A few of the portraiture club members have the lens and love it, just can be a little tight in a studio shoot subject to the application and prefer the 50mm 85mm focal length in that application.
For myself i see the 135mm Plena as another tool fit for a need, its showing some new innovative design, bravo, and it has its place for certain, is it worth it, well that's up to you, its already dropped in price here in OZ.
To me longer focal length also adds to creating greater shallow DOF we can see this in position of the subject and in focal lengths 200, 400, 600, 800mm.
At shorter focal lengths like 35, 50, 85, 135 it needs to be done with more engineering i feel.
Ziess Leica, with all there manual 1.4, F2, primes really excel in this unique DOF and subject POP and get it from shorter focal length primes due to their unique lens designs, my 100 F2 Ziess Macro is excellent, dreamy background pop tack sharp, heavy as but for a purpose, i mean weight is of value in theses types of lenses, these manual primes are in cases very much sort after for video.
The Ziess Leica brand have always been sort after for this SDOF POP and back ground outcome, they have always been heavy, well built and optically magical, known for excelling especially from F4 to F1.4 which is their sweet spot, something i feel the big three are doing now better and better for them selves.
We used to go gaga over the number of pixels, now its a FPS race and tracking LOL, now there adding the trend of F stops 1.4, 1.8, 1.2, 0.95, and there is nothing wrong in that.
For myself i get very natural bokah and shallow depth of field from my 70-200 FL at F2.8 and its tack sharp making it more then fit for my purpose, i mean its not the same as the 135mm Plena wide open but adding distance in the mix really makes the 70-200 look very usable and very enjoyable.
For those with the need the Plena seems nice.
Being overpriced is not a surprise being Nikon, why because they can and seem to usually get away with it.
Only an opinion
