I have both the MM and AE versions and like the AE except for the ninja star bokeh. It's isn't as sharp as the MM but fall off is faster so images have more pop or at least a sharper delineation between in and out of focus elements. Contrast/micro contrast are pretty similar though the MM is better if you are pixel peeping.
This is wide open close to MFD. This lens has great resolution within the plane of focus wide open and only gets better stopped down. Great bokeh as well.
I apologize for my quick PP technique lately. I have been spending lots of time @ work and this has left little time for proper photography.
I owned the Zeiss 135/2.8 for quite some time. My second-favourite Zeiss lens. Terrific value. Sold it only when I bought the CV 125/2.5.
Now I have sold the CV 125/2.5 and instead I have the Rolleinar-MC 135/2.8, which is very close to the Zeiss 135/2.8 and only cost me $60.
Yeah, I've been raving here about the Mamiya 135/2.8 for a long time, but no one ever seems to take notice. Shockingly good performance for a lens you can get fo under $50, with patience. - and uses a cheap M42 adapter, as well.
One thing- I tried 4-5 different versions, and the SX is the one you want. I'm not sure which version is the same as the Rollei.
-------
I might pick up a Zeiss now, though. I especially like Piotr_P's pics, above.
My fave 135 is the ZA, (f/1.8) but I don't feel like dealing with the conversion / aperture woes. Plus, well, the price. - but what a lens.....
ebrandon wrote:
... Does anyone know if this is possible, a made in Japan AE?
All combinations exist. For example, I have the S-Planar 60 AEG, Distagon 28/2.8 AEJ, Planar 100 MMG, and Aposonnar 200 MMJ. Some C/Y lenses only exist in one form (like the F-Distagon AEG or Distagon 21 MMJ), while other lenses exist in two or more forms. Over time, most lenses became MM and moved to Japan. Interestingly, the Sonnar 85 moved to Japan, but then moved back to Germany!
Finally got mine today (and a 50f1.7 as well).
Just trying around the house it seems sharp and contrasty at all apertures.
It feels heavier than I thought it would with a definite forward weighting. A bit odd in this aspect compared to my other lenses.
Questions:
1) Is it normal for the focus ring to have a bit of play? It also makes a noisy snapping sound.
2) Is it normal for the built-in hood to be loose and move on it's own?
1) No on both accounts. Mine has zero play and there is no snapping or grinding sound when the focus ring is turned.
2) Again, no. But mine has excessive looseness too and won't stay in any position. Is there any way to adjust it? I actually stuck a piece of plastic in it to keep the hood from moving.
No on all accounts.
In fact, the hood on mine had such a close fit that at first I thought it was actually stuck.
But what's count is the optics and by the sound of it they seem OK. How about the 50/1.7?
surf monkey wrote:
Finally got mine today (and a 50f1.7 as well).
Just trying around the house it seems sharp and contrasty at all apertures.
It feels heavier than I thought it would with a definite forward weighting. A bit odd in this aspect compared to my other lenses.
Questions:
1) Is it normal for the focus ring to have a bit of play? It also makes a noisy snapping sound.
2) Is it normal for the built-in hood to be loose and move on it's own?
Optically good, but in poor condition.
Should I send it back and get another one?
The hood isn't so loose that it would move around in normal use.
The focus ring is a little bothersome. I expected the tight, smooth focus operation of my Zeiss 35f2 ZE. Is that too much to ask of an older Contax lens?
Neither focus ring nor lens hood sholud behave like this.Send it back and find another one in good conditiion.They are plenty out in the market.
Problems like this happen very often.I was lucky with 135/2.8 CZS but I had to swap 3 copies of 1.7/50 CY Planar,1.4/50 CY Planar and 2.8/85 CY Sonnar before I got a decent one.
I can recommend this german e-bay shop.I bought mine 135/2.8 there plus few others.They seem to have plenty of these lenses now in good cond,both AE and MM.
surf monkey wrote:
Optically good, but in poor condition.
Should I send it back and get another one?
The hood isn't so loose that it would move around in normal use.
The focus ring is a little bothersome. I expected the tight, smooth focus operation of my Zeiss 35f2 ZE. Is that too much to ask of an older Contax lens?
The 135 has one of the best focus rings IMO and I thought it was better than the 28ZE. I would certainly return yours on that basis alone. Could you list the serial number too so others don't get stuck with this lens. Maybe after you've successfully returned it.
These lenses are plentiful, get another one, and make sure to get the MM version, as the optical formula was updated for better performance. My copy has one of the best helicoids I have used...
ersatz wrote:
The 135 has one of the best focus rings IMO and I thought it was better than the 28ZE. I would certainly return yours on that basis alone. Could you list the serial number too so others don't get stuck with this lens. Maybe after you've successfully returned it.
I'll return it soon.
Listing the serial number makes a lot of sense. Should I post this somewhere else?
Maybe we should start a "Don't buy this if..." post with warnings about certain gear.
