Canon 135mm vs Nikkor 135mm 3.5

[gregarpp]

Which one is supposed to be better??
I have both older chrome versions with LTM.

Any suggestions?

[back alley]

the black versions.

both get about the same reviews, that being...excellent.

[gregarpp]

My silver versions are no good??
I plan on only keeping one... I am not sure which one

[back alley]

silver are good, i had one, the canon.

they both get very good reviews. the nikkor usually sells for more.

[wlewisiii]

Decide for yourself. This is a case where all _you_ can do is put film behind both lenses, decide which you actually like better and then deal with it.

Yeah, comparasons are nice. Sche*ss happens.

Wiliam

[VinceC]

I read somewhere (probably here) that a 135mm lens is one of the least challenging optical designs, so all varieties tend to be excellent.

I don't know anything about the Canon version. On the Nikkor, they design was stable and there are no optical variations in chrome of black barrel except that a very few of the earliest chrome lenses were f/4 instead of f/3.5.

[Brian Sweeney]

I have the Nikkor and Canon lenses.

The Nikkor optical formula went unchanged from the 1950 chrome lens to the 1980's AIs series when it was discontinued. Nikon multicoated it, but the formula stayed the same. I have one of those, too.

The Black Canon lens is shorter and lighter. It is also quite sharp. Performance is a tossup between the two, they are not expensive, buy one of each.

[VinceC]

135s tend to be the least expensive lens for any system.