Nikon engineers spent years to get a quality of lens they could put their name on while meeting the strict standards that the resultant lens shall weigh no more than a plena. Truly commendable.
I used the plena for dog action shots on my Z8 and totally blown away by the consistency. The quality is outstanding and it so sharp it’s ridiculous really.
I bought the plena last week and although due to weather haven't been able to play with it too much outside, the photos I have taken surely make me happy!!
135mm really are a great focal length. My work horse is my 70-200/2.8 but when I take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I work I always end up at around 135mm. Even when I don't look at the zoom ring and just dial everything in as I look through th viewfinder, more often than not I usually end up at 135mm or very close to it. It just *works* for portraits!
Just got mine, a little early to say but the capabilities of the Xspeed 7 coupled with that sensor are producing amazing images, an instant winner for me.
now go to a dim lit room where the 1.2 was giving you, say an ISO of 2000, and set it at 1.8 and tell me how much you enjoy the Noise of an ISO 4000. :) glad you like the Plena, but comparing a 1.8 to a 1.2 is quite silly.
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll oh jeez. Think I don’t know that? What if 50 is too short? What if 135 is too long? Lenses for different situations my friend. And for modern cameras ISO 4000 is nothing. Expose properly and you’re fine.
Nikon glass really is top notch, and I can't help but to think that it's because they're primarily an industrial optics company first and foremost. Nikon doesn't make as many products or rely on consumer cameras nearly as much as Sony or Canon. As a result of being an optics company I think that research and development carries over to their consumer glass. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony cameras/glass, and they're all SUPER good these days... But something about Nikon glass just always gave me that extra quality. I like that they tend to be heavier, and I hope they don't cut corners to make them lighter. Use a monopod or tripod if the weight is a problem, but don't make worse glass for the sake of weight.
I have the Fujifilm 90mm. It’s amazing. Seeing the specular highlights on the Plena being so perfect, I may need to test it out on the 90. The 90 has a very pleasing bokeh. Great review.
not just good value but also a great performer. The Samyang bokeh is rounder than Sony and it has probably less LOCA than all of these 3 lenses (or equal to the best). Only reason to use Sony is lens color match or autofocus speed (which is I think unrivalled). The Sony is supposed to have best central sharpness at infinity but beyond a certain level you care for things other than sharpness. Btw image stabilization is very useful on 135mm even with IBIS on the bodies (though too much will of course rob edge sharpness)
It doesn’t autofocus very well. Struggles in low light… compared to Sony lenses or even my Sigma art 85 dg dn in the same not too demanding settings. It really felt like it is Sony autofocus from 2016. I can’t use it at fashion shows or for fasted paced reportage.
I agree. I would never consider a Sanyang normally but I had sold my GM and needed a 135 for a job so bought the Samyang. Its actually sharper with nicer bokeh then the GM and thats saying something!
Yea. In my country. The plena cost double the 135gm. Its costly. But its a good tool nonetheless. Its also the latest. But from the bokeh test. Altho its more round but it has the onion ring going on.
@@TsvetanVR Not really without rebait (that sony runs at times) its 1729 i paid 1899 when it was released 4+ years ago. The canon is 2369 and the nikon is 2999. The GM is just cheaper in europe. Now i am sure when sony updates it (next year?) it will become more in the price line of the canon sony has been upping the price on the GM2's.
135mm was my favorite. Then I saw this mystical Canon 200mm EF 2.0 and its a god tier lens mounted on a Sony with EF mount adapter. Insanely expensive used.
I know what you are saying, I only mean those extreme situations, like unprepared, sudden operations. But that's what you pay for G Master's premium for, for those 5% of the time rare conditions, they don't fail as well.@@spanishprisoner
Always wanted to get 200 f/2 but it's super heavy and impractical for some use.. Getting the Plena for my Z9, smaller size, great optics, same if not better bokeh to the 200 f/2, almost there with compressing subjects and backgrounds..
The 200 f2 still stands out as a lens with its own look with it's airy smoothness. Two completely different looks in my opinion. The 135s are incredibly sharp whereas the 200 f2 (Nikon anyway) is more than sharp enough but has that smooth look still. Both are excellent tools, but different in my opinion.
Jump ship mate. Fuji already lost its way. Even Nikon zf has more innovation, likr for manual shooting, than Fuji's latest. Fuji is just playing catch up to others' spec+lens, relies heavily to xtrans and film sim.
I suspect the Plena would effortlessly cover the GFX format with that vignetting figure on full frame. Of course, I wish Nikon would make a medium format around the 100mp sensor that would accommodate Z lenses through an adaptor.
Heck Z mount is big enough they could probably just put a 44x33 sensor in there and be good to go. I suspect several if not most of their new Z lenses would cover it pretty well. At the very least, it would give you the option of using any aspect ratio portrait or landscape and still using the whole image circle.
@@seth094978 I am sure most full frame lenses can cover most of this format if not all of it. For example, the Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 28 1.4, 40 1.4, 50 1.4 85 1.8, are all lenses that cover the GFX. I don't see why mirrorless wouldn't cover it as well. Most important, the more you go outside the 35mm sensor, the more obvious the character of the lens becomes, because vignetting becomes more pronounced, the field curvature as well, so this is exactly what some photographers are actually looking for, including me, while still retain good sharpness most of the field. So, win win.
I've paired the Sony 135 and 55 1.8's on my two A9s for the past 4 years now, mostly for kids and Family portraits, and neither the cameras or lenses miss a beat. I'm sure the Canon and Nikon are just as good though. You really can't go wrong with today's mirror-less systems, as long as they're in your budget
The Plena is an optical masterpiece. Nikon is finally taking advantage of the superior Z mount (shortest flange distance and widest throat diameter). This lens is the first of many to come, I suspect, that will be in a league of their own that the other manufacturers will not be able to match unless they change their mounts. Nikon is back to their roots of being an optics company - no doubt they can make the best lenses when they want to - its been their core business for 100 years. -PD
No doubt the Plena is a masterpiece. However, I doubt that the small geometric advantage of the Z-mount is an important factor. The geometry can be an advantage with wide-angle lenses, but there is not much of an advantage at standard and telephoto focal ranges.
