I have the 70-200 f2.8 GM and tried the batis f2.8 but the batis was pointless. It it had been a f1.8 or f2 I would have kept it. The 70-200 GM is as good as the batis at 135 f2.8.
Ive got the canon 70-200 f2.8 and used to have the Nikon 70-200 (latest version) and the GM is easily as good as either of those two so I kept the GM and sent the batis back.
chez wrote:
Weight surely must come into play. The Batis is less than 1/2 the weight of the 70-200 GM.
Absolutely. As does size.
But: It's often about thresholds, and I'm not sure the B135 aperture/weight/size + price equation works out in a way to make it anything but a niche case lens. In that respect, it's a different animal than the other Batis lenses (even the 85, which is pricey next to the FE).
These days any 135mm lens is a bit of a niche (speaking in terms of volume), no matter its characteristics and specs. It takes a lot to convince 70-200 shooters to go with a prime either in place of the zoom, or as a second lens to the zoom for travel/special purposes. The strategy at 135mm in modern times has been to beat the zoom on aperture, size, weight, and wide-aperture IQ + price. Each area seems to give a little advantage over the zoom, attracting a broader party into the tent, not to mention the aggregate for those who favor each of these areas.
The issue with the Batis in terms of broad interest is that it doesn't do anything on the aperture front, its price differential is minimal (at the cost of having only 1 FL), and its size/weight advantage probably feels to many (myself included) as not past the threshold to induce a purchase. Of course, it's essentially an APO lens with great critical sharpness, but mixed bokeh-- that performs right from max aperture.
I totally see the appeal. But it looks like quite a niche appeal to me (and I own and love the B18 and B85, and dream of a Batis 35mm f/2).
But: It's often about thresholds, and I'm not sure the B135 aperture/weight/size + price equation works out in a way to make it anything but a niche case lens. In that respect, it's a different animal than the other Batis lenses (even the 85, which is pricey next to the FE).
These days any 135mm lens is a bit of a niche (speaking in terms of volume), no matter its characteristics and specs. It takes a lot to convince 70-200 shooters to go with a prime either in place of the zoom, or as a second lens to the zoom for travel/special purposes. The strategy at 135mm in modern times has been to beat the zoom on aperture, size, weight, and wide-aperture IQ + price. Each area seems to give a little advantage over the zoom, attracting a broader party into the tent, not to mention the aggregate for those who favor each of these areas.
The issue with the Batis in terms of broad interest is that it doesn't do anything on the aperture front, its price differential is minimal (at the cost of having only 1 FL), and its size/weight advantage probably feels to many (myself included) as not past the threshold to induce a purchase. Of course, it's essentially an APO lens with great critical sharpness, but mixed bokeh-- that performs right from max aperture.
I totally see the appeal. But it looks like quite a niche appeal to me (and I own and love the B18 and B85, and dream of a Batis 35mm f/2)....Show more →
You’re spot on. I do most of my photography with a 24-70 GM. A 135mm. prime would complement it nicely when I need more reach. Adapted glass seems a temporary solution at best. We all know that it never will be the real thing. Even Sigma Art lenses + MC-11 combos are lacking in AF features and performance if compared to native lenses but, as you said, with the Batis 135 Zeiss went over the top. It’s priced like a F/2 lens and, while not heavy, it’s as bulky as a Canon 135/2.
They should had to remove that first “1” in the price and leave it at $999 or to remove the “.8” in the aperture and make it a F/2, then I’d consider it seriously. As it is, no sorry.
BTW would you please, Mr. Zeiss, explain to me why your own ApoSonnar 135/2 for Canon/Nikon it’s cheaper than your ApoSonnar Batis 135/2.8 ?. I’d expect that a 135/2 should cost nearly twice as much as a 135/2.8. Oh, I see .. for Canikon shooters the ApoSonnar it’s not the only game in town. They can buy brand native 135 primes or the Sigma ART 135/1.8.
I have owned the Sony/Zeiss 135/1.8 which "does something on the aperture front". It is gorgeous rendering and bokeh. Unfortunately it also does something on the "weight front". Eventually I ended up selling it due to the weight. It is not a portable landscape lens, if one has to carry it in the field. The LA-EA4 adapter is actually worth it in the singular case of the Sony/Zeiss 135/1.8. Expect a new modern 135/1.8 FE lens to be heavy, the Sigma Art 135/1.8 is 1200 grams. This is what the Batis 135/2.8 does: it's a high performance medium tele, lighter than even the Sony 70-200/4 G, that can be carried in the field and that will see use.
Don't expect everyone to desire zooms or DSLR-heavy 135/1.8 primes.
