135GM in 2025

Follow this link for sample images : https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1P5RW6eIgu4s982omCS_6Xkx0r-TfSVjG?usp=sharing

And here is the associated Youtube video for this blog post : https://youtu.be/6icGOXdC3EI

Back Story

Right… I bought this lens about 3wks ago, right before an assignment that I know I needed it.

Before I continue, let me share with you my journey with the 135mm lens. This 135L is my 3rd time buying this specific lens; the 135L was my first ever prime lens that I bought with my own money and the first 135L I got I had to import it from Singapore as it was cheaper there.

I used that for a while and then I replaced it with the 100L macro. After using the 100L macro for about 1yr, I missed the 135L and sold the 100 and got my second 135L.

Then the second 135L got sold once I got the 85 f/1.2L II, which I held onto it until it fell into a waterfall; that’s a story for another day.

So here we are, my 3rd 135L which I bought after I got my 2 Sony bodies. Yes, I bought this with the intention of adapting it to Sony since I knew I liked this lens.

But only after using the 135L with the Sigma MC11 adapter, I found out it had major issues. The 135L + MC11 would work fine initially for every shoot I took it to but eventually, especially for events, it would suddenly cause a 1-5 second shutter lag after I press the shutter.

So… after about 2yrs running around with this crazy combo, I finally had it and decided to pick up a 135GM.

Yes, I wasn’t particularly interested in getting the 135GM, I was waiting for Sigma to release a 135 f/1.8 or 135 f/2.0. But I waited and waited… and couldn’t wait any longer.

So, as you can see, the 135GM had to fight an uphill battle to satisfy me but here’s the TLDR…

TLDR

All tests were conducted using a Sony A7 IV for both the Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 GM and Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L.

The 135GM is good optically, especially when compared to the 135L. But… all it isn’t completely suns and roses for the 135GM. More on this later.

135GM AF is excellent while the 135L + MC11 AF is OK at best.

The 135GM is noticeably heavier; slightly wider and nearly the same length as the 135L + MC11.

Possibly due to the weight, the 135GM feels solid in hand and better built compared to the 135L but there is also slight niggle there. As usual, more details later.

The 135GM has a functionality deficit compared to the 135L; it DOES NOT take any teleconverters, limiting its versatility and lowers its overall value.

Optical Deep Dive

So… let’s look into a bit more detail how the 135GM is optically and its easier if we have a basis for comparison, the Canon EF 135L f/2.0L and as a reminder, it is a lens that was released in April 1996 (yes, it’s nearly 20yrs old :-P)

Sharpness	135GM is noticeably sharper than the 135L but only if viewed close to or greater than 100% crop
Contrast	135GM has noticeably higher contrast and better microcontrast than the 135L
Color	135GM and 135L both render color pleasingly although the 135L renders warmer
CA	The 135L suffers from noticeable lateral CA at 100% at highlight / shadow interfaces; the 135L also has higher although not very bothersome longitudinal CA. The 135GM doesn’t have any noticeable lateral CA and has barely visible longitudinal CA when viewed near 200% or so.
Distortion	The 135GM has higher distortion (pincushion) compared to the 135L; the 135L has barely any distortion. The 135GM still has higher pincushion distortion than the 135L after applying 100% correction in Capture One 21.

Note that all tests are done using a Sony A7 IV.

AF performance

Welp… I am just telling you what you already know, the 135GM autofocuses well and accurately in all the situations I put it in. And I don’t expect there is anything better at autofocus except Sony super-tele GM lenses as the 135GM is the first GM lens to use 4x linear motors.

And when you pair a lens like a 135GM with a Sony body, no third-party lens will ever come close and an adapted lens using a 3rd party adapter will always function even worse than that.

Other Notable Points

Although the lens is built well and feels like it has very good weather-sealing, it is also one of those lenses that uses linear motors for AF.

As such, it is also one of those lenses who you can feel something large moving around if you were to rock the lens left and right in your hand when it is not powered up.

That doesn’t feel particularly good, it makes me worry about the lens’s long term reliability but most LM equipped lenses exhibits the same behaviour; so I really can’t complain too much regarding that.

I do note that the “rattle” isn’t so bad as the 135GM only rattles if you were to rock the lens significantly and it doesn’t sound as if anything is going to break when that happens. It only makes a very solid “thud”when rocked unless some other LM-equiped lenses.