I have the Sony 135mm for a few years now and it's one of my favorite lenses I have. Never fails me even wide open, even on fast moving subjects coming towards me. Tack sharp on Sony A7RV
@@PH61a I totally agree. Added to this all of Sony's recent GM and G lenses have been superb. No need to get blown around by individual reviews for cameras and lenses - I'm very happy on E mount
I like the format and concept of this video. I'd be quite interested to see the 50mm 1.8s tested. Not a trio of sexy lenses, but a comparison of these bread and butter lenses could be interesting.
Hard to beat a 135mm prime. All of these lenses are great and this test demonstrates how finely tuned each of these lenses really are. Canon’s coatings are both aggravating at times, but can be ethereal when used to the photographer’s advantage. The Canon used in backlit portraits can look truly spectacular and is a benefit or compromise (depending on how you look at it) for not having that sterile, perfection that can come with some lenses.
Great work guys. I have the Sony 135 and my copy is simply the sharpest lens I have ever used over a long lifetime of photography. All these lenses seem pretty fantastic though whatever system you use.
I’ve had a great time using my Samyang 135 1.8, so I have almost none of the desire to buy the Sony GM. I know the GM is built much better but $699 for that Samyang was such a deal!
Oh they are plenty of bad primes. Low contrast wide open, poor sharpness out of center, bad flare, a lot of LoCa. I mean for some portrait use it was good enough but compared to any modern lens they are poor.
Most of their apertures weren't quite this wide though... the Pentax Super Takumar 135 I have is a pretty neat lens with almost 3 dimensional rendering, but it's also F2.5, and it does have LOCA. I think there was a 1.8 but it was very rare and very expensive.
Hopefully Sigma will release a 135/1.8 DG DN soon, and Viltrox is rumored to have a 135/1.8 almost ready for release. Once those are out it would be great to revisit this comparison but add in the Sigma, Viltrox, and of course the already existing Samyang 135/1.8. See how the 3rd party lenses stack up against the 1st party options.
@@edwardnoble9897 Might be possible. The old Sigma 105/1.4 was a massive 1.6kg but the Nikkor was 985g. A modern Sigma DG DN version at around 1kg could happen.
@@edwardnoble9897 yes so true I am now 66 almost 67 and muscles a lot less but even after a shoot no pain no gain .yes a dream lens would be for me A sigma 105 mm F1.2 but for the Z mount when Nikon accepts Sigma to make that one !
Great! Love them all, but have been enjoying the Plena first hand (since I don’t have the other mounts, haha). Always like your reviews and comparisons!
As a multiple system user myself I consider the the 135 Plena along with the 85 F1.2 and 600 PF is in fact one of the reason to own a Nikon mirrorless. and of course there is the Noct also.
I'll wait and see what the canon R5 mk2 has to offer but I think I'll go with nikon as a regular hybrid camera. They really nailed their lens lineup this far. I really want to try sony and nikon just to compare. So far canon RF has blown me away compared to old dslr cameras. The fullframe era is like switching to fiber internet or a fast m.2 SSD from an old HDD.
Canon EF 135mm f2L for me. I use it still even with my Sony camera via MC11 adapter. Love the look of that lens and seeing I paid $600 CAD for it, bargain!
Talk about bargain, I also have a manual focus Samyang 135 F2...... but I won't fool myself the Samyang is just as good as the Nikon 135 Plena though. LOL.
I would have liked to know more about the AF speed and accuracy. For a 135mm especially, it is used for action shots, like shots of dogs running towards the camera. Since I have used it, I know that the Sony 135 f1.8 GM is very fast and accurate. The Plenta seemed pretty impressive here
I'll stick with the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and Sigma fp L + 90mm f2.8 in APS-C/crop mode (pretty much how I use the fp L a majority of the time, still get 25-26mp of great image quality and lesser impact on the slower readout that doesn't bother me anyway). I'm a travelling photographer that focuses a lot on lifestyle portraits, mostly in rural areas/villages, and then a lot of time in East/Southeast Asia. I've had the chance to use both the Nikon 135mm f1.8 and the Sony 135mm f1.8. I stopped using both less than an hour in because they failed at giving me what I needed for the job. That is to say, I need a lens that has the reach to let me capture an intimate shot without standing out too much and destroying the moment with someone staring at a massive lens. I immediately noticed a difference when I went back to my E-M5.iii+75mm f1.8 and fp L+90mm f2.8. I blended back into the background as much as a foreigner can and was able to get natural shots again. That's 150mm reach at f1.8 of light or 135mm of reach with f2.8 worth of light, both of which have a good enough depth of field (a 75mm at f1.8 is shallow, same with a 90mm at f2.8, crop factor doesn't change that, it just pushes in changing the reach, changing the distance you stand from the subject, and changes compression due to that distance change). That isn't to say they're bad lenses, they're amazing. It's just for me, they're not the right tools for the job. The advantages of being able to stand out less and just the weight/size difference when I'm walking/hiking mile after mile daily in rural areas, makes any loss in image quality that no one has ever noticed fine. I'll try the Panasonic 100mm f2.8 with my fp L APS-C mode setup, but the difference in size and losing an aperture ring will have to be beaten by 15mm of reach.
Yeah the 75/1.8 is a fantastic lens. It is pretty much the only reason I have considered upgrading my E-M5ii instead of jumping ship to Fuji or something.
