Recently I have been on a buying spree for the new Nikon lenses. So far I purchased the 85 1.2 and the 50 mm 1.2 and the 24 to 70 2.8 and I just received my copy of this 135 1.8 plena. There's something magical about this 135 plena and I shot a bunch of bird pictures outside and then came inside and shot a bunch of portrait pictures of my dogs. Of course I shot all of them at 1.8 and I have to say that I am astonished by the quality that this lens. I thought that the $135 mm focal range was going to be strange but to be frank it's not really that bad. Yes you need to stand back a little more than you normally would however the end result of the photographs is worth the slight inconvenience of having to be a little further from the subject. I highly recommend this lens. Not sure really what magic sauce they put in this lens but it's obviously above and beyond just an S lens from Nikon. Worth every penny and is my new favorite lens for shooting pictures on my Z9.
Fully agree, the 105mm f1.4 is a “Goldilocks” lens and I certainly hope that Nikon comes up with a Z version soon. A quality 16-34mm f/2.8 would also be great.
Got my Plena last week and so far have been very impressed with the handling on the Z8 and the bokeh is very good. Beautiful fall off as well. I have the 85mm 1.2 and the Plena seems to have a very different background compression and perspective.
I will keep both as they give me a different perspective and each seem to have their own characteristics. If I could only keep one, it would be the 85mm though as the 1.2 allows for great low light capture and is a little more all rounder. Both are excellent. Nikon is killing it on lenses right now.
I have the 85mm f/1.2 and think it's a gamechanger but I'm intrigued by your comment about the difference between it and the new Plena. Would you be able to elaborate?
I admit that I had glossed over the Plena 135mm as it doesn't really fit my use case. But the marvelous images you show on this video has sparked a bit of lust in me. I guess I should never say never. Great content as always!
Plena has been a game changer for the work I do in nightclubs and theatre work, just as I felt it would. I ended up using it all night long and not mounting the other lenses I brought. 🔥📷
I love 135mm. I have owned multiple for other systems. It is amazing for portraits. 85mm is great, I own a couple but, the 135 is great. I am glad there are many great options like I have never owned or used the 105, I’m sure it is amazing.
Great review and samples. The Plena is impressive, no question...but that 105mm f/1.4 is no slouch. I don't think it gives up much, if anything, to the Plena in overall sharpness, and it still offers almost another stop of low light capability. But that Zf with the Voigtlander Nokton Z 50mm f/1.0 Aspherical lens? Perfection. Was really hoping we'd get some more beauty shots of those two together in B-roll in your video...but no matter. I think that combo is going to be the world's best low light set up for a while.
Thank you for your review. The Plena is tempting, but like you, I love my 105 f1.4. I also use the Sigma 135 f1.8 with the FTZ and it remains an amazing portrait lens. I always enjoy your take on all things photography and Nikon.
85 is ideal for portraits indoors, 135 is ideal outdoors, but 105 can do both in the majority of use cases. Before I migrated to Z from F, my golden trio was the 28/58/105 f/1.4. I sold the 28 and 105 in the migration but now deeply regret the 105. Good to see it with FTZ next to the 135 as it shows the size advantage is gone on a Z body. Incidentally, I am so glad I kept the 58, as quirky as it might be. That 58 is, for me, the best AF "portrait lens" for social occasions (close quarters with friends)...
Very useful take on the Plena - I‘m interested but as a recent F shooter with lots of high quality under used lenses around I consider now a used 105mm not only because of the price as I expected needs to take distance more often than not, same happens to me already with the 85mm (own the F mount) so for the time being I keep my money and wait for a 35mm f1.2 which would really add to my range of lenses.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto not a big deal maybe, yet a very stupid mistake. Thanks for correcting Hudson. Won’t do again 😅 Extremely useful and clear conclusion of your test. Feel the same than u regarding 85/105/135.
