Oh no! 135mm f/2.0

[Lars]

Jorgen, There's a rumor around of a Pentax 50/1.0 on its way later this year. Those guys have released some pretty interesting lenses in the last few years, so it wouldn't come as a complete surprise.

 

[Lars]

You never can compare Nikkor to Zeiss lenses!

Already 10 years ago in the analog days I did comparisons between Leica and Zeiss and I must say I liked most Zeiss lenses better than Leica lenses. Especially I made this experience with the 1:2.0/180 APO from Leica compared to the 1:2.0/200 Zeiss (I think it was 200) - man the Zeiss lens was just so much better.

All the other Zeiss glass I owned (Hasselblad, Contax) just proved the same!

I currently do not own the 1.8/135, but I have no doubt it will be a similar stellar performer than it's "old" ancestors - forgive my English :angel:

Actually the Zeiss lenses and the positive reports here in the forum about the A900 made me switch from Nikon/Canon to Sony - will receive the cam and a bunch of lenses next week YEAH !!!

Of course you can compare Zeiss to Nikon. Some parameters can be measured, some are subjective. How you weigh those factors is a personal preference.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen, There's a rumor around of a Pentax 50/1.0 on its way later this year. Those guys have released some pretty interesting lenses in the last few years, so it wouldn't come as a complete surprise.

I've heard the rumour, and the one about a Limited 135mm f/2.8. I will Buy two Pentax bodies some time this year, and the only dilemma is if it's going to be a dirt cheap K20D now (my future backup body) and a K7 later, or two K7s.

I'll keep my Fujis and the most important Nikkors, and I will buy some "special interest" lenses in F-mount still. It looks like I have a 105mm f/1.8 on its way from Sweden and the 135mm f/2.0 is not written off yet.

The only problem I can see in the Pentax line-up is the "standard" zoom, but I can always buy another Tamron 17-50. The 50-135mm f/2.8 will probably be my most used lens, in spite of my love for primes, since it's perfect for studio, industrial and product photography.

 

[Steen]

But there are other criteria too. My mother is probably of the opinion that any lens that will show her great granddaughter smiling, is a good lens

Basicly your mother is right, Jorgen. Wise lady, your mother
Still, I need to admit that I love lenses with some mojo

Do you have some examples to show us, Peter?
Thank you.

Hi S.P.

I cannot answer on behalf of Peter, but I have the Zeiss ZF 1.4/50 and the new Nikon AF-S 1.4/50 G as well.

In general it's my impression that most of the Zeiss lenses render with an extraordinary good contrast thus adding to a more three dimensional look. At least that is the main reason why I have some of them and live with the Manual Focus only. Autofocus is the reason why I bought the Nikon 50mm as well.

50mm lenses are easy to design so actually most of them are pretty good and a comparison may not be all that interesting, but it's the only focal length where I own both brands. For what it is worth I have made a quick shot of the same scenery with my ZF 50 and my AF-S 50. I have posted it in the following separate thread, in order not to contaminate this 135mm thread with my trivial 50mm shot.
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7841

Now let's get back on track with the 135mm discussion here.

 

[S.P.]

It looks like I have a 105mm f/1.8 on its way from Sweden

Jorgen,

you will have fun with the 105/1.8!
I bought one last year and it´s a great lens if you use it wide open.

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=104376

I also have the new Micro AF-S 105/2.8 VR which is stellar in sharpness, but it´s always great to use an old AIS-Nikkor.