What is the quality of the Nikkor-W 135 f/5.6 ?

[Navy Moose]

Hello All,

I recently bid on a Nikkor-W 135mm f/5.6 on E-Bay as a semi-wide angle lens for landscape work.

Several reviews I saw indicate this lens is not very good. I own several Nikkor lenses for my DSLR and they are fantastic lenses. This is why the reviews seem suspicious to me.

Since most of my work is landscapes, I won't be using a ton of movement. Does anyone here have any first hand experience with this lens?

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Navy Moose

[Kevin Crisp]

I've used the 90, the 150, the 210 and the 240, and they were excellent. It would be hard for me to believe that Nikon couldn't pull off a 135mm. I am extremely skeptical of unresearched "this is better than that" opinions on the web.

[Ron Marshall]

I have a Nikkor 90 and a 200, both are excellent. There is often a greater difference between samples of the same lens than between the same focal length from different manufacturers.

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/testing.html

[Dave_B]

I have this lens. Its main drawback is a somewhat limited image circle (200mm @f22). Otherwise, it is a fine perfromer like all the modern Nikkor lenses. Like any recent lens from one of the big four, it will let you take fine photographs providing you get a decent copy of it and know how to use it. The Nikkor lenses have a look-sharp, good contrast, nothing to complain about. They do not have any special character like some of the older lenses you see for sale here and elsewhere. The Nikkors do not intrude into the picture and impose their character onto the image.

IMHO, the main issue with this lens is that is is not a classic like some others in this range. For example while people will sing the praises morning, noon and night of the Schneider SSXL 110, this lens tends to get overlooked. No one has ever called this a modern classic and never will. But because it tends to get overlooked, it does not go for what the SSXL 110 does on the used lens market. If you are looking for a decent performer on a budget, this lens is worth considering if you can get a good price and check it before you keep it.
Cheers,
Dave B.

[Navy Moose]

Thank you all for your feedback. The lens is for the moment bidding at a reasonable price.

[richard brown]

i have a copy of this lens and so does my buddy Peter.... he tested both copies with a lens resolution chart and both were the sharpest lenses he has tested. in fact, sharper and better contrast than a schneider apo symar 135 i owned and sold after the test. i agree it has limits with its circle but i got a nikkor 120SW for times i need big coverage. For landscape, the nikkor 135 is the top gun in my humble opinion. happy shooting!!!

[Navy Moose]

i have a copy of this lens and so does my buddy Peter.... he tested both copies with a lens resolution chart and both were the sharpest lenses he has tested. in fact, sharper and better contrast than a schneider apo symar 135 i owned and sold after the test. i agree it has limits with its circle but i got a nikkor 120SW for times i need big coverage. For landscape, the nikkor 135 is the top gun in my humble opinion. happy shooting!!!

Hi Richard,

I lost my first auction, I bid on the same lens that is in slightly better shape earlier today. My Rodenstock 150mm is a good lens, but I want something a bit wider to catch the scenic vistas I bought the camera for.

Thank you for your feedback!

Navy Moose

[Kevin Crisp]

I'd go for a 120mm if you have an 150. The 120 APO symmar goes for relatively little and it has more usable coverage than people seem to think it has. You can take a couple steps back with your 150 and you have a 135. And I would never bid in an eBay auction until the last few seconds. OK, I'm done with unsolicited advice.

[Nick_3536]

I agree. If you have an 150 I'd go wider. Maybe 105 or 90mm.

[Robert Skeoch]

I have a Nikon 135mm.... it's a nice lens and I think they sell in the $400 range on the bay.
-rob