Looking for a fast ish 85-135

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Alex66, Aug 2, 2015.

  1. Alex66

    Alex66 TalkEmount Regular

    74
    Dec 23, 2014
    As the title says, I am looking for a very good but not bank breaking 85-135 prime that is reasonably fast say f2 for an 85 and f2.8 for a 135 I don't really want to spend more than £100 on them though I would buy both if one was silly cheep. Also rarity is not a major concern if it is the right one as I would be willing to wait for months to get the right one. I already have an FD 135 3.5 and a T mount 135 3.5 to keep me going.
     
  2. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    Cyprus
    Nick
    The Minolta MD 85 f/2 gets very good reviews from what I've read and its not extremly rare but it usually sells more than £100...
    http://www.rokkorfiles.com/85mm Page 1.htm

    The MD 135 f/2 is very expensive and rare but I reckon you can easily get an MD 135 f/2.8 for about £100.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. VLReviews

    VLReviews TalkEmount Regular

    33
    Mar 16, 2015
    Germany
    Benjamin
    I can recommend the Minolta MD 135 f/2.8 in the first MD version (4 elements, 4 groups, ~540 g). But I recently also started looking for a Tamron adaptall 135 f/2.5, which would probably be closer to the definition of "fast-ish". I've heard good things about it, but didn't test one, yet.
     
  4. roundball

    roundball TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Oct 8, 2013
    USA
    IMO, my Canon FDn 85/1.8 and 135/2.8 are outstanding, both on the Canon A1 film camera and now the Sony NEX-7 body....might buy & sell various lenses over time but not those two
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    Cyprus
    Nick
    There's also something in between - the MD 100 f/2.5 which if I remember correctly our own minolta expert here (Ad) favors a lot - @addieleman@addieleman correct me if I'm wrong :)
    home.kpn.nl/dielpeet/minolta/experiences.htm#minolta-md-100-2.5
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    :thumbup: Absolutely right, beautiful optic. When I don't want to carry the FE 70-200mm heavyweight, that'll be my weapon of choice for telephoto.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Alex66

    Alex66 TalkEmount Regular

    74
    Dec 23, 2014
    Superb Ill watch how much they tend to go for for a while then make my move, either the 85 or 100 or both depending on price.
     
  8. jai

    jai TalkEmount Top Veteran

    589
    Feb 4, 2013
    I have the 85mm F2 and I love it, but it costs a lot and I think the 100mm would be the better choice.

    I would actually recommended against about the 135mm Rokkors. I don't think they are in the same league as the 85mm, 100mm or 200mm.
     
  9. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    Agree with the first sentence, but not the second. I used a Minolta MD 135/2.8 (plain MD, latest version without the Rokkor designation) with excellent results on my NEX-6, at f/4 it's sharp across the frame and shows very nice contrast and colors. Lots of people prefer the earliest MD Rokkor version but I've never been able to see much of a difference and the plain MD one is lighter than the early Rokkor one.
     
  10. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
    85mm f2's are usually expensive. I see Jupiter 9 85mm f2's are selling as low as $120 in ebay. Tamron 90mm f2.5 (1/2 Macro) are in the same price range also. A safe bet is also Nikon 105mm 2.5. I got mine for $50. When I look at the 135mm m42 mounts, there are lots of them cheap... But you have to watch the mfd's. I bought Takumar 135mm f2.5 & CZ Jena 135mm 3.5 and found 135mm 3.5 more useful due to mfd. CZ Jena is also a very sharp lens wide open...
     
  11. jai

    jai TalkEmount Top Veteran

    589
    Feb 4, 2013
    I may have had a bad sample, but the 135mm MD Rokkor F2.8 version I had was pretty awful. Low contrast, poor sharpness, long minimum focus distance. Did have nice bokeh though, and an awesome little built in magnetic hood. I remember reading other reviews with similar complaints, so I didn't try another.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. eno789

    eno789 TalkEmount Top Veteran

    720
    Jan 1, 2012
    NoCal, USA
    Brian
    Some of the lenses I like, that are in this focal range, and in your budget:

    * Cosina/Phoenix/Promaster/Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 Macro
    * Konica Hexanon 100mm f/2.8
    * Konica Hexanon 135mm f/3.2
    * Nikon Nikkor 105mm f/2.5
    * Nikon Series E 100mm f/2.8
    * Olympus Zuiko MC 100mm f/2.8
    * S-M-C Takumar 120mm f/2.8
    * Tamron Adaptall-2 90mm f/2.5 Macro
    * Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 Macro ("Bokina")
    * Vivitar 135mm f/2.8 Close Focusing
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. VLReviews

    VLReviews TalkEmount Regular

    33
    Mar 16, 2015
    Germany
    Benjamin
    It happens. I also recently acquired a 135 f/2.8 MD-II with a nearly invisible fungal infection. It showed the same flaws you describe.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Alex66

    Alex66 TalkEmount Regular

    74
    Dec 23, 2014
    Thanks for all your replies, but my wife insists I just go all in and get the Batis 85mm, so I will get one of the decent macros on the list to cover macro duties if I find one at a good price. So I will wait until the initial uptake of the Batis has happened and order when the price drops slightly, I have a couple of 3.5 135's to tide me over.
     
  15. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    Seriously, that's kind of wise I think. I know I have spent way too much money on playing around with legacy glass only to end up with native lenses. I now only use legacy lenses for special things like close-up photography with a tilt/shift bellows but when I go out and shoot I just carry FE lenses.