135 f2.8 - do I need this?

Raj_55555 · Nov 16, 2014

Just found this advert of someone selling a 135mm f2.8 for about 66$. I've heard some good things about it, I can afford to buy it but I am wondering whether I really need this or should I save up for the 50 1.8g. I've contacted the person, he said that there's some fungal problems with the lens but also promised to have it cleaned up before giving it to me. I've told him I'll call back to confirm.

I was planning to get something decent for portraits, low lights and street shots, and was eying the 50/35 1.8g for that, but again no real world experience to guide me.
Most of you guys know my shooting style well enough to comment, should I get this or just get a new 50/35mm 1.8g/1.8d. Are there any obvious shortcomings that I'm missing? I do have Pix's sigma 28-70 f2.8-4 if I need to go any wider.

tirediron · Nov 16, 2014

It's a nice lens, but if it's already got fungal issues, I'd probably pass. If you do buy it, be aware that you're auto-metering won't work, so you will have to set the aperture on the lens manually. Not a huge deal, but a pain if you see 'the' shot.

Raj_55555 · Nov 16, 2014

Thanks John, I didn't know that auto metering won't work, something else to consider. I think 50 1.8 would be good enough for my work, I just felt like this was as close to a "very good" lens I'll get for so cheap and read some real good things about the bokeh it produced. But I do have the 70-300 VR for the range, and nifty fifty isn't too bad as well.

480sparky · Nov 16, 2014

The 135/2.8 is a very sharp lens (I have a copy of the one you linked to). But I'd pass on it if the seller says there's fungus in it. Save your money and buy better glass, even the 135.

Raj_55555 · Nov 17, 2014

thanks sparky, I let it go.. I'm sure I'll find something useful if I keep looking

Mr.Photo · Nov 17, 2014

Raj_55555 said:
Thanks John, I didn't know that auto metering won't work, something else to consider. I think 50 1.8 would be good enough for my work, I just felt like this was as close to a "very good" lens I'll get for so cheap and read some real good things about the bokeh it produced. But I do have the 70-300 VR for the range, and nifty fifty isn't too bad as well.

I'm presuming you are using a Nikon body, if so which one? If you have one of the entry level bodies (D3100/3200/3300 or D5100/5200/5300) then the older manual focus lenses will not meter on the camera. If you have a D7000/D7100 or higher body (Nikon's older D300/300S can do this as well) then you can input the lens data (maximum aperture, and focal length) so that the camera will provide full matrix metering with the lens. I have a 135 f/2.8 as well as several other manual focus lenses that all perform beautifully on my D7000. I picked up mine in virtually "like new" condition at a local used camera shop for $69. There is no signs of internal dust or anything, and the outside is flawless. Here's a couple of shot's I've taken with this lens on my D7000. I LOVE this little lens.

ISO 100, 1/1000, @ f/4.

ISO 100, 1/1250, @ f/4

Raj_55555 · Nov 17, 2014

Thanks Mr. photo, it's the 135 f2.8, not f2; but I suppose the performance is similar. I use a Nikon D100, not sure if it has those features. Nice photographs, these are the kind of portraits I am aiming at (other than my street shots)!

Mr.Photo · Nov 17, 2014

Sorry, I meant to put 2.8. I was posting in bit of a hurry at that moment.

It looks as though the D100 is able to meter with the Ai/Ai-S lenses. Here's a link to the Technical Specs for the D100 Straight from Nikon USA.

D100 from Nikon

Gary A. · Nov 17, 2014

In the beginning the 50mm would be much more useful than the 135mm. While you'll get less keepers from the 135mm, the keepers you capture will have greater impact. Back in the film only days when I was a pro, I had a 135mm f/2. It was a very good lens.

Gary

That's a 135mm on the f/2.8.

Derrel · Nov 17, 2014

The 135mm f/2.8 in Ai or Ai-S is a very small, compact lens and was one of the MOST popular of all prime lenses back in its era; the 50mm lens often was sold with a body, and the lowest-priced "extra" lens was the 135/3.5, with the f/2.8 model only a little bit more money. The 135mm f/3.5 is actually a very good performer as well. NON-Nikon brand 135mm f/2.8 lenses back in the day sold for $69 to $89 typically, and today are worth about $20 US in second hand shops. On a 1.5x camera, a 135mm f/3.5 or f/2.8 is a lightweight, handy moderately long telephoto lens, but I would steer clear of ones that have any fungus problems, unless the price is reallllllly low, and the fungus issue is very,very minor.

Raj_55555 · Nov 17, 2014

Ah well, after Gary's post I was starting to wonder whether I should go an get it.. After you posted (Derrel) I have again decided that the fungi are a no-no. I'll wait for someone else to post before I change my mind again :lol:

My problem is that I want to own a lens that can get me "brilliant" people shots, for little money. I have a huge expenditure planned ahead with the D7100 and the Tammy 150-600, and it'll take me years to pay it off! I can't really keep buying everything I want to, so the wide angle and the expensive portrait lenses will have to wait unfortunately. :BangHead:

480sparky · Nov 17, 2014

135/2.8 Ai's are a common a belly buttons. Just look around and you'll find one.

Mr.Photo · Nov 17, 2014

Yes the Ai/Ai-S 135mm 2.8 lenses are very common. However there seems to be a recent surge in popularity with this lens as of late. Just a quick glance of eBay, and various other sources are showing prices ranging from around $80 for a rough looking copy, to as much as $180 for a pristine sample. However if you keep an eye out, and be patient you will occasionally find a sweet deal like the one in my post above.