Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-15-2010, 09:54 PM   #1
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: HCMC
Posts: 272
Porst Tele MC Auto D 135mm 2.8 vs M 135mm 3.5

Dear All,

Which one is better IQ wise and Bokeh.

Any experiences with Pentacon 135 they call bokeh monster?

Need help asap, i wanted this range.


11-16-2010, 03:21 AM   #2
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern England
Posts: 495
I don't know anything about the Porst, other than what I read here:

You may find this helpful.

Regarding the M135/3.5, I have one of these, amongst several other 135s, and really like the fact that it's much smaller and lighter than the others. This makes it a popular choice for putting on my camera!

I'm happy with the IQ of this lens (I haven't any images which have "awkward" bokeh situations), but would expect my S-M-C Takumar, Pentax K and Carl Zeiss Jena versions of 135/3.5 to outperform it in a controlled comparative test (which I haven't yet got round to doing).

Just to summarise the salient features of the 135s I mentioned:

M135/3.5: very compact and lightweight
K135/3.5: excellent IQ, slightly heavier to focus
S-M-C Tak: excellent IQ, wonderful smooth focusing, lovely build quality, but M42
CZJ: excellent IQ, all controls heavier, poorer build quality, M42 of course

If you're after nice soft bokeh, I'm thinking that the CZJ might be your best (but most expensive) option:

Bokeh Test

Do note that it can be difficult to provoke "bad bokeh" in real-life situations, and that a lens which is known for "bad bokeh" may actually perform satisfactorily most of the time. And bokeh is a subjective thing, anyway.
01-23-2019, 04:57 AM   #3
New Member

Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 6
Porst AUTO N or AUTO D ?

The best PORST 2.8/135 is the Auto N, because of its 5/4 elements contruction. auto D has only 4/4 lenses and is not so extremely sharp as AUT N !!! Auto D is fequerntly found, Auto N is very rare !!!
01-24-2019, 05:08 AM   #4
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,614
A very long time ago, I did a comparison between 3 different 135mm lenses

I shot with a Pentax 135/3.5, a rikenon 135/2.8 and a tele lentar 135/2.8 preset.

What I noticed was with the preset lens, I suspect due to optical formula and aperture placement much more forward, that while depth of field at any aperture was the same, the rendition of the farther subjects away from the plane in focus was markedly different than more modern lenses where the aperture is much closer to the rear of the optical group.

Check out the discussion posted in 2010 in the 135 mm lens club, around post 250 in the thread. My comparative photos are still there.


  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
135mm, 135mm 2.8 vs, bokeh, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tokina Tele-Auto 135mm f2.8. Can anyone tell me something about it? fikkser Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-08-2010 12:12 AM
Regarding Porst 135mm f2.8 PK Manual Lens gut1kor Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 3 07-23-2010 08:06 AM
Auto Tele Lentar 135mm 1:3.5 Swift1 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 03-17-2010 09:22 AM
Weltblick auto tele 135mm f2.8? ducdao Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 12-10-2009 09:04 PM
For Sale - Sold: Porst 135mm/1.8 MC for Pentax K pspentax Sold Items 18 03-17-2009 04:43 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:47 AM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]