New Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 announced!
/forum/topic/1146723/0

1
       2       3       end

Fred Miranda
Registered: Dec 31, 2001
Total Posts: 17990
Country: United States

Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2/135
Carl Zeiss is presenting the new Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 during Photokina later this month.

"Carl Zeiss' longest medium telephoto lens in the range of high-quality SLR lenses. With the Apo Sonnar T* 2/135, the company is substantially extending the creative possibilities available in the medium tele range.

The Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 can capture subjects up to a scale of 1:4. It has been built based on Carl Zeiss's proven floating elements design. A special variable arrangement of the lens elements delivers excellent images over the entire focusing range, from 0.8 meters to infinity.

The Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 is equipped with an all-metal barrel, which enables long-lasting use with high-quality results. It will be available with F bayonet (ZF.2) and with EF bayonet (ZE)"

The price is expected to be $2,000 (US Dollars)

Read the entire press release



Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33650
Country: Thailand

Great news, this lens is what a lot of people have been waiting for



buggz2k
Registered: Mar 10, 2010
Total Posts: 1718
Country: United States

Awesome!
I had a bunch of stuff stolen earlier, now rethinking my C/Y, and others, repurchase plans.



dhphoto
Registered: Feb 16, 2003
Total Posts: 10034
Country: United Kingdom

I can understand the interest in non-Canon mounts, but is this really going to best the 135L ?



Lasse Eriksson
Registered: Sep 13, 2006
Total Posts: 2773
Country: Sweden

dhphoto wrote:
I can understand the interest in non-Canon mounts, but is this really going to best the 135L ?


Why not ? Many of the the other ZE lenses are better than the Canon version if you don't mind MF



Rajan Parrikar
Registered: Sep 09, 2006
Total Posts: 1398
Country: United States

dhphoto wrote:
I can understand the interest in non-Canon mounts, but is this really going to best the 135L ?



Most likely yes, if the design is anything like the ZE 100 f/2 MP. The 135L is a magnificent lens, especially for portraits. But I have found it wanting in landscape work with not as good local contrast. This is easily evident when I compare files from the 135L with those obtained from ZE100 MP.



AGeoJO
Registered: Jul 08, 2003
Total Posts: 12099
Country: United States

Not knowing and only assuming the actual price, it seems that it would be hard for that lens to compete with the 135mmL at approximately double the price and no AF.



Rajan Parrikar
Registered: Sep 09, 2006
Total Posts: 1398
Country: United States

dhphoto wrote:
AGeoJO wrote:
Not knowing and only assuming the actual price, it seems that it would be hard for that lens to compete with the 135mmL at approximately double the price and no AF.


Exactly my point. All of a sudden one of the greatest Canon lenses ever made is demoted to a bit-part by a Zeiss offering?


What point is that? Zeiss seldom competes with Canon on price. Hardly news.

Is the post that "demoted" the 135L visible to the naked eye? Nobody as yet knows the Zeiss 135 performance.



helimat
Registered: Apr 06, 2008
Total Posts: 3748
Country: Canada

AGeoJO wrote:
Not knowing and only assuming the actual price, it seems that it would be hard for that lens to compete with the 135mmL at approximately double the price and no AF.


Might not be double. And I don't think Zeiss intends to compete for the moderate telephoto market, rather just supply a niche market.



thedigitalbean
Registered: Jun 24, 2005
Total Posts: 6247
Country: United States

AGeoJO wrote:
Not knowing and only assuming the actual price, it seems that it would be hard for that lens to compete with the 135mmL at approximately double the price and no AF.


I thought the price was announced at $2000 elsewhere, don't remember which site.



lovinglife
Registered: Mar 11, 2008
Total Posts: 2951
Country: United States

Wonder how this compares to the 100/MP...Besides the focal length difference, of course.



a.RodriguezPix
Registered: Oct 31, 2011
Total Posts: 2237
Country: United States

I wonder if I should sell some gold, eh, no, not this time! I will wait however when its frustratedly ebay'ed!



AGeoJO
Registered: Jul 08, 2003
Total Posts: 12099
Country: United States

The way I look at it is as follows - a lot of folks consider the 135mmL as their entry to the "L-lens realm" because of the affordable price and its stellar reputation, both optically and mechanically (read: AF speed/accuracy). After a while they realize that it is not the easiest lens to use. Your focusing technique has to be accurate, at least when using wide open aperture, which the lens is fully capable of generating great images, and the lack of IS, resulting in blurred images due to camera/lens combo.