The plena was an easy one for me, as have wanted a wide 135 for some time and didn't have the 105. Picked up the 85 1.2 and love the images, but the plena clearly feels like another iteration down the path of wide aperture primes (the z 50 1.2 as v1, 85 1.2 as v2, and 135 1.8 as v3). 85 is enough different than 135 that for my work may keep both, but if one goes it'll be the 85. With the 50 f1.2 being v1, thinking it'll need the first iteration to bring it up to plena standards ... so looked at the voigtlander 50 f1 instead. Wow, what a surprising lens, so much fun to use, such great control, such good images, with a different set of tradeoffs than the z 50 1.2. Again, easy to keep for what I'm working on. As for the zf, that was perhaps the most surprising. Approached it with low expectations (love the z8 in most things but size), was curious what the faster computing platform combined with the older sensor would mean. Found a used one so low risk to try ,,, and *bam* now that's my daily carry (usually paired with the smaller voigtlander 50 f2 apo). Still go for the z8/z9 when working with specific intent, but hard to beat the zf for kick around.
About the Zf : it does actually have the very last processor (Expeed 7) which can be found in the Z8 and Z9... Thanks for your videos, regards from France ! :-)
As a Canon shooter, I found the EF 85mm F1.4/1.2L too short, the 135 too long, but Canon don’t do in RF and EF a 105mm F1.4, so I settled for the Sigma 105 mm F1.4 Art, wow what a lens, it renders the out of focus areas so well, a heavy beast to carry about but worth every penny, but waiting to see if they bring out a 105 F1.4 L RF, anyway love your content, kindest regards, Adrian
I love that lens too. Best macro I've owned. It's very slow to focus though. I really wish they'd made the focus limit so you could lock out close instead of only the opposite... :-(
Great review. Makes the 135mm desirable. I will buy it but probably seldom use it. Shoot lots of headshots for Professionals, Actors, Execs, similar, for use as simple headshots or for further advertising. After several years with the z systemt have gone back to my D850 as primary, with my basic operating trio of the 35mm F/1.4 G, the 58mm F/1.4 G or the 50mm F/1.4 G, and the 105mm F/2.8 VR Micro G. When using the z system I may swap out the 35mm and 58mm for the 35mm F/1.8 z and usually the 50mm F/1.8z . Sometimes, though try to avoid it, the 50mm F/1.2 z. I personally do not love, almost don't like the F mount 105mm F/1.4 E. I find it to flat and lacking bite. It does however have that magical color saturation and rendering which I take advantage of on occasion. Generally, and here comes the groans, use the 105mm F/2.8 VR Micro AF-S for headshots. Yes, go ahead and groan. I find it a very limiting lens in so many ways, but in it's range as a headshot lens stellar. Very snappy yet with some nice color. Good to have a competing Actor's headshot jump off the screen. I also use ancient 105mm F/2.5 AI Nikkors, 100mm Leitzs and at least as old German made Zeiss 100mms on occasion for certain looks. The prehistoric W German Zeiss 85mm F/1.2 has my favorite rendering after the Leitz look, but to short. When I was in film school they explained why the 105mm was perfect for the then typical person's headshot. There is a mathematical formula which I don't remember, that states to avoid perspective distortion of any kind for the typical headshot you needed to use a 105mm focal length. Perhaps somebody will dig up the formula from their physics book.
@@laurencegoode1387 given your preferences, you really need to try the 105 2.8 MC S. Insanely razor sharp subject background seperation. Sharpest 105 I've ever shot. Like the old 105 macro you prefer, it's not the fastest focusing and lacks the 105 1.4 AFS character I adore so much, but given your choices... I think you'd love it. I think it may be my sharpest lens aside from the 400 TC. A huge upgrade from the VR Micro. Huge.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto Thanks. I have a have used the 105mm MC z occasionally. It appeared to be very sharp in close and equal or better than all others at full figure distances and no worse than others at infinity. My issues with this lens was its very cool look, it's somewhat garish-unfair, lets say stark or harsher look compared to other 105mm's. Perhaps I got a bad one-it still happens. Given that you clearly know what you're talking about, perhaps more so than anyone else I've seen on the web, I am going to try it again. Samy's here in SoCal is having a no tax sale. Perfect way minimize the risk. Just ordered another one now as we speak. Will let you know after formal and field testing and will shoot some examples I can share with you. Thanks for all the hard work. I know it can be tedious.
Thanks for this great review. I shoot for now with 2 lenses : Z 24 70 f/2,8 and MC 105 f/2,8. I'am about to buy a new one - I wonder if the Plena could replace te great but heavy Z 70 200 f/2,8. Is this a good choice ?
Thanks for this great review. Pretty soon I am going to need a porter to carry all the great cameras and lenses from Nikon. Also wondering if you are going to review the new 600PF?
