October 31, 2014, 06:25:40 PM

Author Topic: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?  (Read 11753 times)

ahsanford

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #75 on: March 26, 2014, 12:36:43 PM »
The 135L has so many other great uses other than indoor sports. Except for Macro and Supertele I have and can use it in almost any situation with the proper sneaker zooming. I put this lens in the same category as the 85 1.2. It has a unique look and color unlike any other Canon lens.If you can get it , get it, especially if it's through the Refurb program at 696.

So did they end up sending you the refurb'd 135mm after all?

Still listed as out of stock at this time.  I expect it will get restocked, but possibly not during this (20% off) sale window.

- A

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #75 on: March 26, 2014, 12:36:43 PM »

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1467
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #76 on: March 26, 2014, 01:26:56 PM »
The 135L has so many other great uses other than indoor sports. Except for Macro and Supertele I have and can use it in almost any situation with the proper sneaker zooming. I put this lens in the same category as the 85 1.2. It has a unique look and color unlike any other Canon lens.If you can get it , get it, especially if it's through the Refurb program at 696.

So did they end up sending you the refurb'd 135mm after all?

Still listed as out of stock at this time.  I expect it will get restocked, but possibly not during this (20% off) sale window.

- A

See this thread:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20148.msg381187#msg381187

At that time it was listed as in stock but could not be added to the cart. I contacted them and they said it wasn't for sale and certainly not in stock and that this was a cached page. But slclick figured out a workaround and was able to order the lens, except he wasn't sure if they will honor the order. I was also curious because if they really don't have it in stock, it will be hard for them to ship one. On the other hand, if they did then the reps gave me incorrect information both over the phone and via email. It's all very weird and, unfortunately, extremely poor communication from Canon.
Now it seems that the lens wasn't in stock after all.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2014, 01:30:40 PM by sagittariansrock »
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1467
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #77 on: March 26, 2014, 01:34:12 PM »
I should inform you, however, that I got an offer via Greentoe for $ 995 before main-in rebate. That, with the $ 20 off first time purchase offer from Greentoe, makes the sale price $ 875 after rebates. I know this is a lot more than $ 697, but it is a really good price for a new US-warranty lens from an authorized dealer.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

ksagomonyants

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #78 on: March 26, 2014, 08:00:31 PM »
If it helps with your answer: 
  • Besides the 70-200, I use a 5D3 with a 24-70 F/4 IS, 28 F/2.8 IS, 40 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 100 F/2.8L IS and a 2x T/C.
  • Enthusiast only -- not a pro.

I appreciate the guidance!

- A

Since you don't have 85L yet, 135L will be great for half body portrait. It's sharp and the bokeh is smooth.

I'm shooting with 2 bodies. My most use combo are: 24-70 II + 70-200 f2.8 IS II and 50L + 135L(when I need some extra speed for indoor).

Why would he spend extra $700-800 for 135L if he can get sharp half-body portraits with nice bokeh using his 70-200?

Besides being great lens for portrait, 135L will be great for indoor(1 full stop faster than 70-200), sharp at wide open, light weight and of course price tag(when compared to 85L).

All great and valid points, Dylan. But the OP is not choosing between 70-200, 135 and 85 1.2. He's asking if 135L is going to give him something unique as compared to 70-200 2.8. I think it won't. And if the OP needs to have a nice indoor lens for portraits, sharp, inexpensive and light, he can just get 85 1.8. The 85 1.2 is a different story, but I'm not sure OP is interested in getting it  ;)

P.S. I really like your lens collection  :D

Northstar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1484
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #79 on: March 26, 2014, 08:33:19 PM »
I just realized that i didnt answer your question.

Answer...not much.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2014, 08:54:10 AM by Northstar »
Sport Shooter

1dX and 5d3... 24-70 2.8ii, 70-200 2.8ii, 1.4xiii and 2xiii, 85, 40mm, 300 2.8L IS....430ex

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #80 on: March 27, 2014, 03:02:21 AM »
Buyer beware:

I got a 70-200 2.8ii  refurb. It was as sharp as a new one, although the new one was perhaps sharper. I kept the new one since it was same price as refurb ($1999)

I for a 24-70 2.8ii refurb; It was not even close to a new 24-70 in sharpness that I had sampled earlier ... I sold it at a loss and got a Sigma 24-105 ART. A new 24-70 is sharper than the Sigma but I don't make money off this hobby so for now Sigma is ok for me.

