JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
The Zeiss Milvus 135mm f/2 is a tele lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2016. The focus is done by Manual Focus, it does not have image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 2696 €;
12 users have given it an average vote of 9.9 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Canon EF.
Nikon F: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Nikon.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 247000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
Opinion: I bought it used. It was at the bottom of my list because 135mm is not my preferred focal length. And then I took some test shots. Handheld at minimum focus distance was difficult. So I used it with a tripod. The resolution is way beyond my expectations. The lens has great plane separation from foreground to background. The images look more three-dimensional than any other Milvus lens.
The Milvus lenses all have the same color rendition, so there are no surprises. And of course the bokeh is great.
This lens is more than a portrait lens. You can use it for anything. I recommend the lens to anyone who likes to shoot still life and likes to work with a tripod.
The lens is a challenge for any tripod ball head, even for the best ones. A larger plate is very useful for moving the center of gravity. Unfortunately, there is no place to attach a tripod collar.
It has almost the same dimension like the Milvus 85mm and is lighter and smaller than Otus 100mm . So it's still a pleasure to use it handheld. My favs Zeiss tele lenses are the Otus 85mm and the Milvus 135mm.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Opinion:I had the chance to try this piece of jewelry for a couple of weeks, before considering buying it (used in very good condition). Most of those who have spoken before me have already expressed flattering opinions, which I share. In particular, the color rendering is really excellent, the changes to be made in LR are minimal and can be limited to camera exposure problems, certainly not to lens limitations. I couldn't make direct comparisons in the same session and in the same light conditions with the Sigma 135/1.8 Art, but if you're interested in this comparison you can find it on Dustin Abbott's review: it seems that Milvus prevails in microcontrast, color, definition at close range and infinity, while Sigma has a very slight prevalence in definition at medium distances. But beyond these comparisons, I can say that the visual impact that the Milvus 135 leaves you with is truly remarkable. Those who can afford both lenses (Milvus only on a tripod and in light conditions acceptable for manual focusing, Sigma art 135 when you want to photograph handheld and when you need autofocus) will certainly be satisfied in every situation. Those who have to choose between the two will have to evaluate what type of photography they prefer. In the end, I opted for Sigma art, but I was left with some regrets, especially for landscape and close-up photography.
Opinion:Great optics that equals its famous predecessor APO DISTAGON 135/2 Classic, of which it maintains the same optical scheme but with the addition of tropicalization. Sharp already at f/2, detachment on the planes, colors and Bokeh make it a reference for this focal length. I do not think the front cap is up to this jewel (but it is a flaw already known in all the Zeiss Classic and Milvus) and the rubbery bezel that is easily marked. The stroke of the bezel is long and frictioned in the right way and allows you to easily find the focus but it is equally easy to lose it even if you have surgeon's hands, and especially if you work with open apertures, you risk losing many shots; for this it would be good to use it with the support of a tripod .. but those who buy a manual 135/2 this should already 'take into account .. RATING : 9,9
Opinion:I have the Canon version and I currently combine it with an R6 with battery grip. A lens that I would recommend, very nice the detachment of the planes and the transition from focus to defocus. The blurry is soft and the colors it reproduces are very beautiful, from the surrounding landscape to the complexion even shooting only in natural light (which I rarely do). It is a very sharp lens at all focal distances, the focus is very precise: at the beginning a little duretta but after a short break-in period it is much softer and smoother. Using it with mirrorless and with the various focus peaking does not slow down a photo session: I tried to test it here at Santa Monica Pier, a very crowded area full of colors and contrasts. Excellent contrast in backlight, well balanced on the body to which it is combined. Bought together with the camera body at a great price with the idea in mind of reselling it to earn something: after the first shots I immediately changed my mind. This lens remains stable in my kit and has become the one I prefer the most.
Pros:Sharpness, contrast, colors and what has already been said and known about this lens
Cons:For me, no one
Opinion:Having already had several Zeiss in classic version, I always thought I would prefer them aesthetically to the Milvus. Then I had an unmissable opportunity of the Milvus 135/2, and I could not let it get away (although having the same lens in Classic version). Well from my simple home trials, although the two lenses have the exact same optical scheme, I think I can say that the Milvus has a, albeit very small, best yield. In the sharpness, contrast and saturation of colors. I think if I remember correctly, the same is said for the 100 Makro, between the Classic and Milvus versions. It is very difficult to improve lenses that are born close to perfection, but with the Milvus the engineers of Zeiss have succeeded. On an aesthetic level, I am starting to be attracted more and more by the new more modern line of the Milvus, but I still do not feel that I can say that I prefer it to the beautiful vintage line of the Classic. Other improvements include waterproofing, less delicate coating, manual focus ring (according to me) and finally also writings and caps (but on the caps it was not difficult to improve). As for the cons, it would be easy to say the price, but for the quality and sophistication of the lens and materials I would say that it is absolutely justified. Finally, manual fire, which thinking about it is by no means a limit, considering that we are talking about a lens not suitable for everyone and that is not born for the street, but for a refined and studioic use. Rating 10 cum laude
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
