm F/1.8 w/ In-body IS makes me jealous everytime I see one. I wish canon would update the 135L to that lens so I can finally put to rest my desire/Un-desire to own a 70-200II.

I've read the 135mm f/1.8 isn't as good optically as the Sonnar. I've not used the lens, though, so I don't know that firsthand.

 

[infared]

The resolution of the Zeiss is truly amazing. All Zeiss lenses are not this spectacular but WOW that is amazing!
As usual GREAT Review, Dustin!
The only Zeiss that I have in my kit is the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 and that is pretty impressive as well.

Dustin, are you still planning on reviewing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art??...I think that you mentioned a while back that you were going to do a review and a comparison, right?
Maybe I missed it, I tried a search but could not find it.
Thanks!

 

[RLPhoto]

If only Zeiss made AF Canon lenses.

I think I can safely say that all of us agree with you on that point. This lens with AF and IS would be worth $3000+. It is crazy good optically.

You could just buy an a99, or A7R and E4 adapter paired with the Sony 135 sonnar f.18 and have AF

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463924-REG/Sony_SAL135F18Z_SAL_135F18Z_135mm_f_1_8_Carl.html

$1700

That 135mm F/1.8 w/ In-body IS makes me jealous everytime I see one. I wish canon would update the 135L to that lens so I can finally put to rest my desire/Un-desire to own a 70-200II.

I've read the 135mm f/1.8 isn't as good optically as the Sonnar. I've not used the lens, though, so I don't know that firsthand.

The Sony isn't as good as the zeiss but it sure makes the 135L look dated. F/1.8 and IS makes the 70-200s completely irrelevant for me and I'd never have to own one. The 135L needs an update alongside the 100-400L. Then I can finally have my Uber prime I've been staring at on the sony.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

The resolution of the Zeiss is truly amazing. All Zeiss lenses are not this spectacular but WOW that is amazing!
As usual GREAT Review, Dustin!
The only Zeiss that I have in my kit is the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 and that is pretty impressive as well.

Dustin, are you still planning on reviewing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art??...I think that you mentioned a while back that you were going to do a review and a comparison, right?
Maybe I missed it, I tried a search but could not find it.
Thanks!

Two of my equipment suppliers made promises and then didn't have stock at the review time. I have just had the original Sigma 50mm f/1.4, which I will do a brief review of (didn't particularly like it), and will do the newer Sigma soon. I've got the new Tamron "superzooms" right now. (28-300mm VC, and 16-300 VC for crop). I will be getting the new Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS and the Tamron 18-200mm for the EOS M mount next week. I've got lots of lenses on the go for review right now, but the Sigma will probably be next.

 

[MLfan3]

must say it is the best lens I have ever used on my D800E and A7R(in terms of resolution and CA control), but it is not really great on my 6D or 5D2.
and I found the ergonomics of the Zeiss APO and Otus terrible(I dropped the Otus 2 times because it is so slippery in my hand), so I just sold them.
I just think it is not a PRACTICAL lens for anything out side of my studio, and in my studio we tend to use MFDB(rented back on our Hassy V cameras).
But if you are doing stitching landscape or landscape at 135mm, then it is the lens for you.
I honestly think the Zeiss ZF ZE line primes are overrated, I think some of these especially this APO deserve the hype but most of so called zeiss ZE ZF primes are just as good or a tiny bit better than similar Canon, Samyong or Nikon primes.
I think most of online reviewers tend to confuse perceived build quality of feeling of it with actual build quality, but the Zeiss lenses are not that durable, if you drop or shoot it in real harsh winter, then you will know it.
The plastic Sigma or Nikon 50 are much more durable than the Otus, I learned this in very hard way in winter lake and after that I never ever wanted so-called ZF Zeiss but sold all.

The truly remarkable noteworthy ones are:
1 this 135mm APO
2 the 15mm f2.8
3 25mm f2 Distagon(f2.8 version is a crap)
4 21mm Distagon.
All the other so called Zeiss actually Coshina primes are just above average.

Personally I will never get this line of lenses regardless of their optical or mechanical quality, the metal hoods really damage other lenses or camera bodies, I got lots of odd scratches on my 6D and A7R when I used them with the 135mm APO via an adapter. I am pretty sure the silly metal hood of it scratched my 6D and A7R.