The next notable point is like most 135 f/1.8 lenses and indeed even some other tele mirrorless lenses, this lens doesn’t take any teleconverters.

This is a serious short-coming, it is an option I miss and I really do hope new lenses will support teleconverters, after all, teleconverters are just more accessories that manufacturers can sell to us consumers at high prices, so why not?

Summary

Yes, the 135GM is very good.

I do have to say something about the Sony GM monicker : “Not all Sony GM are created equal” and if I put it another way, some GM isn’t as GM as others, if you know what I mean.

And IMHO, the 135 GM definitely deserves to be called a GM lens.

Is the 135GM worth buying in early 2025?

Is the 135GM worth it especially in 2025, nearly 4yrs after it was released? After the Viltrox 135mm LAB is released? Or after there is a cheaper and lighter Samyang 135mm f/1.8? And… why not get a zoom lens instead? The great 70-200mm f/2.8s or even the currently latest & greatest 50-150mm f/2 GM?

The short answer is, yes, especially if you buy it used.

Let’s look at the Viltrox and Samyang 135 f/1.8; both lenses are known to have nearly comparable optical quality to the 135GM but consider this, the Samyang has a not-so-stellar reputation for AF accuracy, feels rather light. The Viltrox is much heavier and longer; and so far, we don’t know much about it’s AF performance. I did request for a sample from the local Viltrox distributor for testing but so far, they have ignored me completely.

At the time of writing which is June 2025, the price of the Viltrox 135 Lab has dropped to close to RM3k, making it RM2k less than a used 135GM. That does make it slightly more attractive but since AF performance is still an unknown, I still could not recommend buying the Lab unless you aren’t concerned with AF inconsistancies.

Another alternative is the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM; I don’t think anyone should buy that unless you get a great deal for a used copy; let’s say in the range for RM2k or so. Even then, it is not a lens I would aim to keep, it’s just a stop-gap for something better as the lens is huge and heavy; and since it’s using the old HSM motors, the AF would be slower and noisy.

And if you are thinking zoom lenses, they are a different animal altogether except for maybe the new Sony 50-150mm f/2.0 GM but that lens is new and currently selling at RM16,999 only.

Considering that price, I don’t think this lens should be compared with the 135GM. If you can afford the RM17k and think you need that monster, just get it and you really shouldn’t be reading this.

Anyway, if all that doesn’t convince you, have a read of the following section and see if you change your mind regarding that.

Prime vs Zoom

First, let’s deal with the medium tele prime vs telephoto zoom question. A 135mm lens has been one of my preferred telephoto lense for a long, long time.

Before we continue down this rabbit hole, let’s talk about a fact that not every photographer is aware of. It is something I call ”usable distance”, which I define by the distance from the lens must the subject be in order for it to remain in frame or roughly the same composition.

That may be a huge wall of text or words that makes little sense to you but let me try to explain it.

Let’s consider the same subject, a child that you want to take a full-body portrait of. Ask the child to take a step back, does he still look similar in frame? If so, ask him to move another step back.

If you were to do this test with a wide-angle lens, let’s say a 35mm; I would say the child could only move back or forward no more than a step and maybe a step and half before the child appears drastically different in size in frame.

If you were to do this with a 85mm, it would probably take 2 steps or maybe even 3 before the child appears to change in size as much compared to the 35mm.

This is a by-product of perspective compression with longer focal lengths. And that is why most sports photographers would probably know that with a 500/600mm lens, you could cover anywhere near the opposite goal posts to at least ¾ of that half of a football field. If you switched to a 300mm, it will probably be only good near the center band of the half of where you are.

Now, what has that got to do with a 135mm prime? Well… in general, for a tele of 135mm’s length actually has a significant “usable distance” and in use, you could use a 135mm to shoot subjects that are nearly suitable for say a 120mm to maybe 150mm.

In other words, IMHO you don’t really NEED a zoom lens to be flexible at 135mm; of course, that is not to say a 135mm can shoot just as wide as a 50-150mm. The question for you to decide which is more suitable for you is, do you need your telephoto zooms to go as wide as 50mm or 70mm? Or do you normally only shoot 100mm+ with it? If so, consider a 135mm prime.