Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2015 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D

  
 
agelessphotog
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


jmai86 wrote:
I was referring to the comparison between Canon and Nikon 135s. The Canon 135L is superior to me over the Nikon 135D.

You can also look up samples on Flickr group photo pools for pretty much any lens.
https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikon180mm/pool/

I wouldn't take online samples as truth though - a lot of them can be post processed quite a bit, some better than others, and so your comparison may be skewed. The best way to compare would be to try them both out for yourself as I have and form your own opinion. Everyone's taste and preference will be different. For
...Show more

I realize with it comes to CA the Canon is much better, has a lot less CA. Other than that though doesn't the DC actually have more buttery bokeh? sharpness is about the same. I would like to see any 135 DC samples you took and compare them to mine, i'm guessing you may have had front focus issues like many did if you were not happy with the results. When I first bought this lens I hated it and was ready to sell it. Sent it back to Nikon to get it adjusted, and still had to do AF fine tune adjust. Now it is my favorite lens. Here are some charts showing sharpness from both lenses, they are almost identical. Photozone.de


Capture by Renee Crabtree, on Flickr

And a photo I took with my 135 DC cropped at 100%

crop by Renee Crabtree, on Flickr




Nov 08, 2015 at 09:51 AM
jmai86
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


agelessphotog wrote:
I realize with it comes to CA the Canon is much better, has a lot less CA. Other than that though doesn't the DC actually have more buttery bokeh? sharpness is about the same. I would like to see any 135 DC samples you took and compare them to mine, i'm guessing you may have had front focus issues like many did if you were not happy with the results. When I first bought this lens I hated it and was ready to sell it. Sent it back to Nikon to get it adjusted, and still had to do AF
...Show more

Don't get me wrong the 135DC is fantastic and many love it, but for me there are many other factors that led me to leave it. Part of it was the shock from coming straight from the Canon 135L. I much preferred the AF speed, handling, and image characteristics of the 135L. After awhile I discovered the 180 despite its slower AF. Sharpness is a very small part of what I look for in a lens, and I absolutely give 0 bearing to test charts as I believe they are technical exercises that don't really relate to real world practical use. Some of my best work is from low rated DXO mark lenses. One thing I can't stand is CA however, sure you can fix it in post but I prefer to spend as little time in post if possible.

This thread is more about the 135 vs 180 however so I won't clutter it with more samples. I don't have any 135DC samples uploaded to my website anyway. But really, online samples are usually a poor indicator of the value of a lens to you and how it fits into your workflow, so I tend to avoid posting samples to begin with.

But regardless, if you love the 135DC or any other lens, don't let anyone or any test chart tell you otherwise! Just enjoy it!



Nov 08, 2015 at 02:19 PM
Creasserys
Offline

[X]
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


There is no difficulty focusing with the 135DC. Or with the 180/2.8D either.

Both of these lenses change focal length along their focus range. At closest focus, the 135 is about 117mm, and the 180 is about 155mm. This is one reason why they are good portrait lenses.

They are both extraordinary lenses in terms of rendering and overall sharpness. By f/3.2, the 135 is pixel sharp across the frame on my D800. Both are very good at f/2.8. I tend to avoid the 135 at f/2, which is often not sharp, but only has a depth-of-field of a few mm anyway. The bokeh on the 135 is of the very highest order, with the 180 not far behind.

The 180 is most suited for frame-busting portraits, and works at a comfortable shooting distance.

Before long, there might be a 135/1.8g replacement for the 135DC, but expect it to be very expensive. There is no reason not to have the DC now. Really, it focuses just fine.



Nov 29, 2015 at 07:37 PM
mannyherr
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


Aubree by manny herreria, on Flickr

180 , and 85 are my got to for portraits with the 180 getting more and more work . I really do love it .

Above was with 180



Dec 03, 2015 at 10:21 PM
Joseph.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


ocir wrote:
Given both lenses have almost identical prices. Which one would you prefer if you do mostly family photoshoots?


