1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Which 135mm prime to get?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Steven, Nov 21, 2012.

  1. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    I am looking to get a fast long prime. 135mm sounds right. I see there are several available with about 2.8 aperture. Does anyone have a preference? I don't want to spend too much on this one. Is Canon FD or Minolta Rokkor good ( I already have the adapters for those 2) or should I look at another brand? Thanks.
  2. sLorenzi

    sLorenzi Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 15, 2010
    Hi. My experience is with the Russian Jupiter 37-A, which is pretty sharp and have good contrast. Unfortunately it's M42 mount (I use a very cheap adapter I got off ebay and it works perfectly).

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9000 using Tapatalk
    • Like Like x 1
  3. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    OM 135/3.5 is dirt cheap, but a good lens nonetheless. Not sure how useable the 2.8s will be wide open on an adapter.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    The Minolta MD 135/2.8 models are excellent once stopped down to f/4. Wide-open they're a bit soft and there is some purple fringing at 100 % viewing. This holds true for all MD models, be it with Rokkor designation or not. Don't go for an MC lens, they are generally lower in contrast.

    There are two distinct optical designs, the models in the top row are older Rokkor designs, they are heavy (535g). The bottom row shows a Rokkor model with tapered depth-of-field scale and a plain MD (no Rokkor), both having the same design and being much lighter (365g). As said, the performance is almost the same between all of them as far as I could see. Some others seem to prefer the earlier models.

    Prices tend to rise the last few months especially for the Minolta 135/2.8 lenses; a year ago I could easily get one for around € 40, now you'd have to pay more, depending on your patience; € 60 should be doable in Europe.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    • Like Like x 2
  5. MajorMagee

    MajorMagee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2011
    Dayton, OH
    The Konica f3.2 has an advantage over most others in that it can focus down to just 1m.
  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    I had a Nikon 135mm 2.8 AIS, and I was disappointed at how soft it was at 2.8. If you're willing to go a little shorter, the Nikon 105mm 2.5 AI/AIS is incredibly sharp wide open and can be had for a decent price.
  7. montaggio

    montaggio Mu-43 Regular

    I use a Canon FD 135/2.5 - love it. Great with my OMD and won't break the bank.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I have an old Vivitar 135 f2.8 in Nikon mount and it isn't bad. It is sharp{even opened up} and has good bokeh{not super good but in no way displeasing}. The one bad thing is that it doesn't focus very close - 4.5 feet is close focus! It also has a little CA but considering the age that is expected. It has a nice built in hood however. This lens was made in most mounts of the time. It appears to be selling on ebay for $20-$60.
  9. eno789

    eno789 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 5, 2010
    Bay Area, California
    I've used and like the following:

    • Konica Hexanon 135mm f/3.2, 55mm thread, 390g, closest focusing 1m

    • Tamron Adaptall-2 135mm f/2.5, 58mm thread, 410g, closest focusing 1.2m

    • Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Close Focusing (Komine made 28xxx serial), 62mm thread, 1:2 macro, closest focusing about 0.6m

    There are sample images in the image archive subforums for the Konica and Tamron.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Gyles

    Gyles Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2012
    Sunny Norfolk, UK
    Travelographer and self confessed Hexaholic
    +1 for this lens.........er because I have one. The Konica Hexanon 135/3.2 is a great lens, check out the image thread. There is also the 135/3.5 (very cheap) and 135/2.8 (heavy)
  11. tdobson

    tdobson Mu-43 Rookie

    Nov 2, 2012
    I like my old-style 135/2.8 Rokkor. Can't comment on others or compare, but it is a substantial lens that produces pleasing results (and I already had it in my stable)
  12. Eirik

    Eirik Mu-43 Regular

    Aug 20, 2012
    Oslo, Norway
    I have both the OM Zuiko 135mm f2.8 and the Canon FD 135mm f2. The former is much smaller, lighter and cheaper, while the latter is one stop faster, larger, and more expensive. Optically I haven't experienced much difference, the Zuiko is perhaps a little bit better. I'd recommend either of them, so it's basically down to your preferences...
  13. arentol

    arentol Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 29, 2012
    I picked up a Minolta 135 f/3.5 MD for $20 off of craiglist. It is small enough to be comfortable to use on my E-M5, and it is sharp at f/3.5 and very sharp already at f/4. The size advantage of a 3.5 over 2.8 might make it worth considering.
  14. veereshai

    veereshai Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 12, 2011
    Arlington, VA
    I had got that one from lattiboy here and then sold it to a good friend. I had too many lenses in that range and had to let it go. Amazing lens for the price and it's SHARP!

    EDIT: I made only 2-3 photos and this was one of them:

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    As you can see, it was pretty darn sharp.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. elavon

    elavon Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2012
    Tel Aviv Israel
    I got last week a JCPenney f/2.8 for 9.99 on Ebay and it is quit impressive.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
  16. VooDoo64

    VooDoo64 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 17, 2010
    Zagreb - Croatia
    Davor Vojvoda
  17. vtsteevo

    vtsteevo Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 20, 2012
  18. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Looks like its the right adapter.
  19. Gyles

    Gyles Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 15, 2012
    Sunny Norfolk, UK
    Travelographer and self confessed Hexaholic
    yeap, that's the one. I have a Pixco adapter for my Hex's. It does not lock on to my 135mm but the others are fine, Be interested on feedback for this one.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.