There is a reason some lenses are returned and refurbished (or not). It is up to you to decide if you will get lucky or not.

Wise advice.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #81 on: March 27, 2014, 03:09:37 AM »

Have to disagree, it's not all subjective...the pictures speak for themselves.  It's just subjective opinion that tries to tell you, that your eyes are lying to you!

That is your opinion (subjective) until you post images backing up your claim. So show us.

My claim about what?  There's lots of pictures shot with this lens in the lens section and other threads.  I'm saying the lens can produce amazing pictures with a unique look.  You're saying it's no better than the 70-200, because anyone could post a shot done with either and not enough people could guess which lens was used to do the shot?  So what?  As if that somehow negates the fact that the 135 can take amazing pictures with spectacular bokeh, contrast, and sharpness...and do it at f/2?  If you think the fact that both lenses can produce a strong and smooth bokeh with nice color...and this negates the need for using a 135L, that's what's subjective.  I simply disagreed that it wasn't "all subjective", and I doubt I could prove anything to you no matter what I said or what pictures I posted, in any case.  Neither of us is going to sway the other's opinion here. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #81 on: March 27, 2014, 03:09:37 AM »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #82 on: March 27, 2014, 03:16:09 AM »
While I agree that for the most part if given the opportunity to manipulate the shooting scenario, you could basically get a close to or similar look to the 135 with the 100 and/or the 70-200. However, it doesn't change the fact that for reasons which I can't quite explain in a scientific fashion, I can consistently get shots that look a certain way when the 135 is mounted while I'm running and gunning (without having to pay mind to subject to background distance and shooting distance from subject etc).

I have the 85II, 90tse, 100, 135, and the 70-200II. The 100 and the zoom get the least amount of usage. The ONLY time I pull the zoom out is for paid shoots when I need the zoom flexibility and the 100 is strictly a macro lens (for my shooting needs). Even then, the 100 is only pulled out when I need 1:1 macro which is not often. Most of the time, the 90tse is preferred for close up product type shots.

This is not to say that it will be the same for you. As others have stated, your question is one that cannot be accurately answered by anyone else other than yourself as you are the only one that truly knows what your needs and preferences are.

+1, a well reasoned response John.

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1467
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #83 on: March 27, 2014, 04:44:48 AM »

Have to disagree, it's not all subjective...the pictures speak for themselves.  It's just subjective opinion that tries to tell you, that your eyes are lying to you!

That is your opinion (subjective) until you post images backing up your claim. So show us.

My claim about what?  There's lots of pictures shot with this lens in the lens section and other threads.  I'm saying the lens can produce amazing pictures with a unique look.  You're saying it's no better than the 70-200, because anyone could post a shot done with either and not enough people could guess which lens was used to do the shot?  So what?  As if that somehow negates the fact that the 135 can take amazing pictures with spectacular bokeh, contrast, and sharpness...and do it at f/2?  If you think the fact that both lenses can produce a strong and smooth bokeh with nice color...and this negates the need for using a 135L, that's what's subjective.  I simply disagreed that it wasn't "all subjective", and I doubt I could prove anything to you no matter what I said or what pictures I posted, in any case.  Neither of us is going to sway the other's opinion here.

You said in your previous post how 100L and 70-200 II owners 'overrate' their lenses. I feel that is subjective. Someone who actually owns a lens and can rate it high only because he has created great images with it. So I am sure you and many others feel the 135L is great because you've made some great images with it, but that doesn't mean people haven't created great images with the other two.
Another point: in order to feel the magic of a lens, you have to know what the shooting conditions were and how the eventual image turned out. I've seen many beautiful images created by the 35L but didn't feel the magic until I actually used it. This is entirely my opinion, but I think the OP should definitely get the 135L and try it out himself. I hope to do the same soon.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #84 on: March 27, 2014, 05:07:33 AM »

Have to disagree, it's not all subjective...the pictures speak for themselves.  It's just subjective opinion that tries to tell you, that your eyes are lying to you!

That is your opinion (subjective) until you post images backing up your claim. So show us.

