igor_burshteyn Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 What is your experience with this lens? I came accross one in mint condition very cheap and could not resist :) For me it's strange feeling - I am more "50mm or wider" person, 135mm looks too long for me. Please share your thoughts about this lens, and your favourite shots from OM 135mm f2.8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorman_studios Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 It's a great lens, good for portraits and headshots. Tack sharp, beutiful bokeh and pretty fast. I have used it to some varying degree with my OM and have never been let down by the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_dc Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 I came across one for $25 in a pawn shop and also couldn't resist. I also generally prefer the wide end of 55(f1.2)with my telephoto use formally limited to the Zuiko 100f2.8 (Have a 200f5 and haven't used it in two decades) but I like the 135. Gives me a little more room to play with than the 100 for outdoor portraits etc. Ironically I generally tend to use fixed length lenses with my OM system, but with my NIKON DSLR system use only zooms. Go figure- Digital images are much easier to crop than negatives. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 I had one once, it had a chip out of the front element and was the old silvernose version (I presume single coated). The coating was probably scratched as it gave very low-contrast photos, especially into the light, but also away from it. Anyway, I sold it and got myself a newer version (blacknose). It works like a dream: the images I get from it are crisp and clear with good contrast. It is very sharp. So, I recommend you try out the lens if you are able to. It certainly can be an excellent buy if it has been looked after. I don't often use this focal length but I was out using it yesterday actually. I use the focal length which is required for the type of photo I want to get at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahams Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Igor - The Zuiko 135mm f2.8 is probably one of the best 135mm lenses ever made, and you are fortunate to have picked one up for a low price. Here in the U.K. I have not seen one for under GBP120.00. 135mm is my most useful focal length - wide open for portraiture, and stopped down to around f11 for landscape work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon evans. Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Graham, they are sometimes available for quite a bit less than that. I saw a lovely 100/2.8 go for 70 UKP on the 'bay recently (genuine too, I know the owner). <br><br> Igor, please persevere. One suggestion made to me a while ago was to go out for a walk / photo exploration session with just one lens. Not your usual or favourite lens, but something that will make you work harder. I suggest you do that with your 135mm. <br><br> BTW I really like the landscape photos on <a href="http://www.touchingthelight.co.uk/">Ken Scott's website</a>, he apparently uses only 24, 50 and 200mm. It ain't what you got... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 <i>"One suggestion made to me a while ago was to go out for a walk / photo exploration session with just one lens."</i> <p> This is exactly what I do every now and again, and in fact the other day I only used the 135/2.8 for the entire day - it is refreshing to do so I think (and the 135 hasn't had much use lately before that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 The 135/2.8 SC is one of my favorite Zuiko lenses: small, sharp, light....the MC version improves the contrast a bit. Definitely a keeper for me. This image, taken with the SC version , is one of my favorites<p> <img src="http://www.skipwilliams.com/images/om/00_ma_portrait_bagpipes.2.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamwhite Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 I'd be interested to see Ken Scotts photos blown up to a decent size. He uses slow film, in low light, with a polariser, without a tripod. And a long lens. Even with wide apertures, you are looking at slow shutter speeds. Looking at the photos, maybe 1/15th sec or even slower. Those small thumbnails show nothing. A tripod is essential for landscape photography. But you can use your 135mm handheld with fast film (100ASA or faster), wide open. Useful for portraits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon evans. Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 Ken gives slide shows and lectures and is well received. A colleague has seen his show and thought the photos were impressive. Some discussion <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DLkM">here</a>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now