My preference these days would be the Nikkor 135 f/2 AIS. It has very similar rendering to the 200 f/2 VR without the bulk. I've actually compared the 200 f/2 VR vs the 135 f/2 AIS below (pics 1 & 2)

I like the 180 2.8 AIS for portraits too, but for some reason I feel that the 135/2 AIS has more punch and smoother rendering. Pic # 3 is from the 180 2.8.

Pics 4 & 5 are from the 135/2 AIS, and shows why I really love this lens for kids portraiture. I shoot 100% manual focus these days, and fast kids are no match against my left hand






200 f/2 VR







135 f/2 AIS







180 2.8 ED AIS







135 f/2 AIS







135 f/2 AIS




Dec 04, 2015 at 12:32 AM
benjikan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


agelessphotog wrote:
I would love to see some samples, I am pretty floored with my 135 DC but now am thinking maybe looking at the 180D. Could you post any?


All over my website:

This was for ELLE, all shot wide open using the Nikon AFD 1980 f/2.8 lens at f/2.8

http://benjaminkanarekblog.com/2014/10/23/vika-falileeva-comfort-zone-elle-vietnam-benjamin-kanarek/

and all over my website: www.benjaminkanarek.com





Jun 07, 2016 at 04:45 PM
benjikan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


This is shot with the Nikon DC 135 f/2.0 at f/2.0




Jun 07, 2016 at 04:47 PM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


Neither one as a 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 zoom is going to work much better. When you have a family take the time to go to a location to be photographed you want to get as many different shots as possible as quickly as possible and the only way to do that is with a zoom lens.

For 3 or more people the 24-70mm is a better choice as it can be used both indoors and outside and brings in the surroundings of the family which is usually very important.



Jun 09, 2016 at 05:09 PM
RexGig0
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Nikon 180 2.8D Vs. Nikon 135 2D


ocir wrote:
Given both lenses have almost identical prices. Which one would you prefer if you do mostly family photoshoots?


Family photo-shoots? Nikkor 180/2.8D, and my EF 135L. Two different-brand cameras, of course. (My 135L, alone, would keep me with one foot in the Canon camp, with the 100/2.8L Macro IS being another reason.)

To be clear, this is personal family photo-shoots, not paid photo-shoots. (My only "paid" photo work is crime scene/evidentiary/forensic images, for official purposes, in the course of my larger duties as a public servant. 100mm is the longest I need for that, for close-range/macro.)

Actually, in a moment of weakness, I traded my Nikkor 180/2.8D, to help acquire a fortuitously-available pre-owned Zeiss lens. While I thought that my 135L, with an a Extender 1.4x III, could effectively substitute for the 180/2.8D, I find myself sorely missing the slim, light Nikkor, and have been have been frequently checking the pre-owned Nikkors at a large local pro-oriented camera store, hoping to find a pristine 180/2.8D. If without luck, there, I may order one in the not-so-distant future.

Another large obstacle to my trying a Nikkor 135/2 DC, is that I have Zeiss 2/135 APO Sonnar ZF.2 and ZE lenses, though I am not sure now many families would sit still enough for manual focus. While very precise and easy to use, the long focus ring throw distance of these Zeiss lenses might not be the best for moving subjects.

Final thought: As elkhornsun, and perhaps others, have indicated, a 70-200/2.8 might be a best choice for families, especially families with active children, who might not remain very still, perhaps requiring the photographer to be flexible in shooting positions. I was, regretfully, not a photographer when my son was young, but he would, most certainly, have been a challenge to photograph. I will be able to try this again, soon, if everything goes well, as my first grandchild is due at the end of this year. (Plus, my son's extended family-in-law has plenty of young, active children, whom I met at the wedding, at which time I was glad to have my fast-focusing Nikkor 24-70/2.8G with me.)



Jun 13, 2016 at 03:59 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.