I will when I'm out with a friend with one. I have several who've bought them. One is returning it for the 800PF. It's not that it wasn't amazing, but he already has the 400 2.8 TC and finds it better (it should be) and really just wants the 800's reach. I have the 800PF and I adore it. It's not enough smaller and lighter to trade down. It's a lens I know I'd love, but not use with the 800PF in my kit.
The plena looks nice. Many thanks for that recommendation on the voigtlander 50mm F1.0 I love it! I have been shooting it on my Z8 until my ZF arrives. It is so sharp at F/1.0 it's unbelievable and nailing focus is so rewarding that it is just a joy to use.
both 1.2/85 and 1.8/135 are better than the 1.4/105 - it's basically a decission of spending additional money for a similar lens. I did it and I am very happy with that
It's much more about the 105 focal length (which is dramatically "better" for me than either the 85 or 135) and a love of that 1.4's size and aperture, but we all have different tastes and needs. That's what makes the world a far more interesting place. "Better" is subjective not absolute in this case. If they build a 105 1.4 plena, the same size... I'll happily pay for it. For now I chose instead to invest in the ZF and a Voigtlander 50 1.0 which I love using more than any of the aforementioned lenses. Again, subjectively "better" for me, but not for a working portrait headshot photogragher. For them I think the Plena is subjectively better than any of these lenses by quite a fair bit.
Really wish you had done any test for astro .. i would have loved to see how IN focus points of light on the corners looked if there was any coma or anything...😢
It's the wrong time of year in the wrong place Scotland. I'd have shot stars since you asked me to prior to leaving, but I didn't see many between the awesome ever changing clouds. I love shooting stars and the Milky Way with Earth as the foreground. My 20 1.8 S is as perfect as I can imagine for that with the msm tracker. I have zero interest in personally shooting deep astro. I prefer to gaze in wonder at what Web sends back from deep out there. ;)
Didnt think about time of year involving cloud cover .. and i wasnt trying to call you out as I didnt even know if you remembered that convo as it was a while ago 😅 Thanks for thinking of me at least lol. I guess ill have to rent the lens down the road and try Andromeda myself.
Hudson I need your advice desperately! I own the Nikon Z9 and find myself about to buy EITHER the Z85mm f1.2 OR the Z135mm f1.8 Plena all over again having once owned both of them and then selling them both simultaneously after barely using either. I’m aware that they are completely different focal lengths but If you had to buy only one of these which would it be? Thanks in advance
Without a doubt I'd get the 85: bhpho.to/3HXj79Q I'm holding out for a fast 105 Z. That's my favorite focal length for this type of lens, but... I find the 85 infintely easier to work with for anything but head shots and I miss it a bit. the Plena was just too long for me despite it's incredible bokeh. The 85 is no slouch there either and I'm so glad that's the one I had in the streets of Havana. the 105 would have been reallly tough there.
If your bread and butter is tight headshots, the nothing beats the Plena. It's tough to work with 135 on a regular basis though. I loved the 85 1.2. It's Bokeh is not as perfect edge to edge, but 85 is a much more all purpose focal length to my taste. 105 is my favorite for this type of lens, hence my sticking with the 105 1.4 F mount for now. Last of my FTZ lenses...
If that's of interest, I'd point you to the Voigtlander 50 1.0 Nocton. I LOVE mine. Much smaller with a fabulous aperture ring, it suits the ZF beyond perfectly. bhpho.to/3X6lGNc The 58 is much more of a bear to carry and shoot. Lovely, but a beast. The Nocton is really something special.
No, with extended shutter speeds activated (d6 in the CS menu) the shutter goes to 900s in manual mode. That's 15 minutes using the dial. :) I love that feature. If you don't activate it, it maxes at 30s and you have to use the bulb setting to go over with a remote release.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto your the best!! That’s bring me to another problem I can’t. Fine a shutter cable that fits ZF, just so I am clear you are saying after I activate the extended shutter in the menu that changes what the dial number mean. I am still confused sorry for taking up your time, but am so appreciative of your channel
The video on my Kase page www.hudsonhenry.com/kase makes clear why I recommend saving resources, weight and space along with avoiding vignetting by adapting all your lenses to at least 82mm filters. If you go smaller, you're sure to fall in love with an 82mm threaded lens released soon after.
The Z-mount was marketted as innovative because of its wider diameter...so why not make lenses with a wider diameter like this Plena from the start and be product and people-centered and not profit-centered? I know they could have given us this from the start!