I recently purchased the Nikon Plena and it is a truly fabulous lens. Its only weakness is that it is rather large (especially with the long hood) and somewhat heavy, although it balances pretty well on the Z9 body. For a lighter setup, I do have the Zeiss Batis 135 f2.8, which is much lighter and smaller, but just about as sharp with virtually no chromatic aberrations even in the most challenging lighting. Balances perfectly with the smaller Sony bodies (like A7Riii). The Batis 135 is also totally silent in operation, while the Plena has a faint whirring sound when racking through the full focus range (no whirring with short focus adjustments).
I’m a big fan of the Batis 135mm. Love the colors, contrast, rendering, size and weight of that lens. I’ve also used the Sony 135mm and I definitely thought it created magic but was just a bit heavy and big for my needs. I get plenty of satisfying background blur from the Batis at f/2.8.
It's a different beast. More than a stop slower and smaller and lighter. It's plenty expensive new though but can sometimes be had for a more reasonable sum second hand.
I second the Batis 135mm, yes it's not as fast (aperture) as these but it's lighter, has built-in stability and very sharp with plenty of background blur. As mentioned, it was/is expensive new but used can be had for reasonable money.
135mm is the lenght I keep going back to Vintage, for artistic looks. There are loads of sharp Sonnar designs. It is an easy optical formula, that ended up really well even during old times. I simply don't justify spending over 1K on a 135mm for that reason.
Hi guys, always love your work and appreciate the frigid temperatures right now might be limiting, but in this kind of comparison it would be great to see ‘actual use’ cases. Perhaps a ‘Jordan running face’ might be a great portrait session idea?
Since AF is usable on the entire field of view, I think you should focus on the corners when testing them. Field curvature matters if you shoot flat objects. For most situations, you want the lens to focus where the subject is and it's interesting to evaluate sharpness on all the field.
im so happy i went with nikon against what everybody always says, all i hear is nikon is a potatoe, just typical bashing but z6 and z8 are incredible i love them ill have them for a long time, im ordering the 135 noquestion.
Again Nikon killing it lately with their fantastic lenses. But as a Canon user, I’m very disappointed with the performance of its lens here. Canon L series glass used to be the benchmark of the industry. Not so much anymore it seems. While they also don’t allow for third party glass on their R mount either. I’ve lost a little faith in the brand that I’ve been using for much of the last 20 years I’m afraid.
Guess we learn all these brands can make nice lenses that work well almost looks like the release date has more effect. the GM is already in its 5th year and once they finally fix the worst of the GM's (85 now the 2470 is fixed in mk2) we could see a 135GM2 in 1 or 2 years.
I had the 135 f2 DC it was unusable for professional work! the fokus was not accurate and the focussing to slow… depending on what you shoot maybe a nice lens but for me at least it was way to slow and not reliable in quality, if I am doing more artsy stuff I use my Mamyia RZ anyway…
One more thing. I've had the Sony GM since it's release. The front filter holder with the filter ring grooves literally unsticks and falls off. Read many instances of this on line. There is no way to buy a part for it so it's a huge cost to fix it. This affects the lens hood and lens cap.
This makes be laugh because over on my channel I just did a vintage lens adaptation for the Nikon Zf video and the lens I ended up loving the most was the Konica 135mm F 3.5 from the 80s. Not nearly as nice of bokeh as the Plena but you can't win every time. LOL
I wonder. Nikon and Canon are still playing catch up with Sony on sensors. I keep hearing rumors that Nikon is working on its own sensors, but so far it's all vaporware. But Nikon has always had great glass, and some recent offerings sure fit this trend.
@@uncle0eric Nikon has been using Sony sensors for a long time and I'm not sure why they would stop now. Their success with the Z9 and Z8 show it's possible to build great cameras with sensors from the competition.
I never understood how ppl said canon has the best glass when I thought it was Nikon, they always had top notch high quality lens with excellent sharpness
It does make me wonder how these 3 lenses, would do against the Fujifilm 90mm f/2, which is of course going to lose but is a great lens. And the big daddy of DSLR 135mm lenses the 135mm f/2 APO Plannar, which is superb optically (even on my GFX100), but of course is a real plain to focus.
"Similar to f/3" ONLY in depth-of-field, NOT in terms of exposure, for which of course f/2 is f/2 regardless of platform. Fun fact: less DOF is NOT always better, and I appreciate the fact that my 90mm f/2 Fujinon gives me f/2 light-gathering power while still offering the bonus of keeping both eyes in focus on a portrait subject etc. Still, I think Chris made a good case for keeping this video simple and sticking to a heads-up comparison among three lenses with identical specs for the three most popular mounts.
I don't do Nikon, but can definitely appreciate that they went through the effort to eliminate the cats eye. Personally the football isn't pleasing to me. As a result on this lens it is good corner-to-corner and that's a dual benefit. They're all fantastic lenses though and it would be good to have any of them in the bag. We're just spoiled in the 2020s with such fantastic glass.
Another thing that Nikon got right with the Plena is the lack of vignetting. And I totally agree about not liking "football" high lights. Getting the lens to weigh exactly one plena is the icing on the cake. Way to go Nikon!
Nice roundup! A "value-note" regarding Nikon: 135 Plena is brand new and very expensive, a used Sigma 135 1.8 is a great option. And for the spared money you can add a used Nikon 105 1.4, used Nikon 85 1.4G, used Nikon 58 1.4G and a used Sigma/Tamron 35 1.4 for a combined price equal to the Plena alone (at least here in Norway). Downside: all lenses are adapted, but a greate range of very good primes for the same amount of money.
I know its apsc, but god damn the 90 f2 is legit one of the best lenses i have ever used, and ive used medium format fuji lenses. Its honestly amazing and definitely worth a test, i think you should review it again on a modern body like a xh2 and compare to the fullframes
Yeah it's not a great look for Canon but I recently heard something along the lines that they're opening things up starting with crop lenses@@lackoliver55
Would have still liked to have seen the Sigma 135 tested on each body through adapting it 🤣 Also, not totally true, the Sony 135 CAN be adapted onto the Nikon using the Megadap FE-NZ mkii adapter - not a perfect adapter but certainly useful if you run multiple bodies.
