Peter Kylberg tested the Samyang 135mm f/2.0 Emount lens on the A7r and A6000:
135mm is a very interesting focal length, for its perspective and creative possibilities. The Samyang is affordable, not too heavy and the image quality is better than Sony 70-200/4. I like it a lot.
Ergonomic it is a mixed bag: Nice to hold and handle on both A7R and A6000, but the grip on the aperture ring is too slippery in relation to its firmness.
Compared to the 70-200 it is of course not very versatile. The zoom has OSS, the 135 has 2.0
Using enlargement on the EVF it is rather easy to nail sharpness – essential on a tele. Color peaking is not accurate enough. Above image is free hand but at 1/2000 sec.
Another thing of interest for A7R owners: No problem at all with shutter vibration loss of sharpness! I can’t say that about the 70-200 which can have that problem (also on tripod) 1/40 to 1/250sec.
Color: Sony(Zeiss) lenses on A7R tends to go towards yellow. (create color profiule with colorchecker passport i my solution). The 135/2 tends to go in the opposite direction, to be a bit cool.
Finally: I really like this lens! Planing to go to the mountains as soon as midnight sun sets in I will probably chose the 135 over the 70-200. Despite versatility, despite OSS.
Want to check out more test shots?
http://perkylberg.smugmug.com/
Both lenses also got tested on a Canon camera at:
Photozine (Click here) tested the Samyang 135mm T/2.2 ED UMC Cine version:
The image quality is almost stunning with very good results at T2.2 and an excellent if not outstanding quality at medium aperture settings and across the image frame. A very low amount of lateral CAs also helps to increase the sharpness perception. Distortions are absent whereas the vignetting is quite typical for a full format lens in this class.
ePhotozine (Click here) posted the Samyang 135mm f/2 ED UMC Lens Review:
Those interested in a fast 135mm, who are either on a budget or don’t need autofocus for their work, should certainly consider this lens. It’s more than capable of delivering sharpness on a par with high-end lenses, but at a fraction of the cost. This, coupled with the excellent build quality and smooth manual focus action make this lens an excellent buy overall.
You can get the lens at BHphoto:
135mm f/2.0 for Sony A-mount (Click here) and Sony E-mount (Click here).
135mm t/2.2 Cine for Sony A-mount (Click here) and Sony E-mount (Click here).
And via Korean sellers on eBay:
[shoplink 33060 ebay]Samyang 135mm E-mount (here n eBay)[/shoplink]
[shoplink 33061 ebay]Samyang 135mm A-mount (here n eBay)[/shoplink]
61 Responses
Guy really knows how to pick test subjects for 135/2. Now i know even less about the lens than yesterday, and yesterday i didnt know anything.
That is the second time this week that I read that the focus peaking in the A7 series is not accurate. If so, that is yet another flaw in these cameras, especially considering the selling point for these cameras is adapted lenses.
It is a shame that no other camera company has chosen to compete with Sony inv the full frame mirrorless market, as Sony really has done a poor job so far (shutter vibration issues, a weak mount that needs to be replaced, limited to lossy, compressed RAW files, inaccurate focus peaking, colour shift and smearing issues with wide-angle adapted glass, inconsistencies with the quality of lenses, poor ergonomics and design , etc)
While I like that they are not conservative and they have provided full frame mirrorless cameras, they definitely need to do a better job with the design and quality of their cameras and lenses. Otherwise, I don’t really see the benefit of this system.
Accurate focus peaking is essential, especially considering the Loxia lenses are manual focus lenses.
It’s no offense but I wonder if you have ever used these A7 series cameras. These reviewers are just jokes. The focus peaking works like a charm. You can set focus peaking intensity as low, mid or high. Most time I set it as low and never failed nailing focus, even when using 30+ year old lenses. If you don’t get enough focus peaking even when you set it as high, you can adjust creative style and increase the sharpness and contrast a little bit. But if you have to adjust the sharpness and contrast for focus peaking, that means the lens lacks sharpness and contrast so much or you don’t know how to use the focus peaking properly, it’s not the problem of the camera. I hope this helps any.