And the metal hood sometimes become loose or too tight to fit on the lens too easily.

 

[infared]

The resolution of the Zeiss is truly amazing. All Zeiss lenses are not this spectacular but WOW that is amazing!
As usual GREAT Review, Dustin!
The only Zeiss that I have in my kit is the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 and that is pretty impressive as well.

Dustin, are you still planning on reviewing the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art??...I think that you mentioned a while back that you were going to do a review and a comparison, right?
Maybe I missed it, I tried a search but could not find it.
Thanks!

Thanks for the reply Dustin...I thought you may be having difficulty picking up the new Sigma 50mm Art....
I have the older Sigma and I actually like my copy for what it cost and for the bokeh it gives me.... I think it is a cool lens for the price...but DEFINITELY has its flaws....The lens is positioned very well from a cost performance standpoint for what is out there IMHO...they could be found at a nice discount when I bought mine ...but for some reason it seems that the price has gone up to list recently...I think it may be because you are getting decent value for the money. It will be interesting so see what you have to say about it.
Also, I just sold my Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II to purchase the New Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS.... I really like the lens...A LOT...I am considering selling my 21mm Zeiss f/2.8. This new zoom is REALLY sharp!!!!!
Look forward to what you think of it when you review it!!!
Thanks for being here.

Two of my equipment suppliers made promises and then didn't have stock at the review time. I have just had the original Sigma 50mm f/1.4, which I will do a brief review of (didn't particularly like it), and will do the newer Sigma soon. I've got the new Tamron "superzooms" right now. (28-300mm VC, and 16-300 VC for crop). I will be getting the new Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS and the Tamron 18-200mm for the EOS M mount next week. I've got lots of lenses on the go for review right now, but the Sigma will probably be next.

 

[MLfan3]

If only Zeiss made AF Canon lenses.

I think I can safely say that all of us agree with you on that point. This lens with AF and IS would be worth $3000+. It is crazy good optically.

You could just buy an a99, or A7R and E4 adapter paired with the Sony 135 sonnar f.18 and have AF

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/463924-REG/Sony_SAL135F18Z_SAL_135F18Z_135mm_f_1_8_Carl.html

$1700

If you've actually used both the APO Zeiss 135mm f2 and so-called Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8, you must have already known that they are not in the same league, the APO ZE/ZF lens is much better.
The Sony 135mm f1.8 is not that good , it is just a tiny bit sharper than an old Nikon AF-D135mm f2DC lens.
I cannot compare it to the Canon version because I never used the Canon 135mm L seriously, but I think it is not much worse than the old ancient Nikon DC, so I think the Sony's so-called Zeiss is not much better than the Canon 135mm L.

I know the FE55mm f1.8 is a truly amazing lens but it is a Sony designed Sony lens with Zeiss brand mark on it.
So try not to confuse Sony Zeiss with Zeiss designed real Zeiss.

They are completely different beats.

 

[Bruce75]

After few shoots of this Zeiss both on Canon then on A7r I was in trouble: it put shame on the other my (still beloved) lenses

 

[ahsanford]

Great review, thanks for posting.

Unfortunately, I see this as a stellar lens I'll never use. Large aperture glass simply has to have AF in my hands or the value of that huge opening is lost on anything I shoot that is moving (even slowly). I'd end up stopping it down just to avoid missing with manual focusing.

As such, I'd only opt for an MF lens if it were on a tripod for landscape work. And as much as 135mm certainly has a place in landscape work, it's not a focal length I reach for enough to justify $2k out of pocket.

So I flag stellar lenses like these in the 'win the lottery / when-I-retire bucket': magical, but not a priority for what I shoot. Keep in mind that I am an enthusiast who has only grown up on having AF on everything I've shot -- pros or folks with significant rangefinder / MF lens experience may be able to net a high percentage of keepers with it.

- A

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

After few shoots of this Zeiss both on Canon then on A7r I was in trouble: it put shame on the other my (still beloved) lenses

It is a bit haunting. But then I look at the amazing images my 135L can still produce and realize that I can live on

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Great review, thanks for posting.