Hard to design a bad 135 I think. But what these comparisons should look at is everything they didn’t look at here. Which is the overall rendering and the in focus to out of focus transitions, and the related brightness in such areas.
I a hot the Z8 and the 85 1.2 vs Fuji xh2 and viltrox 75mm 1.2. The Nikon combination wins for portraits and the Fuji wins for sharpness. For a portrait shooter , the Nikon is no brainer .
![Eminem - Fuel (feat. JID) [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t5H_CewqpKA/mqdefault.jpg)
Amazing how the Plena weighs exactly one plena
Nikon engineers spent years to get a quality of lens they could put their name on while meeting the strict standards that the resultant lens shall weigh no more than a plena. Truly commendable.
@@lackoliver55 no wonder it is more expensive
The Canon EOS 135 f2 was a real classic - have Canon lost their edge ?
@@soumyonath911 Wrong! The Plena is officially recognised by the Système International (SI) as a unit of mass for photographic equipment.
Yeah I love how Nikon took the time and effort to make sure the Plena weighs exactly one plena and the Noct weights precisely one Noct.
The Plena is a dream lens for now. 135mm 1.8 is pure perfection. one day I will own it, along with Nikon 85mm 1.2
I wish I had a Nikon mirrorless just to experience the Plena!
I wish I had a Plena for my Nikon mirrorless just to experience the Plena!😄
I wish i have a camera money to experience a Plena
I used the plena for dog action shots on my Z8 and totally blown away by the consistency. The quality is outstanding and it so sharp it’s ridiculous really.
I bought the plena last week and although due to weather haven't been able to play with it too much outside, the photos I have taken surely make me happy!!
135mm really are a great focal length. My work horse is my 70-200/2.8 but when I take portraits of the animals at the zoo where I work I always end up at around 135mm. Even when I don't look at the zoom ring and just dial everything in as I look through th viewfinder, more often than not I usually end up at 135mm or very close to it.
It just *works* for portraits!
So glad to see Nikon really making an amazing comeback...they had me worried for a bit...now I've my eye on the Zf 😀
I’ve had the Zf since release. I haven’t had this much fun with a camera in a long time. I can’t see anything else being close in the price range.
Just got mine, a little early to say but the capabilities of the Xspeed 7 coupled with that sensor are producing amazing images, an instant winner for me.
Nikon's Z lenses were top class straight from the beginning. Not sure why you were worried.
Everyone's clickbaity "Nikon is going out of business!!!" videos aged like fine milk.
Up until a few years ago, their Balance Sheet indicated their trend line was “going out of business”…@@opalyankaBG
I didn’t think a lens could awe me more than my Nikon 50 1.2, but the Plena does. I’ve had for about a month now and it’s stunning.
now go to a dim lit room where the 1.2 was giving you, say an ISO of 2000, and set it at 1.8 and tell me how much you enjoy the Noise of an ISO 4000. :) glad you like the Plena, but comparing a 1.8 to a 1.2 is quite silly.
Hhhhhhhhmmmmm loving my 50 f1.2...but....
I bought the Plena and its drop jaw beautiful.
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll oh jeez. Think I don’t know that? What if 50 is too short? What if 135 is too long? Lenses for different situations my friend. And for modern cameras ISO 4000 is nothing. Expose properly and you’re fine.
Love my 50 f/1.2 as well. Still haven't pulled the trigger on a Plena, but I have a feeling I'll get there eventually.
Nikon killing it with the latest series of lenses. Impressive how good the Sony holds up still!
Nikon glass really is top notch, and I can't help but to think that it's because they're primarily an industrial optics company first and foremost. Nikon doesn't make as many products or rely on consumer cameras nearly as much as Sony or Canon. As a result of being an optics company I think that research and development carries over to their consumer glass. I've owned Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony cameras/glass, and they're all SUPER good these days... But something about Nikon glass just always gave me that extra quality. I like that they tend to be heavier, and I hope they don't cut corners to make them lighter. Use a monopod or tripod if the weight is a problem, but don't make worse glass for the sake of weight.
I have the Fujifilm 90mm. It’s amazing. Seeing the specular highlights on the Plena being so perfect, I may need to test it out on the 90. The 90 has a very pleasing bokeh. Great review.
yea finally the 135 battle... 135 are usually the best lenses any company can make..
very interesting video and comparison here.
I believe the Plena is also better in terms of vignetting compared to the other 2.
Thanx :) I am waiting for a better weather to play more with my Plena
For a hobbyist, the Samyang 135 f1.8 is an amazing value and without a doubt a must for Sony E-mount users
not just good value but also a great performer. The Samyang bokeh is rounder than Sony and it has probably less LOCA than all of these 3 lenses (or equal to the best). Only reason to use Sony is lens color match or autofocus speed (which is I think unrivalled). The Sony is supposed to have best central sharpness at infinity but beyond a certain level you care for things other than sharpness. Btw image stabilization is very useful on 135mm even with IBIS on the bodies (though too much will of course rob edge sharpness)
It doesn’t autofocus very well. Struggles in low light… compared to Sony lenses or even my Sigma art 85 dg dn in the same not too demanding settings. It really felt like it is Sony autofocus from 2016. I can’t use it at fashion shows or for fasted paced reportage.
God I love my Samyang 135mm f/1.8, got it on a prime day sale for like $600 bucks
I agree. I would never consider a Sanyang normally but I had sold my GM and needed a 135 for a job so bought the Samyang. Its actually sharper with nicer bokeh then the GM and thats saying something!
Hope it'll be available for Z mount soon.
As a Sony user myself, i can appreciate the Nikon 135mm as it looks to be the best out of all 3.
As a Nikon user I can appreciate the Plena too. I just can't afford it....
Yea. In my country. The plena cost double the 135gm.