My methodology was:
1. focus using peaking
2. check focus using enlarge.
I most of the time need to adjust the focus a little in step 2.
But you may be true. Maybe more training with peaking makes one better using it.
Yeah, it requires some practice. And the methodology can vary depending on the scene. I’m not saying I’m better than you or anyone. I just wanted to say focus peaking works. I hope I didn’t discourage you, and you will find some better way.
That is good to hear, as it is essential for system like this, where many are relying on adapted lenses. However, I think they need to improve the peaking if it is necessary to zoom in, as that doesn’t work when you are shooting scenes spontaneously.
If they resolve the shutter vibration issue and provide the option for uncompressed RAW files, I may consider the A7rii. I am definitely not spending over $2000 for lossy RAW files and shutter vibration issues.
Have a great day.
you should also use focus magnification. especially when the depth of field is shallow. by the way the internet is full of contradictory expert opinions. find the sources that are reliable or form your own opinion by experience.
No offence here either, but that is just a bunch of nonsense, both from the reviewer and from you. Focus peaking simply detects microconstrast. There’s nothing inaccurate about it. What’s inaccurate is people’s usage and expectations of a system, which is not perfect (like everything else in this world). Also, how has Sony done a poor job when they provided you with an additional tool?
Colour shift is inherent to these designs, heck even Leica has it. Nobody is supposed to support adapted lenses. Sure, it’d be nice, but what exactly do you expect? Do you really believe that Canikon (when they decide to finally make a real mirrorless camera) will somehow be able to adapt everything out there without any issues?
What inconsistencies with lenses? With the exception of two zooms, everything performs pretty much accordingly to expectations.
Poor ergonomics and design? These are some of the best mirrorless cameras I have ever tried, with the possible exception of the GH series and the E-M1.
And finally, the “compression issue”. With this one here, you clearly showed that you have never used a Sony camera. I’d suggest you stop reading blogs who have no idea what they are talking about and start using the camera. You will have a much better idea of what it is capable of (or not).
Again, no offence whatsoever, but when I see this usual list of “complaints” it just irks me. Sony, like every other company, has its issues and they are none of the above.
As I understand, shutter vibration is only a problem with long lenses on a tripod. For long lenses on a tripod I use a Manfrotto collar, so the lens rests on two points and can’t swing on one single point. Anyway, I have an A7 and not sure it has the same issue, never was a problem for me anyhow.
The weak mount does not need to be replaced. At least wait till it breaks the first time before you replace it, wouldn’t you?
I publish on the web, jpegs are 8 bit, you know. Whatever my camera is giving me, I can push and pull a lot. From what I hear, Canon chaps are jealous, maybe we should be jealous of the Nikon guys, but I am too busy working with my files to note..
Inaccurate focus peaking.. so who has an accurate one? Olympus? Panasonic? Fuji? Oh, did I tell you I use focus magnification? Focus peaking is on by default now in order to do the quick pre-focussing. It is certainly good to have it. Oh, and Canikon has focus peaking in their OVF? Last time I used my manual focus lenses on a Canon 5D I had to replace the default screen in order to be able to focus with my eyes.. but then, the Mark iii might have something in life view, but to be honest, maybe better not to know..
Oh, and believe me, the people buying the Loxia lenses, they know what they are doing. And it might not be focus peaking that they are using. To repeat myself, focus magnification is so damn perfect in the result, it is poor joy to use manual lenses on. And yes, focus peaking can also be a great support. And then there are also other techniques. Ever heard of zone focussing? And some people are also able to accurately estimate distances, maybe not many, but just like some people don’t need a light meter. And you are free to combine and practice all these techniques for manual focussing. All in all the A7 is a fantastic camera for manual focussing. A touch screen to set the focus point (instead of using cumbersome wheels) would be the icing on the cake.