They absolutely have. Every Z lens made has taken advantage of that wide mount to absolutely trounce the performance of narrower F-mount lenses that preceeded them. The F4 Z lenses have better edge to edge performance than the 2.8 F lenses across the board. The Z lenses have all been mind bendingly better than similar F lenses exactly because of the short flange distance and wide mount. As you say... From the start.
Don't hate me.... but I feel like if you're not zooming into 200% you can get the same results on a D850 with a 135mm f/2 DC. I'm almost certain in 90% of situations, if we just posted the same photos Z vs F on Instagram or even RUclips... literally 98% of the people won't be able to tell the difference as long as we don't zoom in to 200% and check out CA etc. I get you guys have to make content of the latest and greatest. The Z system isn't all that, especially when it comes to purely photography. Video... well Z wins 100%.
The Z system lens's are accross the board lightyears better than the F equivalents with a very few minor exceptions. The 135 DC is of course legendary and very few photographers have it. Much the same as the original Noct lens. I have a 105 1.4 that I adore and will keep. The Plena's bokeh is kind of nuts and it's light, silent, insanely fast focusing and built for far more than the D850's megapixels. It's quite easy to see that pixel peeping. The real joy of the Z system, aside from the insanely fabulous viewfinders in low light and lack of need to don reading glasses for menu navigation or image reivew in camera is the optics across the board. The wider mount and shorter flange distance have opened up a whole new world of quality unimaginable in the DSLR days. I shot Nikon film cameras and pretty much every DSLR from the D70 to the D850 and D5. I used AF-S 2.8 glass and fast primes in those days. These new lenses for the Z system slay the old AF-S kit. Slay it. When I first ordered my Z7 intending to hate it and send it back, it came with the 24-70 F4. My shock was that that lens was better in the corners at 46MP wide open than the 24-70 2.8 AF-S on my lower megapixel D850. I've found that accross the board. The F4 glass is sharper in the corners wide open than the F-mount 2.8 glass at equivalent apertures and they stand up to much higher resolution sensors. I have to VERY STRONGLY disagree. The Z system is absolutley all that. The new 14-24 S is flat mind bending. I mostly carry just the 14-24, 24-120 F4 and 100-400 F4 these days. The quality is shocking. I think the challenge is to take a Z8 with that kit on a month of exclusive shooting and try to go back to a DSLR afterward. I sincerly doubt you'll be able to. It's why in the past 3 years of teaching workshops around the world, I've seen 1 DSLR show up. That ship has sailed.
It gets 8 stops of IBIS on the ZF or Z6iii ;-) You'd only lack stabilization on the Z50/30/fc platform. Not this lens's intended platform I'd argue. ;-)
Those who have those for portrait work love it. I love the 1.4 for lowlight and street work myself and can't imagine ditching it. The Plena is a stunner though. If it were a 105 1.4 with that bokeh, they'd have had me...
Already got the Plena and am waiting for the ZF! I don’t NEED either but I’m having fun playing! 🔥
Recently I have been on a buying spree for the new Nikon lenses. So far I purchased the 85 1.2 and the 50 mm 1.2 and the 24 to 70 2.8 and I just received my copy of this 135 1.8 plena. There's something magical about this 135 plena and I shot a bunch of bird pictures outside and then came inside and shot a bunch of portrait pictures of my dogs. Of course I shot all of them at 1.8 and I have to say that I am astonished by the quality that this lens. I thought that the $135 mm focal range was going to be strange but to be frank it's not really that bad. Yes you need to stand back a little more than you normally would however the end result of the photographs is worth the slight inconvenience of having to be a little further from the subject. I highly recommend this lens. Not sure really what magic sauce they put in this lens but it's obviously above and beyond just an S lens from Nikon. Worth every penny and is my new favorite lens for shooting pictures on my Z9.
Fully agree, the 105mm f1.4 is a “Goldilocks” lens and I certainly hope that Nikon comes up with a Z version soon. A quality 16-34mm f/2.8 would also be great.
Got my Plena last week and so far have been very impressed with the handling on the Z8 and the bokeh is very good. Beautiful fall off as well. I have the 85mm 1.2 and the Plena seems to have a very different background compression and perspective.
Will you be keeping both?