Its costly. But its a good tool nonetheless. Its also the latest. But from the bokeh test. Altho its more round but it has the onion ring going on.
@@sgpork Yeah checked here too in netherlands the GM 1529 euro at the moment and the nikon 2999 euro.. That is just too much of a price gap.
@@scb2scb2 Such a huge difference only means one thing - GM II is on the way.
@@TsvetanVR Not really without rebait (that sony runs at times) its 1729 i paid 1899 when it was released 4+ years ago. The canon is 2369 and the nikon is 2999. The GM is just cheaper in europe. Now i am sure when sony updates it (next year?) it will become more in the price line of the canon sony has been upping the price on the GM2's.
Shooting some nice indoor basketball with the Plena!
135mm is my favorite focal length. I put my 135GM on my A7RV all the time and it never failed me once. Super love these
135mm was my favorite. Then I saw this mystical Canon 200mm EF 2.0 and its a god tier lens mounted on a Sony with EF mount adapter. Insanely expensive used.
@@vlcheish 200mm is a bit too much compression for me, still cool though
@@spanishprisoner capturing a bird suddenly flies away in front of you. My sigma 150-600 failed lots of times because the AF is just not fast enough.
I know what you are saying, I only mean those extreme situations, like unprepared, sudden operations. But that's what you pay for G Master's premium for, for those 5% of the time rare conditions, they don't fail as well.@@spanishprisoner
I agree, 135mm is my fav. I used to do 50, then 85, and now the 135GM. Its great.
All my best shots are with my Sony 135mm on the A7RIV, but I'm personally not a fan of cat-eye. Props to Nikon!
No one is a fan of the cat eye bokeh. There is no argument to the contrary. Many aspects about bokeh are subjective, but not this one.
What is a prop, and why does Nikon need some?
Always wanted to get 200 f/2 but it's super heavy and impractical for some use.. Getting the Plena for my Z9, smaller size, great optics, same if not better bokeh to the 200 f/2, almost there with compressing subjects and backgrounds..
The 200 f2 still stands out as a lens with its own look with it's airy smoothness. Two completely different looks in my opinion. The 135s are incredibly sharp whereas the 200 f2 (Nikon anyway) is more than sharp enough but has that smooth look still. Both are excellent tools, but different in my opinion.
The 200 is incomparable nothing can touch it .
more of these manufacturer comparison videos. would love to see 24-70, 70-200, prime lens comparisons!
Was waiting to hear the Plena weighs exactly 1 Plena. Was not disappointed.
Took a lot of work for Nikon make it weigh exactly one Plena. They always recognize that out of respect.
Sort of disappointed that they didnt said how much Nocts it weights. Oh well, not every measuring system have to be covered I guess...
I’m a Fuji shooter but I love watching these videos. The Nikon is stunning. Maybe someday…..
Jump ship mate. Fuji already lost its way. Even Nikon zf has more innovation, likr for manual shooting, than Fuji's latest. Fuji is just playing catch up to others' spec+lens, relies heavily to xtrans and film sim.
The XF 90mm f/2 is ridiculously good.
I suspect the Plena would effortlessly cover the GFX format with that vignetting figure on full frame. Of course, I wish Nikon would make a medium format around the 100mp sensor that would accommodate Z lenses through an adaptor.
Even better. A medium format with Z mount ruclips.net/video/M3UN8LHgnLY/видео.html
Heck Z mount is big enough they could probably just put a 44x33 sensor in there and be good to go. I suspect several if not most of their new Z lenses would cover it pretty well. At the very least, it would give you the option of using any aspect ratio portrait or landscape and still using the whole image circle.
@@seth094978 I am sure most full frame lenses can cover most of this format if not all of it. For example, the Tamron 35 1.8, Sigma 28 1.4, 40 1.4, 50 1.4 85 1.8, are all lenses that cover the GFX. I don't see why mirrorless wouldn't cover it as well. Most important, the more you go outside the 35mm sensor, the more obvious the character of the lens becomes, because vignetting becomes more pronounced, the field curvature as well, so this is exactly what some photographers are actually looking for, including me, while still retain good sharpness most of the field. So, win win.
The Samyang/Rokinon 135 1.8 is also insanely good aaaand mirrorless
Best mirrorless 135mm f1.8
@@Riskbreaker2009 I agree but not for action or sports (but much more than OK for portraits). Makes a perfect pair with 70-200 GM II
I've paired the Sony 135 and 55 1.8's on my two A9s for the past 4 years now, mostly for kids and Family portraits, and neither the cameras or lenses miss a beat. I'm sure the Canon and Nikon are just as good though. You really can't go wrong with today's mirror-less systems, as long as they're in your budget
The Plena is an optical masterpiece. Nikon is finally taking advantage of the superior Z mount (shortest flange distance and widest throat diameter). This lens is the first of many to come, I suspect, that will be in a league of their own that the other manufacturers will not be able to match unless they change their mounts. Nikon is back to their roots of being an optics company - no doubt they can make the best lenses when they want to - its been their core business for 100 years.
-PD
No doubt the Plena is a masterpiece. However, I doubt that the small geometric advantage of the Z-mount is an important factor. The geometry can be an advantage with wide-angle lenses, but there is not much of an advantage at standard and telephoto focal ranges.
Is it me or is there onion rings in the plena's specular highlights? Seriously.. onion rings in that price of a lens?
@@Zakna Haven't seen any in mine - maybe you have a bad copy :(
-PD
@@venietvideo The physics is undeniable - look of angle of incidence.
-PD
@@photographydiscourse1185you can clearly see it in the videos example
good video, but you did not compared the autofocus speed of this 3 lenses. i hope part 2 tomorrow
Just got the 135GM yesterday, waiting for the 24mm F1.2 to drop for Christmas
I have the Sony 135mm for a few years now and it's one of my favorite lenses I have. Never fails me even wide open, even on fast moving subjects coming towards me. Tack sharp on Sony A7RV
Got the 135GM last night and put it on A1 and took it to the grocery store...Holy crap this lens pairs perfectly with the 50GM
Still one of my 3 favourite lenses together with the f1.2 50GM and the f1.8 14GM.