I would be bet almost anything that the Zeiss lens is an awesome optical marvel but the lack of AF (and the same lack of IS as the Canon lens "suffers" from), would turn off a lot people looking into a 135mm f/2.0 from considering the Zeiss. We are not even talking about the price difference here. Why would Zeiss introduce a lens in that very tight market segment with similar specs is beyond me. I know that they have a 135mm f/1.8 in Sony mount. The speed difference would make it more attractive. I had the Zeiss 100mm f/2.0 Makro and it was a wonderful lens. It doesn't have AF, (hybrid) IS and it doesn't go to 1:1 macro range but at least, it is faster than the Canon counterpart. That faster speed was what attracted me. Except for the Apo designation, the Zeiss doesn't seem to offer any advantage. Sorry, and I know a lot folks may not agree with me and that's fine. Please note that I would not say that it may suffer the possibility of DOA, that would be too harsh but.... . Oh, well.



jopeme
Registered: Mar 19, 2009
Total Posts: 64
Country: Spain

Surely it is going to best the Canon 135mm f/2L in terms of IQ

BUT... and I love Zeiss ( I have the 21ZE and 1.4/35ZE)

very big but...

How do you shoot portraits? This is a portrait lens, and AF is a MUST. Are you going to tell your model to keep their eyes wide open so that you may manually focus on the eyeballs veins?

Sure it is possible, but I cannot think of a more sophisticated means of being told to f*** *p.

Don't understand the concept.



Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33650
Country: Thailand

jopeme wrote:
Surely it is going to best the Canon 135mm f/2L in terms of IQ

BUT... and I love Zeiss ( I have the 21ZE and 1.4/35ZE)

very big but...

How do you shoot portraits? This is a portrait lens, and AF is a MUST. Are you going to tell your model to keep their eyes wide open so that you may manually focus on the eyeballs veins?

Sure it is possible, but I cannot think of a more sophisticated means of being told to f*** *p.

Don't understand the concept.


Portraits is only one of the many things you can shoot with it. And if AF is a must!! How could everybody shot portrait before? I have many ZE lenses that I already use for portrait shooting. And they are MF



Rajan Parrikar
Registered: Sep 09, 2006
Total Posts: 1398
Country: United States

jopeme wrote:
Surely it is going to best the Canon 135mm f/2L in terms of IQ

BUT... and I love Zeiss ( I have the 21ZE and 1.4/35ZE)

very big but...

How do you shoot portraits? This is a portrait lens, and AF is a MUST. Are you going to tell your model to keep their eyes wide open so that you may manually focus on the eyeballs veins?


You need skill which comes with practice, lots of practice. I routinely shoot portraits with the ZE100 MP.



jopeme
Registered: Mar 19, 2009
Total Posts: 64
Country: Spain

jopeme wrote:
Surely it is going to best the Canon 135mm f/2L in terms of IQ

BUT... and I love Zeiss ( I have the 21ZE and 1.4/35ZE)

very big but...

How do you shoot portraits? This is a portrait lens, and AF is a MUST. Are you going to tell your model to keep their eyes wide open so that you may manually focus on the eyeballs veins?

Sure it is possible, but I cannot think of a more sophisticated means of being told to f*** *p.

Don't understand the concept.

Lars Johnsson wrote:
Portraits is only one of the many things you can shoot with it.
Sure...

And if AF is a must!!
For landscape work MF is far more recommendable

How could everybody shot portrait before?
With the only means they had. Do you still go to NY on a vessel or do you take a plane?

I have many ZE lenses that I already use for portrait shooting. And they are MF

I love them all!!! Zeiss is unique!

All the best



Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33650
Country: Thailand

And I often shoot portrait with ZE 35/1,4--50/1,4--50/2--85/1,4 & 100/2 So I can't understand why it should be impossible with the new 135



jopeme
Registered: Mar 19, 2009
Total Posts: 64
Country: Spain

This lens is more option, so I welcome it with open arms.

Let's be honest. Going Zeiss is all about quality and unique look. When I look at my files, I can easily reconcile to MF

BUT...
to let the magic happen, critical focus is very important. As we use greater a distance from the subject, and a wider focal lens...., things become easier

Zeiss 35mm at f/2 ( I think)

img_2192 por jopeme, en Flickr

Zeiss 35 at f/1.4 ( focus on the cross)

IMG_0354 por jopeme, en Flickr

When I mount a 135, I change to portrait mode, and AF is so convenient here, so convenient that the canon 135mm f/2 can be more than nice enough.

Would they sell more lenses if the put an AF system to their glasses?
Would people update MF lenses to the very same lens with AF?



Yakim Peled
Registered: Nov 18, 2004
Total Posts: 16903
Country: Israel

AGeoJO wrote:
Not knowing and only assuming the actual price, it seems that it would be hard for that lens to compete with the 135mmL at approximately double the price and no AF.


+1

The 135/2 is unanimously raved for superb IQ and AF.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



1
       2       3       end