I will keep both as they give me a different perspective and each seem to have their own characteristics. If I could only keep one, it would be the 85mm though as the 1.2 allows for great low light capture and is a little more all rounder. Both are excellent. Nikon is killing it on lenses right now.
Background Compression is the main difference between 85 and 135
I have the 85mm f/1.2 and think it's a gamechanger but I'm intrigued by your comment about the difference between it and the new Plena. Would you be able to elaborate?
I admit that I had glossed over the Plena 135mm as it doesn't really fit my use case. But the marvelous images you show on this video has sparked a bit of lust in me. I guess I should never say never. Great content as always!
bought a blue Zf and love it 😍
Great video, thank you and it looks like quite a time yyou guys had in Scotland! It brings back great memories.
Plena has been a game changer for the work I do in nightclubs and theatre work, just as I felt it would.
I ended up using it all night long and not mounting the other lenses I brought. 🔥📷
I love 135mm. I have owned multiple for other systems. It is amazing for portraits. 85mm is great, I own a couple but, the 135 is great. I am glad there are many great options like I have never owned or used the 105, I’m sure it is amazing.
Great review and samples. The Plena is impressive, no question...but that 105mm f/1.4 is no slouch. I don't think it gives up much, if anything, to the Plena in overall sharpness, and it still offers almost another stop of low light capability.
But that Zf with the Voigtlander Nokton Z 50mm f/1.0 Aspherical lens? Perfection. Was really hoping we'd get some more beauty shots of those two together in B-roll in your video...but no matter. I think that combo is going to be the world's best low light set up for a while.
They'll be coming. ;) I agree!
This lens is just stunning!
Thank you for your review. The Plena is tempting, but like you, I love my 105 f1.4. I also use the Sigma 135 f1.8 with the FTZ and it remains an amazing portrait lens. I always enjoy your take on all things photography and Nikon.
85 is ideal for portraits indoors, 135 is ideal outdoors, but 105 can do both in the majority of use cases. Before I migrated to Z from F, my golden trio was the 28/58/105 f/1.4. I sold the 28 and 105 in the migration but now deeply regret the 105. Good to see it with FTZ next to the 135 as it shows the size advantage is gone on a Z body. Incidentally, I am so glad I kept the 58, as quirky as it might be. That 58 is, for me, the best AF "portrait lens" for social occasions (close quarters with friends)...
Hudson I know you're returning it but those images you got make me want to go buy it. Great work!
Very useful take on the Plena - I‘m interested but as a recent F shooter with lots of high quality under used lenses around I consider now a used 105mm not only because of the price as I expected needs to take distance more often than not, same happens to me already with the 85mm (own the F mount) so for the time being I keep my money and wait for a 35mm f1.2 which would really add to my range of lenses.
I have a limited use case for it but absolutely love it. Spot on review.
Thanks for the video. I was wondering though what kind of extra grip you’ve added to the Zf?
Couldn't be more interesting: our beloved 105 1.4 compared to the Plena. Many thanks for this Henry. Now watching.
:-) First name is Hudson... But no big deal at all.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto not a big deal maybe, yet a very stupid mistake. Thanks for correcting Hudson. Won’t do again 😅
Extremely useful and clear conclusion of your test. Feel the same than u regarding 85/105/135.
The plena was an easy one for me, as have wanted a wide 135 for some time and didn't have the 105. Picked up the 85 1.2 and love the images, but the plena clearly feels like another iteration down the path of wide aperture primes (the z 50 1.2 as v1, 85 1.2 as v2, and 135 1.8 as v3). 85 is enough different than 135 that for my work may keep both, but if one goes it'll be the 85.
With the 50 f1.2 being v1, thinking it'll need the first iteration to bring it up to plena standards ... so looked at the voigtlander 50 f1 instead. Wow, what a surprising lens, so much fun to use, such great control, such good images, with a different set of tradeoffs than the z 50 1.2. Again, easy to keep for what I'm working on.
As for the zf, that was perhaps the most surprising. Approached it with low expectations (love the z8 in most things but size), was curious what the faster computing platform combined with the older sensor would mean. Found a used one so low risk to try ,,, and *bam* now that's my daily carry (usually paired with the smaller voigtlander 50 f2 apo). Still go for the z8/z9 when working with specific intent, but hard to beat the zf for kick around.