@@PH61a I totally agree. Added to this all of Sony's recent GM and G lenses have been superb. No need to get blown around by individual reviews for cameras and lenses - I'm very happy on E mount
I like the format and concept of this video. I'd be quite interested to see the 50mm 1.8s tested. Not a trio of sexy lenses, but a comparison of these bread and butter lenses could be interesting.
Love this comparison, thank you guys! As great as always :)
Hard to beat a 135mm prime. All of these lenses are great and this test demonstrates how finely tuned each of these lenses really are. Canon’s coatings are both aggravating at times, but can be ethereal when used to the photographer’s advantage. The Canon used in backlit portraits can look truly spectacular and is a benefit or compromise (depending on how you look at it) for not having that sterile, perfection that can come with some lenses.
By far the most important feature of these lenses are how good they are shot wide open, in the center.
I have the 135GM for my Sony and absolutely love it! Such a gorgeous lens! Really cool to see how it compares to the brands
I totally agree!
Great work guys. I have the Sony 135 and my copy is simply the sharpest lens I have ever used over a long lifetime of photography. All these lenses seem pretty fantastic though whatever system you use.
So darn sharp that I have to tone it down in post-processing! When I go for a softer look on portraits, GM135 is just too sharp haha
Honestly any of these 3 lenses would be a great buy, they are all amazing pieces of glass.
I’ve had a great time using my Samyang 135 1.8, so I have almost none of the desire to buy the Sony GM. I know the GM is built much better but $699 for that Samyang was such a deal!
Same here, and I got mine the last Prime days when they had it for just $540.13!
@@trekkeruss i remember seeing that price and was so sad i bought it 2 months ago lol
Man, even going back to like 1960, it's hard to find a bad 135mm prime.
Oh they are plenty of bad primes. Low contrast wide open, poor sharpness out of center, bad flare, a lot of LoCa. I mean for some portrait use it was good enough but compared to any modern lens they are poor.
@@jan.tichavskyyep. I have a Tamron Adaptall BBAR 135mm 1.8 that is really poor, poor sharpness
Most of their apertures weren't quite this wide though... the Pentax Super Takumar 135 I have is a pretty neat lens with almost 3 dimensional rendering, but it's also F2.5, and it does have LOCA. I think there was a 1.8 but it was very rare and very expensive.
@@atarkus8❤❤❤ *PENTAX*
Hopefully Sigma will release a 135/1.8 DG DN soon, and Viltrox is rumored to have a 135/1.8 almost ready for release. Once those are out it would be great to revisit this comparison but add in the Sigma, Viltrox, and of course the already existing Samyang 135/1.8. See how the 3rd party lenses stack up against the 1st party options.
Totally agree and a 105/1.4 dg dn under 1kg
@@edwardnoble9897 Might be possible. The old Sigma 105/1.4 was a massive 1.6kg but the Nikkor was 985g. A modern Sigma DG DN version at around 1kg could happen.
@@edwardnoble9897 hi I own the Sigma 105mm F1.4 Art and more than happy oh btw still DSLR D800 shooting
@@edwardphilipmarianafzger9800 hey, it's a great lens. I would just like something lighter for mirrorless like they did with the 85mm dg dn
@@edwardnoble9897 yes so true I am now 66 almost 67 and muscles a lot less but even after a shoot no pain no gain .yes a dream lens would be for me A sigma 105 mm F1.2 but for the Z mount when Nikon accepts Sigma to make that one !
God I love the way Nikon renders images.
Get a room will ya. I don't need to see this kind of private interaction with camera
Great! Love them all, but have been enjoying the Plena first hand (since I don’t have the other mounts, haha). Always like your reviews and comparisons!
Great review as always ...
It looks like Nikon is inching back to the top ( cameras and lenses ... )
It has always been at the Top for 100Yrs
Samyang 135 1.8 is such a great lens. Wish that was tested against these.
As a multiple system user myself I consider the the 135 Plena along with the 85 F1.2 and 600 PF is in fact one of the reason to own a Nikon mirrorless. and of course there is the Noct also.
I love the portrait of Jordan with the string of lights. I think you should submit that to this weeks Portrait Live series with Tony and Chelsea
Do a review on the Viltrox 75mm and 27mm pro lenses
I love how Jordan has put his entire soul into the G9 II.
I see you showing off your Fractal Design build. 👌
I'll wait and see what the canon R5 mk2 has to offer but I think I'll go with nikon as a regular hybrid camera. They really nailed their lens lineup this far. I really want to try sony and nikon just to compare. So far canon RF has blown me away compared to old dslr cameras. The fullframe era is like switching to fiber internet or a fast m.2 SSD from an old HDD.
Canon EF 135mm f2L for me. I use it still even with my Sony camera via MC11 adapter. Love the look of that lens and seeing I paid $600 CAD for it, bargain!
Talk about bargain, I also have a manual focus Samyang 135 F2...... but I won't fool myself the Samyang is just as good as the Nikon 135 Plena though. LOL.