Issues with wide-angle adapted glass, well, you can only have those problems if you can adapt this kind of glass. Good luck with putting the m-mount lenses on your Canikon, rhmpffff. Oh, and you know, there are the retrofocus super wide angle lenses out there, the ones called Distagons and Elmarit-Rs and such.. The same you also use on the DSLRs.. They work like a charm, because they are designed for not having a steep angle when hitting the film (or sensor). Well, at least to be honest you can also adapt a lot of good glass on a Canon. Ironically it is not so much fun using the old AI-S lenses on most Nikon cameras, thought it is possible.
Inconsistency with the quality of lenses? Indeed, it is very tough to choose from every single 35mm lens every made..
Poor ergonomics and design.. I have small hands, and the A7 fits them perfectly. It has a tilt screen which is irreplaceable for my kind of shooting (or all your photos end up from eye level). Personally I find the A7 serious more beautiful than any other full frame with the exception of the Leicas, thought those I think are still more heavy than the Sony.
Did you talk about size and weight? 474 g vs 760 g for the Canon D6.
The EVF (and tilt screen) you can only get otherwise on the Sony A99 (speaking of FF).
And what about price? When I bought the A7 new it was almost half the price of a full frame Canikon. Now they also came down with prices, but would they have done so without Sony coming into the game? Still today the Canon D6 costs USD 100 more than the Sony A7. A7r vs Nikon D810 is even more in favor towards the Sony. A7s has no competition.
If shutter vibration is a “problem with long lenses on a tripod”, it is an issue when using a long lens with or without a tripod. I believe this is only an issue for the A7r, but seeing I don’t like AA filters, it is the only A7 series camera that I would consider.
While the weak mount may not need to be replaced, it is ridiculous and more importantly a design flaw that Sony carelessly overlooked.
While some may not care that their camera is limited to lossy, compressed RAW files, a $1000 or $2000 camera should not be limited to lossy files, whether it be jpeg or RAW. If not, they really are not D610/D810 quality in a small package.
As for the inaccurate focus peaking, I haven’t tried it, so I don’t know. However, since the A7 series is pretty much relying on adapted lenses, it should be a priority to make the focus peaking as accurate as can be.
While all of what you say is technically correct, the issue here is how big these problems really are? You are basically arguing based on what you’ve read on some blogs against people using these cameras.
1. How come many don’t have the shutter problem? I haven’t seen it at all and I do tend to pixel peep – although, admittedly, I’ve used an a7r only on occasions and the longest lens I tried was a 135mm.
2. A weak mount would be indeed ridiculous, but do you even know what this is based on? This all started with some guy seeing some plastic around the mount and a few wobbly lenses. That’s it. No broken mounts, no effect on IQ or usability, no nothing. So, maybe what is ridiculous here is people complaining about nothing.
3. Yes, a camera should not be limited to lossy files, agreed. Yet, to date I’ve seen like 3 examples of that “issue”, none of them of any relevance when it comes to final output. Arguing that Sony should provide lossless files is more about the principle than anything else.
4. It is accurate. For example, CDAF is renowned to be very precise and it is based on the same idea. The issue is to learn how to use it and know its limitations. And, as pointed above by someone, there’s no better camera for using manual focus lenses than one with an EVF, focus magnification and focus peaking.
Now I’m using Minolta AF 135mm F2.8, aka “Pocket Rocket”, on my A7S with LA-EA4 adapter. This lens is very good – sharp wide open, almost no distortion, and very compact. The downsides are somewhat severe purple fringing and auto focusing noise as it is a 30-year-old screw-drive lens.
When I see the Samyang 135mm F2.0, it just looks so huge. The Samyang looks like a good performing lens, but I’d rather keep using my Pocket Rocket. I know it’s F2.0 vs F2.8, but I just love the compactness of the Minolta.
Yes, the Samyang is as long as the 70-700 but slimmer. A little lighter.
I just bought one and use it with an laea3 as a mf lens on my A6000. I wonder how much sharper this lens is? I have found the Minolta not super sharp at 2.8 myself. Not as good as the sel 50 1.8 anyway. I really notice the lack of OSS at that focal length as well. I also find the bokeh distracting in certain instances. It is an awesome portrait lens but not as good as I hoped as a walk around lens on my hikes.
