My picks are the CZ Sonnar 100/3.5 C/Y, Leitz 135 Tele-Elmar, or Yashica 200/4 MLC C/Y. In particular, the TE135 is near-APO, has beautiful b/g blur, is cheap, and can be adapted to anything:
This is based on my copy, and I've never owned nor shot another copy, but I wouldn't recommend the FD 80-200/4L for your purposes. It's not the highest resolving lens anyway, and my copy loses way too much detail over distances to be of any real use for landscape shooting. Add in some atmospheric haze and the background becomes truly messy.
It's possible my copy has a misaligned element or something wrong with the FLE that makes it good close up and terrible at distances. I think I'll post a thread later with my results and see if any other owners have similar experiences.
freaklikeme wrote:
This is based on my copy, and I've never owned nor shot another copy, but I wouldn't recommend the FD 80-200/4L for your purposes. It's not the highest resolving lens anyway, and my copy loses way too much detail over distances to be of any real use for landscape shooting. Add in some atmospheric haze and the background becomes truly messy.
It's possible my copy has a misaligned element or something wrong with the FLE that makes it good close up and terrible at distances. I think I'll post a thread later with my results and see if any other owners have similar experiences....Show more →
All long lenses will loose resolution at distance if there is air pollution and heat haze.
I agree on two that were already mentioned... the Nikon 200mm f4 and the Contax Zeiss 100mm 3.5. I'll add the Canon FD 200mm f4. Oddly enough this is an earlier model from 1972 without SC or SSC. Used on my A6000, it has outstanding sharpness even at f4.
The fact that you said 105 instead of 100 tells me you come from a Nikon background? Good on you. Nikon 105/1.8 AI-s and 105/2.5 AI-s are very nice, by the way.
Voigtlander 180/4 is a great one, though everyone is right that they're a little rare and expensive. I like the C/Y 135/2.8 as well as the especially affordable Nikon 135/2.8 AI-s. Nikon 180/2.8 AI-s (it can't be the AI version, which is a different non-ED design [unlike most AI to AI-s transitions which were identical optical formulas]) has no shortage of CA but has great resolution and is affordable. Nikon 200/4 Micro AI-s is a great one, kind of a weird (very skinny but very long) shape, but it's light enough that it doesn't really cause handling issues.
Leica 180/2 is a smidge outside the budget and weight range you're targeting but it's worth it
I can also recommend the Leica M 135/4 Tele Elmar. It performs great right from wide open and has a nice creamy bokeh. Stopped down it is super sharp and as said, its very compact and well built. They come on eBay fairly cheap from time to time and these lenses normally hold their value very good (if not even get more expensive).
Since people are bringing up 135s I'll offer the humble Vivitar 135/2.8 Close Focus. Not Apo-Lanthar or Apo-Telyt class, optically, mechanically, or price-wise, but easily AiS/FD/MD etc class. And it focuses down to 1:2. Just make sure it's the Close Focus -- Vivitar sold a lot of different 135s, some rather crap.
The OM 135s are also nice -- small, light, sharp. Some CA wide open (usually easy to fix). The 135/3.5 is slow but tiny. Also partial to the 135 Taks, though a bit heavier than the OMs.
I do have Zeiss ZE 100mm makro-planar and love the detail at infinity.
When I had the Leica I had some great shots from that but decided at the time to keep my Canon 70-300L as it was also very good at infinity on 5d2 (i tested both side by side).
However, both of those are very front heavy on the a7r.
I like the idea of the Leica M 135 Tele Elmar, seems reasonably priced for a leica too.
I have the Minolta MD I Tele-Rokkor 135/2.8. There are many versions of this lens. Mine is the 1977 version ,which seems to be the most prized amongst aficionados as it was the last of the more robustly built 55 filter versions (weighing in at 535g) before Minolta redesigned it with less glass and less weight, with subsequent versions weighing 365g and 385g having a 49 filter thread. In its day this was thought comparable to the Leitz Elmarit 135/2.8 so it is an excellent lens. The only real issue is there can be CA at wider apertures but this is easily removed in Lightroom. I've used it on my A7 and found it to focus sharply across the frame including corners and not too heavy. I suspect it would balance a little better on the A7II but I decided to skip that version and am now on a list for the a7rii. It has a built in retractable lens hood, like the later Leica variants. It was eventually superseded by the AF version, which was very similar in looks and feel to the final, lighter weight, MD versions at 365g. I used to own one of these and found it to work well on my old A900. However, it provides absolutely no contest for the MD 135/2.8 which, in my copy at any rate, is tons better on 100% comparisons, particularly at corners.
Last but not least the prized Minolta colour rendition is no myth. I can't wait to see how these work in the a7rii particularly with IBIS.