I love love my zf it’s amazing
About the Zf : it does actually have the very last processor (Expeed 7) which can be found in the Z8 and Z9... Thanks for your videos, regards from France ! :-)
This will be a good lens for outdoor portraits👍
As a Canon shooter, I found the EF 85mm F1.4/1.2L too short, the 135 too long, but Canon don’t do in RF and EF a 105mm F1.4, so I settled for the Sigma 105 mm F1.4 Art, wow what a lens, it renders the out of focus areas so well, a heavy beast to carry about but worth every penny, but waiting to see if they bring out a 105 F1.4 L RF, anyway love your content, kindest regards, Adrian
Thanks Adrian! We're of a kind on focal lengths. :)
Man please add more close up shots of you gear. I love that zf + f1 combo.
That'll come with the review and setup guide. :)
Makes me think that I ought to get out with my 105/2.8 and shoot some things other than macro.
I love that lens too. Best macro I've owned. It's very slow to focus though. I really wish they'd made the focus limit so you could lock out close instead of only the opposite... :-(
Workshop coordinator! That's the solution nobody talks about, and yet - many are throwing around photo business advices!
Great review. Makes the 135mm desirable. I will buy it but probably seldom use it.
Shoot lots of headshots for Professionals, Actors, Execs, similar, for use as simple headshots or for further advertising. After several years with the z systemt have gone back to my D850 as primary, with my basic operating trio of the 35mm F/1.4 G, the 58mm F/1.4 G or the 50mm F/1.4 G, and the 105mm F/2.8 VR Micro G. When using the z system I may swap out the 35mm and 58mm for the 35mm F/1.8 z and usually the 50mm F/1.8z . Sometimes, though try to avoid it, the 50mm F/1.2 z.
I personally do not love, almost don't like the F mount 105mm F/1.4 E. I find it to flat and lacking bite. It does however have that magical color saturation and rendering which I take advantage of on occasion. Generally, and here comes the groans, use the 105mm F/2.8 VR Micro AF-S for headshots. Yes, go ahead and groan. I find it a very limiting lens in so many ways, but in it's range as a headshot lens stellar. Very snappy yet with some nice color. Good to have a competing Actor's headshot jump off the screen. I also use ancient 105mm F/2.5 AI Nikkors, 100mm Leitzs and at least as old German made Zeiss 100mms on occasion for certain looks. The prehistoric W German Zeiss 85mm F/1.2 has my favorite rendering after the Leitz look, but to short.
When I was in film school they explained why the 105mm was perfect for the then typical person's headshot. There is a mathematical formula which I don't remember, that states to avoid perspective distortion of any kind for the typical headshot you needed to use a 105mm focal length. Perhaps somebody will dig up the formula from their physics book.
@@laurencegoode1387 given your preferences, you really need to try the 105 2.8 MC S. Insanely razor sharp subject background seperation. Sharpest 105 I've ever shot. Like the old 105 macro you prefer, it's not the fastest focusing and lacks the 105 1.4 AFS character I adore so much, but given your choices... I think you'd love it. I think it may be my sharpest lens aside from the 400 TC. A huge upgrade from the VR Micro. Huge.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto Thanks. I have a have used the 105mm MC z occasionally. It appeared to be very sharp in close and equal or better than all others at full figure distances and no worse than others at infinity. My issues with this lens was its very cool look, it's somewhat garish-unfair, lets say stark or harsher look compared to other 105mm's. Perhaps I got a bad one-it still happens. Given that you clearly know what you're talking about, perhaps more so than anyone else I've seen on the web, I am going to try it again.
Samy's here in SoCal is having a no tax sale. Perfect way minimize the risk. Just ordered another one now as we speak. Will let you know after formal and field testing and will shoot some examples I can share with you.
Thanks for all the hard work. I know it can be tedious.
Thanks for this great review. I shoot for now with 2 lenses : Z 24 70 f/2,8 and MC 105 f/2,8. I'am about to buy a new one - I wonder if the Plena could replace te great but heavy Z 70 200 f/2,8. Is this a good choice ?
@@fb7575 it's nowhere near as versatile... If headshots are your mainstay... It's perfect though.
Is this lens better than the 85mm f1.2 Which lens gives you the 3D look for video? The 85mn or 135mm?
Like to see that Zf setup…thanks in advance.
Might be a couple more weeks, but it'll come. :-)
Thanks for this great review. Pretty soon I am going to need a porter to carry all the great cameras and lenses from Nikon. Also wondering if you are going to review the new 600PF?
