Premium Portrait Lenses Compared: Nikon’s NIKKOR Z and Viltrox Lab

Two 135mm lenses are competing for a place in your Nikon Z setup: Nikon’s own Plena and Viltrox’s Lab Series. Knowing which lens suits your work means digging into details beyond the spec sheet.

Coming to you from Dustin Abbott, this insightful video offers a direct comparison between Nikon’s NIKKOR Z 135mm f/1.8 S Plena lens and Viltrox’s LAB Series 135mm f/1.8 lens. Abbott highlights key similarities, such as their identical focal lengths, aperture, and remarkably close build quality. Autofocus performance is nearly identical, though some minor but crucial distinctions set these lenses apart. For instance, the LAB lens offers more customization options like an LCD screen displaying focus and aperture settings, a three-position focus limiter, and a clickable aperture ring. Surprisingly, the LAB lens also has slightly less distortion than Nikon's version, although Abbott emphasizes this difference isn't decisive.

The differences Abbott identifies between these two lenses mostly come down to build and specific usability features. The LAB lens is noticeably heavier by around 273 grams, making Nikon’s Plena a better choice for extended handheld shooting. Another critical point Abbott mentions is the aperture control: the Plena delivers smoother aperture transitions suitable for video, whereas the LAB lens exhibits noticeable stepping, making it less ideal for video applications. Abbott also emphasizes the superior manual focusing feel of the Plena lens, noting smoother, uninterrupted movements compared to the LAB's slight stepping motion.

Further into the comparison, Abbott discusses some optical subtleties. Both lenses perform excellently in sharpness, with Nikon’s Plena slightly edging out the LAB in central sharpness at wide apertures. Conversely, the Viltrox LAB lens demonstrates superior mid-frame sharpness and marginally better corner performance. Close-focusing abilities also favor the LAB, which provides higher magnification (0.25x vs. Nikon’s 0.20x), potentially enhancing macro or detailed portrait photography. However, Abbott clarifies that while both lenses handle minimum focus distances well, Nikon slightly excels in resolving finer detail.

Abbott also points out Nikon’s Plena’s distinct advantage in vignette and specular highlight rendering. The lens shows exceptionally even illumination across the frame and produces more consistently round bokeh highlights, an important consideration for portrait photographers seeking visually pleasing background blur. The Viltrox performs admirably in this area too, though not quite matching Nikon’s standard-setting performance.

While both lenses struggle somewhat with video autofocus smoothness and responsiveness, Abbott finds the Nikon slightly more reliable and less frustrating in practice. Portrait photographers who rely heavily on autofocus accuracy will likely favor Nikon’s Plena, as it demonstrated a higher rate of focus consistency in Abbott’s controlled tests. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Abbott.