Oh, maybe it looks sharp because I’m using it on 12MP A7S. In my case, stopping down didn’t improve the sharpness much, which was already good wide open. I guess the Samyang will be sharper than the Minolta. And I agree that some kind of stabilization will be very helpful for a 135mm lens. The biggest point for me was the size. Maybe the Pocket Rocket is not good enough for higher-MP cameras.
I think it is good enough and a fantastic value for me, it just isn’t as all purpose as I hoped. It isn’t as good at fine detail when viewed at %100 in my birding pictures. Closer shots of flowers or portraits of people and it renders beautifully. For $225 for an immaculate optically lens its unbelievable 🙂
Why do people cover brand badges?
Covet. Like oxen.
Thou shall not covet thy neighbors Zeiss lens.
Sorry Barus, can’t tell you – it’s a secret 🙂
Just joking – it is to be less noticed during street photo.
But why covering focus assistance light with duct tape if you can switch it off in menus? 🙂
I think he covered the camera’s name “a7R”. You can see the lamp near the front dial.
You are right. My bad
By removing those ugly duct tapes you would be even less noticed. 🙂
I don’t cover the badges when I go out. I cover my eyes though. I call it “freestyle photography.”
becuz they’re asshats
because they don’t like endorsing a product…specially when doing street photography I do that too and not attract muggers. It is a great idea to cover any brand names/logos so as to show having a generic cam.
Nasty bokeh…..
Burn this troll at the stake !
He said that “Another thing of interest for A7R owners: No problem at all with
shutter vibration loss of sharpness! I can’t say that about the 70-200
which can have that problem (also on tripod) 1/40 to 1/250sec.”
I can’t stand all of this troll talk. First Anton now this guy.
So – is anyone telling the truth a troll? What I write is the truth and shutter vibration is sometimes disturbing as you have to use a workaround.
This forum has a strict code.. Speak out against a known and documented Sony issue and forever be identified as a troll.
Yawn…
Every single post you make is trolling Anton, never have you contributed anything useful or legitimate to the conversation. What a pathetic little man you are, the troll of trolls.
If the problem really existed, it would be present with every long lens. Many make the exact same claim for the D800, no one want’s to admit that their technique is what’s at fault. Do you blame the camera when you get a blurred shot Anton? I bet you do.
If it’s an A7r on a tripod and the shutter speed is 1/40 to 1/250 I do indeed blame the blur on the camera.
But that’s only because it’s a widely known, well documented problem with the A7r. Other than that I might suspect technique. But in this particular case it’s very clear the author is correct.
Good grief, you pansy-waisted buffoon…………good job we’re not teaching you to hold & shoot a firearm.
I own this Samyang, along with the ZE135/2 APO and the ZA135/1.8. There are considerable differences between them. The Samyang is very nice indeed. But it is not an f2.0 lens, and it is more like a 130mm than a 135.
http://alphatog.com/zzPhotos/Lenses/Testing/Compare/135ish/Group.jpg
The Samyang is incredibly sharp. All three lenses are about equal in sharpness.
They are all Otus caliber sharp.
The Samyang ZERO CA. None. Nada. Zilch.
The ZE has almost ZERO negligible CA only in the most extreme. Not worth mentioning.
The ZA has a little more than the others, but nothing to even think about.
See sample comparison. The ZA is brighter at f2.0 than the ZE and the Samyang. The Samyang looks very dark by comparison to the others.
http://alphatog.com/zzPhotos/Lenses/Testing/Compare/135ish/Compare1.jpg
The Samyang has a very noticeable yellow tint compared to the others. The ZE and ZA match each other perfectly. And they match the other Zeiss and Minolta lenses very well too. This Samyang doesn’t even match the other Samyang lenses color. The others are very neutral. But the 135 Samyang is yellow.
The focus ring on the Samyang is wonderful, and a pleasure to use. A full half turn makes it much easier to manual focus than the ZA/1.8. But it’s not as nice as the ZE/2APO, which has a full 3/4 turn. Samyang is internal focus like the ZA, which never changes size. The ZE/2APO changes size.