Unfortunately, I see this as a stellar lens I'll never use. Large aperture glass simply has to have AF in my hands or the value of that huge opening is lost on anything I shoot that is moving (even slowly). I'd end up stopping it down just to avoid missing with manual focusing.

As such, I'd only opt for an MF lens if it were on a tripod for landscape work. And as much as 135mm certainly has a place in landscape work, it's not a focal length I reach for enough to justify $2k out of pocket.

So I flag stellar lenses like these in the 'win the lottery / when-I-retire bucket': magical, but not a priority for what I shoot. Keep in mind that I am an enthusiast who has only grown up on having AF on everything I've shot -- pros or folks with significant rangefinder / MF lens experience may be able to net a high percentage of keepers with it.

- A

Well put. Lenses like this are perfect for those who have the disposal income to get the best and then use it in the more leisurely fashion that it deserves. It will highly reward those that take some time with it, but the real world precludes always having such time or opportunity.

...or money.

 

[Ruined]

Would like to see an updated Canon 135 f/2.

 

[Perio]

I'm sure many people use it for jewelry or food photography, when they need a very high quality of their images. Obviously, this is not the lens for everybody, and Zeiss probably never said it is.

Great review, thanks for posting.

Unfortunately, I see this as a stellar lens I'll never use. Large aperture glass simply has to have AF in my hands or the value of that huge opening is lost on anything I shoot that is moving (even slowly). I'd end up stopping it down just to avoid missing with manual focusing.

As such, I'd only opt for an MF lens if it were on a tripod for landscape work. And as much as 135mm certainly has a place in landscape work, it's not a focal length I reach for enough to justify $2k out of pocket.

So I flag stellar lenses like these in the 'win the lottery / when-I-retire bucket': magical, but not a priority for what I shoot. Keep in mind that I am an enthusiast who has only grown up on having AF on everything I've shot -- pros or folks with significant rangefinder / MF lens experience may be able to net a high percentage of keepers with it.

- A

Well put. Lenses like this are perfect for those who have the disposal income to get the best and then use it in the more leisurely fashion that it deserves. It will highly reward those that take some time with it, but the real world precludes always having such time or opportunity.

...or money.

 

[infared]

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

 

[can0nfan2379]

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

+1 -- Double

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

+1 -- Double

Two that must have the best. I guess the review was for you

 

[ahsanford]

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

+1 -- Double

Two that must have the best. I guess the review was for you

Well, if they must have the best, they ought to pitch their autofocusing 70-200 F/2.8 IS II lenses as well:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/04/first-look-zeiss-cz-2-70-200mm-t2-9

Dustin, perhaps this is your next review? ;D

- A

 

[can0nfan2379]

I rented the 135 APO from LensRentals a few months ago for a trial to see if I liked it. I was quite impressed and actually found achieving focus with the 135 infinitely easier than the 50MP. The problem with the 50MP was the almost non-existent focus throw from about 1.5m to infinity (actually about 30 degrees) which made using the lens as a normal 50 unbearable. As a macro lens, the 50MP had tons of focus throw and excelled in that area. The 135 on the other hand has fairly generous throw.

With the 135 APO focus confirm was pretty darn accurate on my 5D3. I'll admit that focusing on even slightly moving subjects was difficult and one of the reasons I haven't pulled the trigger yet as I am hoping that we may see a Canon 135 1.8L IS at Photokina. If the Canon 135 improved the way the other mark II superteles and 70-200II improved especially with respect to contrast, that would be a killer lens (not that it's bad now, quite the opposite but the Zeiss really is in another league) and vastly more versatile than the Zeiss.

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

. I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!

+1 -- Double

Two that must have the best. I guess the review was for you

 

[Dholai]

." I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!"

So darn true

This review compelled me to order one overnight and I tried it briefly yesterday. I hate MF lenses with my bad eyesight but this will definitely be a keeper.

PS: I am not going to read any more reviews of Zeiss glasses.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

." I think you have convinced me that I must own this lens!"

So darn true

This review compelled me to order one overnight and I tried it briefly yesterday. I hate MF lenses with my bad eyesight but this will definitely be a keeper.

PS: I am not going to read any more reviews of Zeiss glasses.

Bad timing. Zeiss just contacted me to see if I would be interested in reviewing the upcoming Otus 85mm f/1.4. I'm sure it will be a piece of junk