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 medium prime?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Geos, Jan 18, 2013.

  1. Geos

    Geos Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 12, 2013
    I'm looking for a prime tele in the f3.5 135-200 range under US$150. I have an OM and Minolta Maxxum adapter so I'm partial to those mounts but I'm open to others. Thanks.
  2. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    The OM 135/3.5 is a nice, relatively inexpensive option.
  3. macalterego

    macalterego Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 10, 2012
    Lawrence, KS
    Jeffrey McPheeters
    There were several 135mm f/2.5 or f/2.8 lenses made back in the day. I have a Pentax 135 f/2.5 I really like. It's decent wide open and very sharp at 3.5-4.0. Nice manual focus, too. I have an OM 200 f/4 that looks like it was never used along with the 2x TC, but I rarely use it. I did take some nice photos and directly into the sun it showed little to no flare. The hood is built in, which is handy. And I rigged a tripod mount for the TC so it isn't badly balanced on the OM-D. But I'll probably end up selling it as I usually pull out the native 40-150 or the Vivitar Series 1 85-210 f/3.5 Macro, if I need something to walk around with that reaches further.

    Either of those should suit, though. Both can focus close for their relative focal lengths. If you can't find what you want, let me know and I'll see if anyone I know has a sharp 135 for sale or I'd be willing to part with the 200 f/4 with TC.
  4. rutrem

    rutrem New to Mu-43

    Jan 18, 2013

    i have the CZJ Sonnar 135mm f3.5 (Zebra), not bed, sharp lens
    but u can have for les money the Vivitar(Kiron) 70-205mm f3.8 (OM)
    or the nice Pentax (SMC) 70-150mm f4 ... both lens are almost or very colse to prime lenses in terms of sharpness. Both are constant aperture, good for video also...
    the cost is low, under 50$ without shipping
    i have the Vivitar , becouse i hhave an OM body so i can use it on digital and film.
  5. Jewood1234

    Jewood1234 Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 8, 2011
    Yashica 135/2.8 (c/y mount) has been a great addition for me. I use it indoors for basketball games and other "less than perfect lighting" occasions.

    Very reasonable prices
  6. lorenzo1910

    lorenzo1910 Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 10, 2013
    Massa Carrara,Tuscany
    Ugh...135mm on a :43: body?
    You'll need a tripod for sure...

    Btw...I used a Minolta MD 135/3.5 on a Sony Nex and it worked nicely...
    Someone says that the 3.5 version is sharper than the 2.8 one.
  7. garfield_cz

    garfield_cz Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 9, 2011
    Czech Republic
    It may depend on your holding style :wink: I can shoot handheld with my Sonnar 135 keeping shutter speed above 1 /250 with good results. However for action shots I would recommend monopod.
  8. fuSi0n

    fuSi0n Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 11, 2013
    Bavaria, Germany
    I highly recommend a Minolta MD (Rokkor) or MC 135 2.8. Its a beautiful and well constructed lens with no vignetting wide open and its razor sharp too. Even wide open the lens is not becoming "soft". It costs around 20-70 € depending on the revision (there are more than 17! different versions with different lens groups) though they have all comparable opitcal performance.
  9. fin azvandi

    fin azvandi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 12, 2011
    South Bend, IN
    The Konica Hexanon 135/3.2 (sample image thread) is lovely, inexpensive, and pretty lightweight. Has a built-in metal hood. Not a macro but it has a respectable close-focus distance. No trouble hand-holding it in decent light. Read more about it here.
  10. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I use my Sonnar 135mm regularly to shoot indoor sports games at 1/250s to 1/350s handheld... I don't see a problem. Shooting action at those shutter speeds, camera shake should not even be a consideration. Your subject will be moving much faster than a steady photographer's hands should be moving, so your concern is only stopping the action of your subject. You should have long passed the point of eliminating camera shake already.

    For static objects I can shoot the Sonnar at 1/10s - 1/15s perfectly comfortably. There's no need for a tripod. In fact, a 135mm f/2.8 is a very small, tiny lens. The Sonnars that Garfield and I have are even one of the largest and heaviest of the bunch (at least the C/Y mount model I use). Standard 135mm/2.8's are normally half the size. I love these lenses for how easy they are to wield around.

    Are you holding your system by the lens, and bracing your elbow/triceps into your body when you shoot?

    Oh, and a couple notes to the OP... The Minolta Maxxum uses the "Alpha Mount" developed jointly with Sony. That might help define your options better with your existing adapters. It is not the same as the Minolta MD and MC mounts, but is the same as the Sony A-mount.

    Personally, I love the Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f/2.8 in C/Y mount. Adapters are not expensive and I would go for the lens I want over the mount type, but since you have an OM adapter the OM Zuiko lenses are also very good. The Zuiko 135mm f/2.8 should definitely suit your needs, if you can find one! Another one you might want to look at is the Pentacon 135mm f/2.8 Preset, also known as the "Bokeh Monster". It has 15 aperture blades and produces really sweet bokeh, but it is also a preset lens which will help when using it on an adapted system once you get used to it. The preset rings solve more issues on an SLR than on a Non-Reflex though. Our system is better to use for adapted lenses because of our EVF, but the old SLR method of wide-open focusing then stopping down before a shot is still advantageous.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. arentol

    arentol Mu-43 Veteran

    Jun 29, 2012
    I have a Minolta MD 135mm f/3.5. I would strongly recommend it. You should be able to get it and an MD adapter for less than $50.

    Here it is the lens on ebay where most are going for $30:

    Minolta 135 mm F/3.5 MD Lens | eBay

    And you can get a good adapter for under $20, like this one from Amazon:

    Amazon.com: RainbowImaging Minolta MD MC Mount Lens to Micro 4/3 Four Thirds System Camera Mount Adapter, Olympus PEN E-P1 E-P2, Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1, GH1, G1, MSRP USD24.99: Camera & Photo

    The Minolta 135 f/2.8's are great lenses as well, but generally cost another $30 more. Since that is in your budget you might want to consider one of those.
  12. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Also... You said you wanted 135-200mm, and have an OM mount adapter.

    The Zuiko 200mm f/4 is an excellent telephoto lens! I consider the 200mm to be a super-tele rather than a mid-tele. The Zuiko is probably my favorite of the 200mm/4 breed, which is still very light and compact. The only reason I don't use mine anymore is because it's the same size and specs as using my 135mm/2.8 with a 1.4x telconverter, which gives me the versatility of 2 lenses in one instead (but requires both lens and converter to be of very high quality to match the quality of a straight 200mm/4). If it weren't for that combination, my Zuiko 200mm f/4 would still be my favorite compact travel telephoto. I used to take that one everywhere.
  13. lorenzo1910

    lorenzo1910 Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 10, 2013
    Massa Carrara,Tuscany
    Oh,I overlooked that you were talking about an AutoFocus Minolta camera or lens...
    I was thinking about an SR mount Minolta (hence my suggestion for the MD lens...)
  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.