ZE has the most secure hood. The Samyang hood wobbles a bit, but it is very secure. The ZA hood fits tight, but always comes loose.
Lastly, if you need AF, or shoot action… The ZA135/1.8 is the only way to go. It is deadly accurate on Sony a99/77 and very fast and capable to follow extreme fast action. I use it whenever I need AF. I use the others when I want manual focus.
Sample of ZA action ability…
http://alphatog.com/zzPhotos/Lenses/Testing/Compare/135ish/zaONa99a.jpg
Photozone comparison of the Samyang to the ZA135/1.8 is interesting.
ZA here:
http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/zeiss_za_135_18_ff/mtf.png
Samyang here:
http://www.photozone.de/images/8Reviews/lenses/samyang_135_2/mtf.png
At f5.6, the Samyang barely edges out the center sharpness of the ZA135. But the ZA is sharper in center at 1.8 than Samyang at f2. And the ZA beats the Samyang in every instance of midfield and extreme corner sharpness.
Glad I didn’t accept those earliest tests that seemed to show the Samyang far sharper. I had a feeling it was a little fabricated.
The Zeiss is better, but it is also three times the price. If I could afford it, I’d get it, but the Samyang is really nice for the price. Thanks for the comparisons, guys.
What’s the point here? A $1698 lens is slightly sharper than a $549 lens?
Early tests are comparing Samyang with Canon 135L, which is nearly 20 years old and optically inferior. I didn’t see any review denying Zeiss’ optical excellence.
“Interesting”. That was the point. Which you apparently took as an insult.
Samyang’s a re a great value, but the Zeiss are pricier for a reason. Especially if you include the other aspects, such as vignetting and bokeh.
What if you had accepted the earlier tests showing the Samyang far sharper? What is you sold the ZA and now owned the Samyang? You’d have some money in your pocket and still have an excellent lens, that’s what. ;~)
Sir….you have there what we like to call…a serious addiction.
Great comparison, much more helpful than the actual post. Thanks.
Thank you for the great comparison ! But the Samyang you own isn’t a native E-mount right ? So if you add the adaptor to E-mount, le lens is the biggest in size of the three ?
All of these would require an adapter for E-mount use. They’d all get bigger. This comparison shows relative size for native mount. The ZA and Sammy for A-mount and the ZE for Canon EF mount.
Wrong. The Samyang is available in E mount:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1110690-REG/samyang_sy135m_e_135mm_f_2_lens_for.html
Thanks for your usefull words & pics!
Not that often here at SAR …
The images seem over-sharpened. Maybe its smugmug adding too much sharpening.
Btw: The gallery is called “153/2″…
The motives behind buying such an item is that you are looking for a decent portrait lens but have limited money (or something else which needs it more!).
In my experience of Samyang products they are stellar at filling that niche and I doubt you could do better. It is very likely more expensive lenses will give better figures (and that is certainy what you would expect), but Samyangs are generally fantastic value for money and unbeatable if you know what you’re doing.
I suspect this will be much the same and I’ll probably get one myself.
That lens hood looks huge in comparison to my FD 135mm f2.
The second shot taken with A7 and Fd135mm f2 @ f2.
Mmmm…..all metal.
You’re right with this. I can’t see any reason to prefer the Samyang over the Canon FD.
Precisely.
I love the product pic at the top of the page. The photographer has carefully blacked out the SONY / A7 markings… but he’s using the enormous Sony camera strap. Not exactly stealthy.
He’s ashamed of using the Sony. Not unusual these days.
I know it’s got 9 blades, but the quality of bokeh has much more to do with optical design as well. There are only two shots I’m seeing here showing it off and to my eyes it looks harsh. Maybe someone with some pics from this thing can chime in.
So lame to duct tape the brand.
Ashamed about using Sony?
What the hell…
Good idea to cover that crappy logo 🙂 Sony is for amatures only.
Writing isn’t for amateurs.
is that the a7r2 camera? its taped up?