Comparing the Batis 135 to the Leica 135/3.4 Apo Telyt even makes the Batis 135 a value proposition.
I can't say enough good things about the Batis 135, I've been super happy with mine. I've posted images in another thread.
The focusing speed is great, the sharpness is great, the rendering and bokeh are great (bokeh is smoother than the Batis 85, for example). There's basically zero CA or LoCA (as you'd expect, given the APO designation). It's astonishing to shoot a backlit subject and see no CA against strands of their hair.
It's basically a perfect lens other than the f/2.8 limitation. I had been apprehensive about that, but f/2.8 gives you pretty shallow DOF at 135mm. For my use, I've found it to be virtually a non-issue for head and shoulders portraits, because at that distance the background is plenty blurred anyway, and having a touch more DOF on the subject is also good.
I would say it's only an issue indoors, where the extra stop could sometimes come in handy, or when the subject is more distant to the camera (like a full-body portrait against a busy background). But all in, I'm very happy with the tradeoff of being limited to f/2.8 in return for having a lighter and smaller lens.
I've gotten great results from the 135. My Batis 85 is now seeing a lot less use, except for indoors.
I've been trying to find one on the used market, presumably for about $1600, and just can't. I realize it's a niche lens and so not many get purchased to begin with, which suggests a very, very small used market. But I've literally seen none for sale in the 6 weeks I've been looking.
This suggests, to me, that for those who have purchased it, it's a keeper. Unless they've returned it quickly, of course.
I have the Canon 135L and the metabones IV and for now, I'll be sticking with it. But I'd rather have the Batis 135 despite the 1-stop of light loss.
GMPhotography wrote:
No one wants to take a 400 dollar hit. I know I won't. Besides I like the lens too much and folks that own it probably do as well.
I generally look for about a 20% drop vs new when I purchase used equipment. More if it's been out a while and/or is available refurbished (historically with Canon).
Jonathan Brady wrote:
I generally look for about a 20% drop vs new when I purchase used equipment. More if it's been out a while and/or is available refurbished (historically with Canon).
That may be a good rule of thumb, but market conditions vary a lot. For example, Batis 85 and 25 when they first came out were in short supply and folks were often asking same as retail for used copies. On the other hand, I recently sold a Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 for Sony for over 30% off since demand had plummeted due to the introduction of the Sony 12-24/4. One size does not fit all.
But: It's often about thresholds, and I'm not sure the B135 aperture/weight/size + price equation works out in a way to make it anything but a niche case lens. In that respect, it's a different animal than the other Batis lenses (even the 85, which is pricey next to the FE).
These days any 135mm lens is a bit of a niche (speaking in terms of volume), no matter its characteristics and specs. It takes a lot to convince 70-200 shooters to go with a prime either in place of the zoom, or as a second lens to the zoom for travel/special purposes. The strategy at 135mm in modern times has been to beat the zoom on aperture, size, weight, and wide-aperture IQ + price. Each area seems to give a little advantage over the zoom, attracting a broader party into the tent, not to mention the aggregate for those who favor each of these areas.
The issue with the Batis in terms of broad interest is that it doesn't do anything on the aperture front, its price differential is minimal (at the cost of having only 1 FL), and its size/weight advantage probably feels to many (myself included) as not past the threshold to induce a purchase. Of course, it's essentially an APO lens with great critical sharpness, but mixed bokeh-- that performs right from max aperture.
I totally see the appeal. But it looks like quite a niche appeal to me (and I own and love the B18 and B85, and dream of a Batis 35mm f/2)....Show more →
Russ, I typically use f4 zooms and supplement them with faster primes. Now the Batis is faster than an f4 zoom, but not enough at the price point they are asking. I love it's weight and size, but not it's aperture for that price. I currently use an adapted 135L that does me good until we see what Sony offers at 135.
colincarter46 wrote:
Not for me, weight wasn't even a consideration in which one I wanted.
Traveling with gear, weight is always a factor for me. No way would I lug around the 70-200 2.8 lens all day around my neck for 3 weeks at a time. I mainly shoot primes for the weight savings, the faster glass and better image quality generally.
I went through this dilemma recently with the Batis 135. I wanted the Batis, but I needed the zooming of the 70-200 2.8 (fixed position no ability to foot zoom), so I bought that instead. Batis 135 is still on my radar in the future due to size/weight/IQ, but I've got other needs first lens-wise.
If I did not have one already I would have bought it by the time you posted it. I wish that price was around when I got mine. I keep trying to talk Fred into one. Lol
peter1219 wrote:
Found a used batis 135 at BHPhotos.