My claim about what?  There's lots of pictures shot with this lens in the lens section and other threads.  I'm saying the lens can produce amazing pictures with a unique look.  You're saying it's no better than the 70-200, because anyone could post a shot done with either and not enough people could guess which lens was used to do the shot?  So what?  As if that somehow negates the fact that the 135 can take amazing pictures with spectacular bokeh, contrast, and sharpness...and do it at f/2?  If you think the fact that both lenses can produce a strong and smooth bokeh with nice color...and this negates the need for using a 135L, that's what's subjective.  I simply disagreed that it wasn't "all subjective", and I doubt I could prove anything to you no matter what I said or what pictures I posted, in any case.  Neither of us is going to sway the other's opinion here.

You said in your previous post how 100L and 70-200 II owners 'overrate' their lenses. I feel that is subjective. Someone who actually owns a lens and can rate it high only because he has created great images with it. So I am sure you and many others feel the 135L is great because you've made some great images with it, but that doesn't mean people haven't created great images with the other two.
Another point: in order to feel the magic of a lens, you have to know what the shooting conditions were and how the eventual image turned out. I've seen many beautiful images created by the 35L but didn't feel the magic until I actually used it. This is entirely my opinion, but I think the OP should definitely get the 135L and try it out himself. I hope to do the same soon.

Agree on most points.  But I still feel the way I do, because those same people are saying those two lenses can take the place of the 135.  I say they can't.  In my opinion that is overrating them.  I would never claim the 135 could take the place of both of those lenses, although it can certainly do macro shots with an extension tube.  My feeling about the 70-200, is that most of the portrait photography done with it, is done around 135mm and wider.  In those cases it definitely will not have the same degree of bokeh that the 135 does.  Event photography would make more use of the entire zoom range, obviously.

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1674
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #85 on: March 27, 2014, 05:35:38 AM »
I really like(d) my 135/2, which I have used along side my 70-200/2.8II and 85/1.2II.

A couple of weeks ago, I dropped it on a tiled floor. Got enough internal damage to put it to final rest (CPS assessed repair cost to equal a new lens). First thought was to buy a new one, but I realized that with the other two listed above, I am able to shoot all the things I want to shoot. The 135 draws less attention than the 70-200, but I can´t say it bothers me. I have always enjoyed the 85/1.2II more and now that lens is being used more instead.

The 135 is a great lens, which deserves all the acclaim it gets, but I have decided to live without it. But if an IS version with equal/better IQ comes along .... mighty tempting ...
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2999
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #86 on: March 27, 2014, 09:17:57 AM »
The 135 is a great lens, which deserves all the acclaim it gets, but I have decided to live without it. But if an IS version with equal/better IQ comes along .... mighty tempting ...
My thoughts exactly!  I would love also love to see an IS version, as long as they don't make it f/2.8 :)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #87 on: March 27, 2014, 09:25:48 AM »

Have to disagree, it's not all subjective...the pictures speak for themselves.  It's just subjective opinion that tries to tell you, that your eyes are lying to you!

That is your opinion (subjective) until you post images backing up your claim. So show us.

I often read about the 'magic' of the 135L, but I don't buy it.  Or, if the 135L is 'magical' then the 70-200 II and 100L are equally 'magical'. 

Many people who claim the images from the 135L are somehow more special than images from those other lenses often have not used the other lenses.  Sure, there are situations where the 135L can deliver a shot not possible with the other two, just as there are situations where the 100L or 70-200 II can deliver a shot that the 135L cannot – overall I'd say the latter situations outnumber the former.

Most times, the difference come down more to the skill of the photographer (in both capturing and processing the image) than the the differences between the lenses.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #87 on: March 27, 2014, 09:25:48 AM »

slclick

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 468
  • I've got a sharp artifact for you!
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #88 on: March 27, 2014, 10:03:10 AM »
I tried and tried with other lenses but the only time I could get a shot of a unicorn pissing rainbows was with the 135L.
5d3+ Sigma 24-105, Sigma 35, Canon 40, Canon 70-200L 2.8 ll, Canon 100L Macro, Kenko 1.4 Extender

JohnDizzo15

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 420
    • View Profile
Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #89 on: March 27, 2014, 10:08:23 AM »
I tried and tried with other lenses but the only time I could get a shot of a unicorn pissing rainbows was with the 135L.

Ahh the ever so elusive unicorn pissing rainbows shot. It is precisely why I always have the 135 with me. Lol.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How much will I use the 135L if I already have the 70-200 F/2.8 IS II?
« Reply #89 on: March 27, 2014, 10:08:23 AM »