1:10 For nikon Z shooters it is useful to compare lenses across different mounts, because they can adapt the sony 135 if they don't like the nikon 135
I would have liked to know more about the AF speed and accuracy. For a 135mm especially, it is used for action shots, like shots of dogs running towards the camera. Since I have used it, I know that the Sony 135 f1.8 GM is very fast and accurate. The Plenta seemed pretty impressive here
I'll stick with the Olympus 75mm f1.8 and Sigma fp L + 90mm f2.8 in APS-C/crop mode (pretty much how I use the fp L a majority of the time, still get 25-26mp of great image quality and lesser impact on the slower readout that doesn't bother me anyway). I'm a travelling photographer that focuses a lot on lifestyle portraits, mostly in rural areas/villages, and then a lot of time in East/Southeast Asia. I've had the chance to use both the Nikon 135mm f1.8 and the Sony 135mm f1.8. I stopped using both less than an hour in because they failed at giving me what I needed for the job. That is to say, I need a lens that has the reach to let me capture an intimate shot without standing out too much and destroying the moment with someone staring at a massive lens. I immediately noticed a difference when I went back to my E-M5.iii+75mm f1.8 and fp L+90mm f2.8. I blended back into the background as much as a foreigner can and was able to get natural shots again. That's 150mm reach at f1.8 of light or 135mm of reach with f2.8 worth of light, both of which have a good enough depth of field (a 75mm at f1.8 is shallow, same with a 90mm at f2.8, crop factor doesn't change that, it just pushes in changing the reach, changing the distance you stand from the subject, and changes compression due to that distance change).
That isn't to say they're bad lenses, they're amazing. It's just for me, they're not the right tools for the job. The advantages of being able to stand out less and just the weight/size difference when I'm walking/hiking mile after mile daily in rural areas, makes any loss in image quality that no one has ever noticed fine. I'll try the Panasonic 100mm f2.8 with my fp L APS-C mode setup, but the difference in size and losing an aperture ring will have to be beaten by 15mm of reach.
Yeah the 75/1.8 is a fantastic lens. It is pretty much the only reason I have considered upgrading my E-M5ii instead of jumping ship to Fuji or something.
I recently purchased the Nikon Plena and it is a truly fabulous lens. Its only weakness is that it is rather large (especially with the long hood) and somewhat heavy, although it balances pretty well on the Z9 body. For a lighter setup, I do have the Zeiss Batis 135 f2.8, which is much lighter and smaller, but just about as sharp with virtually no chromatic aberrations even in the most challenging lighting. Balances perfectly with the smaller Sony bodies (like A7Riii). The Batis 135 is also totally silent in operation, while the Plena has a faint whirring sound when racking through the full focus range (no whirring with short focus adjustments).
stm motor👎
Nikons Bokeh blows the competition out of the water. Amazing. But costly.
But lookit all the pretty onion rings in the specular highlights.. lol
At least they have round rings at all instead of flares and cat eyes lol
@@Shentao83 cats eyes fine. Onion rings horrible
@@Zakna Good for you 🤣
I’m a big fan of the Batis 135mm. Love the colors, contrast, rendering, size and weight of that lens. I’ve also used the Sony 135mm and I definitely thought it created magic but was just a bit heavy and big for my needs. I get plenty of satisfying background blur from the Batis at f/2.8.
It's a different beast. More than a stop slower and smaller and lighter. It's plenty expensive new though but can sometimes be had for a more reasonable sum second hand.
I second the Batis 135mm, yes it's not as fast (aperture) as these but it's lighter, has built-in stability and very sharp with plenty of background blur. As mentioned, it was/is expensive new but used can be had for reasonable money.
Masterful evaluation! Thanks!!
Great video, but I would like to see a Samyang included in these shootouts. Their lenses have really impressed me.
135mm is the lenght I keep going back to Vintage, for artistic looks. There are loads of sharp Sonnar designs. It is an easy optical formula, that ended up really well even during old times. I simply don't justify spending over 1K on a 135mm for that reason.
For me, real world images and portraits with the Canon are Godsmacking good. Astounding…whatever floats your boat…😊
Hi guys, always love your work and appreciate the frigid temperatures right now might be limiting, but in this kind of comparison it would be great to see ‘actual use’ cases. Perhaps a ‘Jordan running face’ might be a great portrait session idea?
Love the Plena, on my list!
One day I will get a Z8 just for the Plena and the Noct.
Since AF is usable on the entire field of view, I think you should focus on the corners when testing them. Field curvature matters if you shoot flat objects. For most situations, you want the lens to focus where the subject is and it's interesting to evaluate sharpness on all the field.
im so happy i went with nikon against what everybody always says, all i hear is nikon is a potatoe, just typical bashing but z6 and z8 are incredible i love them ill have them for a long time, im ordering the 135 noquestion.
Again Nikon killing it lately with their fantastic lenses. But as a Canon user, I’m very disappointed with the performance of its lens here. Canon L series glass used to be the benchmark of the industry. Not so much anymore it seems. While they also don’t allow for third party glass on their R mount either. I’ve lost a little faith in the brand that I’ve been using for much of the last 20 years I’m afraid.
What are you talking about lmfao? The canon one is near perfect.
@@adamhayek7889 the lens is good, but not as good as the Nikon. It’s not the benchmark lens of its class, like most L series glass used to be.
Guess we learn all these brands can make nice lenses that work well almost looks like the release date has more effect. the GM is already in its 5th year and once they finally fix the worst of the GM's (85 now the 2470 is fixed in mk2) we could see a 135GM2 in 1 or 2 years.
AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D walks in, sits down, says "that's cute, you had a little contest for runner up to the bokeh king." ;)
I had the 135 f2 DC it was unusable for professional work! the fokus was not accurate and the focussing to slow… depending on what you shoot maybe a nice lens but for me at least it was way to slow and not reliable in quality, if I am doing more artsy stuff I use my Mamyia RZ anyway…
*the 105 f1.4 G on the other hand was really really good, but now I switched to Canon mirrorless :)
Please do that for 50 and 85 too. Also maybe you guys should include autofocus test. Regardless. Great stuff, thank you
One more thing. I've had the Sony GM since it's release. The front filter holder with the filter ring grooves literally unsticks and falls off. Read many instances of this on line. There is no way to buy a part for it so it's a huge cost to fix it. This affects the lens hood and lens cap.
if you don't use AF, the zeiss Milvus is impressive !
It is!