I will when I'm out with a friend with one. I have several who've bought them. One is returning it for the 800PF. It's not that it wasn't amazing, but he already has the 400 2.8 TC and finds it better (it should be) and really just wants the 800's reach. I have the 800PF and I adore it. It's not enough smaller and lighter to trade down. It's a lens I know I'd love, but not use with the 800PF in my kit.
Thanks. I’m in the midst of the same decision just not quite as far along.
The plena looks nice. Many thanks for that recommendation on the voigtlander 50mm F1.0 I love it! I have been shooting it on my Z8 until my ZF arrives. It is so sharp at F/1.0 it's unbelievable and nailing focus is so rewarding that it is just a joy to use.
both 1.2/85 and 1.8/135 are better than the 1.4/105 - it's basically a decission of spending additional money for a similar lens. I did it and I am very happy with that
It's much more about the 105 focal length (which is dramatically "better" for me than either the 85 or 135) and a love of that 1.4's size and aperture, but we all have different tastes and needs. That's what makes the world a far more interesting place.
"Better" is subjective not absolute in this case. If they build a 105 1.4 plena, the same size... I'll happily pay for it. For now I chose instead to invest in the ZF and a Voigtlander 50 1.0 which I love using more than any of the aforementioned lenses. Again, subjectively "better" for me, but not for a working portrait headshot photogragher. For them I think the Plena is subjectively better than any of these lenses by quite a fair bit.
Really wish you had done any test for astro .. i would have loved to see how IN focus points of light on the corners looked if there was any coma or anything...😢
It's the wrong time of year in the wrong place Scotland. I'd have shot stars since you asked me to prior to leaving, but I didn't see many between the awesome ever changing clouds.
I love shooting stars and the Milky Way with Earth as the foreground. My 20 1.8 S is as perfect as I can imagine for that with the msm tracker. I have zero interest in personally shooting deep astro. I prefer to gaze in wonder at what Web sends back from deep out there. ;)
Didnt think about time of year involving cloud cover .. and i wasnt trying to call you out as I didnt even know if you remembered that convo as it was a while ago 😅 Thanks for thinking of me at least lol. I guess ill have to rent the lens down the road and try Andromeda myself.
Hudson I need your advice desperately! I own the Nikon Z9 and find myself about to buy EITHER the Z85mm f1.2 OR the Z135mm f1.8 Plena all over again having once owned both of them and then selling them both simultaneously after barely using either. I’m aware that they are completely different focal lengths but If you had to buy only one of these which would it be? Thanks in advance
Without a doubt I'd get the 85: bhpho.to/3HXj79Q I'm holding out for a fast 105 Z. That's my favorite focal length for this type of lens, but... I find the 85 infintely easier to work with for anything but head shots and I miss it a bit. the Plena was just too long for me despite it's incredible bokeh. The 85 is no slouch there either and I'm so glad that's the one I had in the streets of Havana. the 105 would have been reallly tough there.
Any chance some of that massive separation at low f stops is in camera software "knowing" that lens is on the camera and "increasing" the effect?
Nope. Just epic glass.
Hi
I would like to buy the plena 135/ 1.8
But also considering the 85/1.2
Which one would you recommend me ?
If your bread and butter is tight headshots, the nothing beats the Plena. It's tough to work with 135 on a regular basis though. I loved the 85 1.2. It's Bokeh is not as perfect edge to edge, but 85 is a much more all purpose focal length to my taste. 105 is my favorite for this type of lens, hence my sticking with the 105 1.4 F mount for now. Last of my FTZ lenses...
As always, great video. Thanks. Didn't occur to me re 3D and eye detect with a manual focus lens -- thought immediately of the Noct .95!!?
If that's of interest, I'd point you to the Voigtlander 50 1.0 Nocton. I LOVE mine. Much smaller with a fabulous aperture ring, it suits the ZF beyond perfectly. bhpho.to/3X6lGNc The 58 is much more of a bear to carry and shoot. Lovely, but a beast. The Nocton is really something special.
How lucky were you to get those 'drops'
Hudson can you help me figure out how to do a long exposure with the zf like 2 mins
Turn on Extended shutter speeds in the custom settings menu and dial in 120s. :-)
@@HudsonHenryPhoto thanks I have done this but the shutter dial only goes to 30s i Gus’s I should have asked how do I by pass the shutter dial?
