Zeiss 135MM F2 ZE Review

I have posted a lengthly review of the Zeiss 135MM lens on my blog. There are a number of field test images for you to view and my overall impressions of the lens. Here is a section from the review, if you find it interesting go to: www.foto-gizmo.blogspot.com

"At a bit over $2,100 this manual focus lens is about twice the price of the Canon 135 F2 L, which is an AF lens. I have a number of L lenses from Canon. In general, they are quite competent, have fine resolution and color rendering. As I only review gear I buy for myself and I do not have the Canon 135, I cannot do a head to head comparison. But, with over 50 years of shooting under my ever expanding belt, I can tell you that this lens is in a class by itself, just as the Leitz glass I used with the last film SLR I owned, the Leica R8, as well as the digital M9 and now the S2.

I took the 135 ZE and mounted it on the Canon 5D Mk III. The balance was very nice in hand. The first thing I noted is the thickness of the lens - nice for my big mitts, it uses 77MM filters. The second thing, somewhat a surprise, is that the lens does not employ internal focusing, the lens does extend as you get closer to your subject and the focus ring moves with it. The Zeiss lens focuses to just over 2 1/2 feet vs. the Canon 135MM F2 L at 3 feet. That is 1:4 ratio for the Zeiss and a 1:5 ratio for the Canon, a nice bonus.

Nice review. Looks like an excellent lens.

Given the great image quality delivered by the Canon EF 135/2L, as well as its purpose, is this the right case to sacrifice AF?

Yes, the image quality on the Canon telephotos, especially the primes like the 135 and the 200 is excellent. The Zeiss has a different quality to it, and in a resolution test on the digital-picture.com outperformed the Canon 135L for sharpness and contrast. That said, I judge gear by how it performs for me in the style in which I shoot. I shoot action rarely, and for that I have the Canon 200 2.8L, so I have a good comfort level with manual focus as long as the lens is reasonably fast.

agedbriar wrote in post #16716962
Given the great image quality delivered by the Canon EF 135/2L, as well as its purpose, is this the right case to sacrifice AF?

It is the "right case" for there to be options for everyone's needs. Most rely on and truly need AF for their work, so the demand for this lens (or any Zeiss Canon-mount lens) will be exceedingly small in comparison to AF lenses.

I am very happy with mine and have no difficulty with the manual focus - especially when mounted on my a7 and a7R bodies.

David Arbogast wrote in post #16717056
It is the "right case" for there to be options for everyone's needs. Most rely on and truly need AF for their work, so the demand for this lens (or any Zeiss Canon-mount lens) will be exceedingly small in comparison to AF lenses.

I am very happy with mine and have no difficulty with the manual focus - especially when mounted on my a7 and a7R bodies.

David, I've been so busy these past 6 months with business that I have not had an opportunity to try out the A7R camra. Sounds like you enjoy the manual focus with the camera. Do you use the focus peeking feature and if so how accurate and easy is it to focus a prime wide open with it. I have focus peeking on my Fuji X100 and find it very useful.

I got a bunch of Zeiss lens with which I'd love to take the A7R for a spin.

Hogloff wrote in post #16717260
David, I've been so busy these past 6 months with business that I have not had an opportunity to try out the A7R camra. Sounds like you enjoy the manual focus with the camera. Do you use the focus peeking feature and if so how accurate and easy is it to focus a prime wide open with it. I have focus peeking on my Fuji X100 and find it very useful.

I got a bunch of Zeiss lens with which I'd love to take the A7R for a spin.

I think it is the absolute ideal platform for using the Canon-mount or Nikon-mount Zeiss lenses (in conjunction with the excellent Metabones III adapter). I highly recommend the a7R.

Focus peaking is excellent for most shots and when more precision is needed I just press a custom button that I have mapped the focus magnifier to and zoom right within the a7/R's excellent EVF. [By the way, my friend/coworker has a Fuji X100; Like him, I think you'll be very impressed with the a7R's EVF.]

For walk-around (not on a tripod shooting) I now use the a7/R exclusively. And my 5D III has been relegated to just AEB shooting and panos on a tripod (not an insignificant role for me, but a very limited one just the same).

Well, you learn something new every day... I didn't even know that this lens had f/14 or f/22. I have been too busy using it at f/2. By the way, I love the tulip shot at f/22. I really need to get over the creamy bokeh of this lens and explore shooting at other apertures.

Great review! I concur, it's a superb lens.

agedbriar wrote in post #16716962
Given the great image quality delivered by the Canon EF 135/2L, as well as its purpose, is this the right case to sacrifice AF?

If you are interested in even higher image quality and superb color correction, then, yes.

I remember reading about it before it was availabe. I put it on my want list. After it came out I Googled all I could and found some negative comments that stopped me from buying it. Of course, I do not remember what those comments were (MF, price not an issue.) Any thoughts on this?

t60p wrote in post #16718949
If you are interested in even higher image quality and superb color correction, then, yes.

well the biggest issue I see with the comparison (or lack of) to the 135L is that it has to be done. Very hard to claim that a lens is a class by itself compared to another lens that has been the top 135mm for a long time, without doing the actual comparison.

Charlie wrote in post #16719634
well the biggest issue I see with the comparison (or lack of) to the 135L is that it has to be done. Very hard to claim that a lens is a class by itself compared to another lens that has been the top 135mm for a long time, without doing the actual comparison.

Lens Rentals does a great comparison.

Charlie wrote in post #16719634
well the biggest issue I see with the comparison (or lack of) to the 135L is that it has to be done. Very hard to claim that a lens is a class by itself compared to another lens that has been the top 135mm for a long time, without doing the actual comparison.

gnome chompski wrote in post #16719640
Lens Rentals does a great comparison.

ahem

http://www.lensrentals​.com …5mm-f2-vs-canon-135mm-f2l

The Canon is no slouch and will win every single time in the AF category.

I'm still waiting for the Sigma 135/1.8 OS APO lens to come out.

Charlie wrote in post #16719634
well the biggest issue I see with the comparison (or lack of) to the 135L is that it has to be done. Very hard to claim that a lens is a class by itself compared to another lens that has been the top 135mm for a long time, without doing the actual comparison.

Zeiss lenses are in a class by themselves for their rendering and micro-contrast, which is very different from both Nikon and Canon lenses. There is absolutely nothing inferior about the Canon L lenses. I made a point that I only review lenses I buy for myself, and while I do not have the 135L, I do have the Canon 200 2.8L (and 5 other Canon lenses), another very highly regarded Canon lens. The resolution and color are great, but different than the Zeiss. It is a matter of personal preference.