This makes be laugh because over on my channel I just did a vintage lens adaptation for the Nikon Zf video and the lens I ended up loving the most was the Konica 135mm F 3.5 from the 80s. Not nearly as nice of bokeh as the Plena but you can't win every time. LOL
Excellent focal length. 135mm is pretty much excellent regardless of the brand.
Another exceptional review and have a great 2024.
Nikon will be the king again, they have the best lens options overall, they just need to launch more midrange cameras and lower end too.
I wonder. Nikon and Canon are still playing catch up with Sony on sensors. I keep hearing rumors that Nikon is working on its own sensors, but so far it's all vaporware. But Nikon has always had great glass, and some recent offerings sure fit this trend.
@@uncle0eric Nikon has been using Sony sensors for a long time and I'm not sure why they would stop now. Their success with the Z9 and Z8 show it's possible to build great cameras with sensors from the competition.
I never understood how ppl said canon has the best glass when I thought it was Nikon, they always had top notch high quality lens with excellent sharpness
Please do another video for 50 mm lenses (1.8 and 1.4) 🙏
My experience in Sony G master’s filter thread come out twice. That’s negative
I dropped mine very hard on concrete and only then the filter thread came out. Super glued it and it's perfect again.
@@jeroenvdw mine never dropped but it came out twice and it covered under warranty. That’s is bad for Sony
@@pematamang9268 that sucks dude
It does make me wonder how these 3 lenses, would do against the Fujifilm 90mm f/2, which is of course going to lose but is a great lens. And the big daddy of DSLR 135mm lenses the 135mm f/2 APO Plannar, which is superb optically (even on my GFX100), but of course is a real plain to focus.
Apo Sonnar
The Fuji 90 would kick arse and 2nd hand it’s an amazing lens for a fabulous price - Canon / Nikon and Leica users I know good glass when I use it 😎
The case is that shooting wide open the picture will be similar to 135mm F3 at full frame. So, it is not a fair comparison.
75 f1.2 Viltrox >>> 90 f2 Fuji
"Similar to f/3" ONLY in depth-of-field, NOT in terms of exposure, for which of course f/2 is f/2 regardless of platform. Fun fact: less DOF is NOT always better, and I appreciate the fact that my 90mm f/2 Fujinon gives me f/2 light-gathering power while still offering the bonus of keeping both eyes in focus on a portrait subject etc. Still, I think Chris made a good case for keeping this video simple and sticking to a heads-up comparison among three lenses with identical specs for the three most popular mounts.
Samyang 135mm f/1.8, amazing!
I don't do Nikon, but can definitely appreciate that they went through the effort to eliminate the cats eye. Personally the football isn't pleasing to me. As a result on this lens it is good corner-to-corner and that's a dual benefit. They're all fantastic lenses though and it would be good to have any of them in the bag. We're just spoiled in the 2020s with such fantastic glass.
Another thing that Nikon got right with the Plena is the lack of vignetting. And I totally agree about not liking "football" high lights. Getting the lens to weigh exactly one plena is the icing on the cake. Way to go Nikon!
Nice roundup! A "value-note" regarding Nikon: 135 Plena is brand new and very expensive, a used Sigma 135 1.8 is a great option. And for the spared money you can add a used Nikon 105 1.4, used Nikon 85 1.4G, used Nikon 58 1.4G and a used Sigma/Tamron 35 1.4 for a combined price equal to the Plena alone (at least here in Norway). Downside: all lenses are adapted, but a greate range of very good primes for the same amount of money.
Good observation!
Yes, but they weight 2.65 Plenas (if you choose the Sigma).
I know its apsc, but god damn the 90 f2 is legit one of the best lenses i have ever used, and ive used medium format fuji lenses. Its honestly amazing and definitely worth a test, i think you should review it again on a modern body like a xh2 and compare to the fullframes
Would have liked to see how the samyang compares to them.
Samyang is better becuase you can get in whatever mount you're currently shooting in. lol
@@drew_hewitt as long as you don't need it in Canon RF or Nikon Z. Then yes. All of them.
lol true just a matter of time though@@lackoliver55
@@drew_hewitt We can dream. We all know Samyang has the mounts sitting around ready to go. Just waiting for Canon to stop being the fun police.
Yeah it's not a great look for Canon but I recently heard something along the lines that they're opening things up starting with crop lenses@@lackoliver55
Samyang AF 135mm f18 FE
Lighter
No distorsion
Lower T stops
CHEAPER
Maybe slower than the GM
canon lens might be struggling from low corner sharpness because of the additional image stabilizing lens element in work
Would have still liked to have seen the Sigma 135 tested on each body through adapting it 🤣
Also, not totally true, the Sony 135 CAN be adapted onto the Nikon using the Megadap FE-NZ mkii adapter - not a perfect adapter but certainly useful if you run multiple bodies.
Did I miss the review for the New Pentax Camera?
ruclips.net/video/I4ZpLIUzjPw/видео.htmlfeature=shared
Hard to design a bad 135 I think.
But what these comparisons should look at is everything they didn’t look at here. Which is the overall rendering and the in focus to out of focus transitions, and the related brightness in such areas.
Samyang 135 1.8 where?
My favourite is Samyang's 135!
Bokeh on the canon in the LoCa shot is quite jarring in my opinion
Could you do the exact same test with the 85mm lenses? But to be honest I am just interested in a comparison between the Nikkor 85 1.2 and the Plena
I would love to see comparison between Z8 + Plena and Fuji XF90mm + XT5/XH2
I a hot the Z8 and the 85 1.2 vs Fuji xh2 and viltrox 75mm 1.2. The Nikon combination wins for portraits and the Fuji wins for sharpness. For a portrait shooter , the Nikon is no brainer .
what about samyang 135mm f1.8?
I can’t believe that this video actually exists because I was just trying to figure out how each of them are by watching separate videos 😂😂😂😂
What about the samyang 135mm f1.8
Yes a great lens les vignette less distortion less weight abd cheaper
“Threaten each others mothers” 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
How about the Samyang 135mm? 🤔