No, with extended shutter speeds activated (d6 in the CS menu) the shutter goes to 900s in manual mode. That's 15 minutes using the dial. :) I love that feature. If you don't activate it, it maxes at 30s and you have to use the bulb setting to go over with a remote release.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto your the best!! That’s bring me to another problem I can’t. Fine a shutter cable that fits ZF, just so I am clear you are saying after I activate the extended shutter in the menu that changes what the dial number mean. I am still confused sorry for taking up your time, but am so appreciative of your channel
You don’t have the 52mm filter I had to use a competition
The video on my Kase page www.hudsonhenry.com/kase makes clear why I recommend saving resources, weight and space along with avoiding vignetting by adapting all your lenses to at least 82mm filters. If you go smaller, you're sure to fall in love with an 82mm threaded lens released soon after.
What is your favorite landscape lens that allows you to capture the beautiful sunset? What is your favorite lens for video?
The Z-mount was marketted as innovative because of its wider diameter...so why not make lenses with a wider diameter like this Plena from the start and be product and people-centered and not profit-centered? I know they could have given us this from the start!
They absolutely have. Every Z lens made has taken advantage of that wide mount to absolutely trounce the performance of narrower F-mount lenses that preceeded them. The F4 Z lenses have better edge to edge performance than the 2.8 F lenses across the board. The Z lenses have all been mind bendingly better than similar F lenses exactly because of the short flange distance and wide mount. As you say... From the start.
Don't hate me.... but I feel like if you're not zooming into 200% you can get the same results on a D850 with a 135mm f/2 DC. I'm almost certain in 90% of situations, if we just posted the same photos Z vs F on Instagram or even RUclips... literally 98% of the people won't be able to tell the difference as long as we don't zoom in to 200% and check out CA etc. I get you guys have to make content of the latest and greatest. The Z system isn't all that, especially when it comes to purely photography. Video... well Z wins 100%.
The Z system lens's are accross the board lightyears better than the F equivalents with a very few minor exceptions. The 135 DC is of course legendary and very few photographers have it. Much the same as the original Noct lens. I have a 105 1.4 that I adore and will keep. The Plena's bokeh is kind of nuts and it's light, silent, insanely fast focusing and built for far more than the D850's megapixels. It's quite easy to see that pixel peeping.
The real joy of the Z system, aside from the insanely fabulous viewfinders in low light and lack of need to don reading glasses for menu navigation or image reivew in camera is the optics across the board. The wider mount and shorter flange distance have opened up a whole new world of quality unimaginable in the DSLR days. I shot Nikon film cameras and pretty much every DSLR from the D70 to the D850 and D5. I used AF-S 2.8 glass and fast primes in those days. These new lenses for the Z system slay the old AF-S kit. Slay it. When I first ordered my Z7 intending to hate it and send it back, it came with the 24-70 F4. My shock was that that lens was better in the corners at 46MP wide open than the 24-70 2.8 AF-S on my lower megapixel D850.
I've found that accross the board. The F4 glass is sharper in the corners wide open than the F-mount 2.8 glass at equivalent apertures and they stand up to much higher resolution sensors. I have to VERY STRONGLY disagree. The Z system is absolutley all that. The new 14-24 S is flat mind bending. I mostly carry just the 14-24, 24-120 F4 and 100-400 F4 these days. The quality is shocking.
I think the challenge is to take a Z8 with that kit on a month of exclusive shooting and try to go back to a DSLR afterward. I sincerly doubt you'll be able to. It's why in the past 3 years of teaching workshops around the world, I've seen 1 DSLR show up. That ship has sailed.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto I’m fortunate to own both the 135 DC and Plena. Probably will never get rid of the DC, it is a special lens.
just ordered it today. fyi.....the lens does not have stabilization.
It gets 8 stops of IBIS on the ZF or Z6iii ;-) You'd only lack stabilization on the Z50/30/fc platform. Not this lens's intended platform I'd argue. ;-)
Gorgeous lens, but I do think maybe there is such a thing as too much bokeh.
So simple to control... Stop down or step back. ;)
I don't think I can get rid of my 105 dc 🫣
Those who have those for portrait work love it. I love the 1.4 for lowlight and street work myself and can't imagine ditching it. The Plena is a stunner though. If it were a 105 1.4 with that bokeh, they'd have had me...