Any 135mm shooters out there?

[VinceC]

Or 90mm with the Epson RD-1?

In celebration of this much-maligned, often overlooked, ridiculously underpriced optic, here are a few shots with a Nikkor 13.5cm f/3.5. It's actually one of my favorite lenses. Anyone else out there who keeps scanning the world with a slightly more distant gaze?

 

[Socke]

Only on a SLR, Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8. Great lens!

 

[Kin Lau]

I have the J11 (135/4) on my Kiev's, and have used them a bit. My subjects were usually a little further away so that parallax wasn't a problem.

OTOH, my "normal" lense on my 4x5 Anniversary Graphics is a 135mm Tessar 🙂.

 

[rover]

I don't think I could hold a 135 steady which kind of defeats the purpose of a RF camera in my mind. I do have one for an SLR, but even that gets little use.

 

[wlewisiii]

I use my 135/4 Sonnar on my Kievs reasonably often. I find it quite useful when shooting barns from the road.

William

 

[ch1]

Or 90mm with the Epson RD-1?

In celebration of this much-maligned, often overlooked, ridiculously underpriced optic, here are a few shots with a Nikkor 13.5cm f/3.5. It's actually one of my favorite lenses. Anyone else out there who keeps scanning the world with a slightly more distant gaze?

This may be slightly OT but probably as good a place as any to ask. I recently obtained both a vintage S2 and, as a companion, a Bessa R2S for backup.

The manual for the R2S recommends (commands?) that the user only use the lens barrell focus for lenses greater than 50mm to avoid undue and potentially damaging strain to the focus wheel mechanism.

The S2 manual (admittedly ancient) contains no such cautionary language.

Bessa's recommendation sounds like a wise (or at least prudent) one. Any thoughts?

 

[dmr]

Only on a SLR, Zeiss Sonnar 135/2.8. Great lens!

Same here, SLR only. I have a 28-135 zoom and yes, I have used it racked out all the way sometimes.

 

[Honu-Hugger]

Ouch! Sometimes the truth hurts...I have to confess to never having used a very nice 135/4 "T" coated Sonnar (it has been through Henry Scherer's service and I even went to the trouble of finding the correct hood for it). Your beautiful photos may inspire me into action 🙂. Thank you for posting them and for raising the question.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

On the S2: (EDIT) Page 20 of my original S2 the manual states not to use the focus wheel for long lenses. The Nikon S manual states the same warning. So does the SP manual... (Flaunt it baby, Flaunt it!)

You can use the wheel for wide-angle lenses, and I have used it with the 3.5cm F2.5 lens. If the mount is "dry", I would not push it. NEVER oil the helical. Soak it in gasoline, after removing it from the camera.

I use my 135mm's a good bit, took the 13.5cm F3.5 Nikkor in LTM to the zoo last month with the Canon VI-T. The RF position worked well with the lens. I have a fair number of 125's, including the Canon 135 F3.5. The latter is shorter than the Nikkor. I have the Nikkor in S-Mount, LTM, and 'c'ontax mount.

1) S2 (modified for 52.3mm standard) with Nikkor 13.5cm F3.5 for 'C'ontax.

2) Canon 7 w 13.5cm F3.5 Nikkor in LTM

 

[ZeissFan]

The 135mm Sonnar is one of the best deals for Contax glass. I prefer the West German version, as it doesn't have the problem of the griding aluminum helical. I've had two very nice versions -- sold one earlier this year.

The 135mm Sonnar is very sharp, and if you can live with the f/4.0 max aperture, it's a nice lens indeed.

One of the nicer things about this particular lens, compared with other lenses from that era, is that it close focuses to about 5 feet. Many other lenses will only close focus to about 11 or 13 feet, which rules it out for portraits.

I'm not sure how the Nikkor is, but I would expect it to be similar or identical in features and performance to the Sonnar. Judging from the photos, I would say that is the case with the addition of a slight speed advantage.

 

[ch1]

On the S2: (EDIT) Page 20 of my original S2 the manual states not to use the focus wheel for long lenses. The Nikon S manual states the same warning. So does the SP manual... (Flaunt it baby, Flaunt it!)

You can use the wheel for wide-angle lenses, and I have used it with the 3.5cm F2.5 lens......

Brian,

Thanks. I must have missed it. I got the manual separately from Craig Camera a few days after the S2 and by time it arrived had already read the "advisory" in R2S manual. So probably just "glanced" at it in S2 manual w/o it "registering".

My S2 came with the 135/4 and I just now obtained a 43mm UV filter for it. I have a rule, I don't use a lens w/o a protective filter (I read some others here who disagree, but it's my camera and my rule). Now that the lens is "protected" I look forward to trying it out and hopefully posting some results soon.

Regards,
George

 

[peter_n]

I have a Jupiter-11 for travel and a Tele-Emarit for here, and a 0.85 mag camera to use them one. 🙂 Below is a pic from the TE wide-open. Fantastic lens!

 

[hoot]

135? Not for me. I'm of the Robert Capa school ("If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough"). Even when shooting a head-portrait I like to get really close, never mind the distortion. I never have the urge to shoot anything longer than the "normal" length of the given medium.

 

[jlw]

I hope to be a 135 user as soon as my 135/2.8 Komura LTM gets back from Essex. I plan to use it on my R-D 1 as a light, compact, easily hand-holdable "200mm" lens. Just hope my accessory viewfinder can be made to point in the same direction!

Closest I get now to the 135 focal length is using a 100/2 Canon on the aforementioned R-D 1. This is a handy size, has excellent reach and speed, and is fabulously sharp! I've also got an 85, which would "equivalate" more closely to 135mm, but I just really like that 100...

 

[VinceC]

I read somewhere (probably here) that the 135 is one of the easiest lenses to design so that all of them tend to be pretty good/excellent. The Tele Emarit looks awfully nice. I never did get a Jupter-11 for my Kiev. Instead I used a Nikkor "c" Contax mount lens back when I used the Kiev more often. The Nikon SP and S3 have 1:1 finders which make the 135 pretty easy to use.

I was a Nikon SLR shooter for many years before getting into rangefinders, so I learned to "see" with medium telephotos, particularly the Nikkor 180. So when I switched to rangefinders, taking up the 135mm lens seemed very natural.

I think it might be difficult to focus really long lenses on an RD-1. I'd still give it a try though, if I had one. I used a primitive digital camera in the mid-1990s, an NC-2000, and really enjoyed the fact that I suddenly didn't need to carry anything longer than a 135mm for long-lens SLR work.

 

[Solinar]

I can't say that I use a 135 regularly. However, sometimes you have to get in close, but you aren't able to stand close to the subject. Example: A top hat and white gloves in the back of a RR Silver Wraith, which was not my car and in a display mode.

 

[Solinar]

The above photo is with a 90mm Elmar, working with ISO 100 and running out of light.

 

[Solinar]

One other reason to use a long lens is that 35mm means small negatives and real estate is precious, especially along the 24mm dimension of the frame.

The same day, but standing behind the rear of a more spartan subject, a bug eye sprite. If a crop was necessary, then one doesn't have what amounts to piece of micro film.

 

[VinceC]

>>sometimes you have to get in close, but you aren't able to stand close to the subject<<

That's one of the reasons I like 135mm on a rangefinder. It's the lens that allows you to get the closest. Not macro, but still very close. Below is the Nikkor 13.5cm at its minimum focus, 5 feet. Wide open at f/3.5. Shutter speed was 1/15th or 1/30th. I used a kitchen chair for a makeshift tripod.

 

[zeos 386sx]

Theaters, Leica M's and 135mm f/2.8 Elmarits are made for each other. I like the focal length.