September 22, 2014, 12:39:54 AM

Author Topic: Canon 135L f/2  (Read 16345 times)

phoenix

  • Guest
Canon 135L f/2
« on: October 31, 2011, 11:47:20 AM »
Is this a good time to pick up a 135L with the $75 rebate from
B&H? I heard there's rumours with 135L equipping a new f1.8 with image stabilizer. Not sure if I should get it

canon rumors FORUM

Canon 135L f/2
« on: October 31, 2011, 11:47:20 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14451
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2011, 12:16:36 PM »
Never make buying decisions based on rumors.  If you are waiting for a 24-70mm II based on that, you would have started waiting in 2009 or before, and still be no closer to having the lens.

If you want the 135L, just get it.  It's an amazing lens in it's current form.  I will admit that for many purposes, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is better - it's IQ matches or exceeds the prime, and it's more versatile and has IS.  But the 135L is a stop faster, is smaller and lighter, and cheaper, too. 

Generally, the best time to buy a new Canon lens is during the rebate period (still true even though the rebates don't mean what they used to, thanks to the enforced minimum price).
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8687
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2011, 12:24:30 PM »
Is this a good time to pick up a 135L with the $75 rebate from
B&H? I heard there's rumours with 135L equipping a new f1.8 with image stabilizer. Not sure if I should get it

How long are you willing to wait?   The 135mm f/2 is a bargain compared to the $3500-$5000 lens you described.  Just get a 200mm f/2 IS if you want a wide aperture short telephoto lens.  A 135mm f/1.8 IS might be the same size and price, or close to it.

ianhar

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2011, 02:04:13 PM »
135 f2 is a great lens and its quite cheap compared to the other L lenses. If you ask me, i will buy the 135 L anytime. Itsone of the lens you will never regret buying. But as i always says, never buy any lens cause some forum ask you too. If you are willing to wait. Then wait. But no one can guarantee you when it is coming out and update lens will always be more expensive than the older one even at same apperture.

Leopard Lupus

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #4 on: October 31, 2011, 02:18:05 PM »
The majority of Canon lenses hold their value, regardless if a new one is released (sure it might go down a bit). You can always sell the lens if you feel the need to upgrade later on.
The 135 L is amazing, just FYI.

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #5 on: October 31, 2011, 02:22:57 PM »
I am in the market to buy the 135L myself as well and have the same questions.  Ultimately I am convinced that any new model will be more expensive (especially with IS) and the current model would likely sell very well on the used market.

Where I am puzzled is I hearing more and more (see Neuro comments above) that the 70-200 2.8 II IS is almost as sharp as the 135L wide open.  It is more versatile but a bit heavier.  I am debating to buy this zoom lens instead.  Although for indoor use the 135L might be better due to faster prime.

When shooting both lens at f2.8, the test out there suggest the 135 is much sharper, but from real user, anyone experience with these and can comment?
1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

photophreek

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2011, 02:49:01 PM »
I don't think the 70-200 II is a"bit heavier".  The 135L weighs 726g and the 70-200 II weighs 1695g.  If Canon produces a 135L 1.8, the lens will be very expensive at probably about $5K.

The 135L is a very sharp lens and is probably considered Canon's sharpest prime.  I have both and I'm always amazed at the sharpness of the 135L when I use it. 

I would suggest getting the 135L.  You will not regret your purchase

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #6 on: October 31, 2011, 02:49:01 PM »

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #7 on: October 31, 2011, 03:18:50 PM »
I don't think the 70-200 II is a"bit heavier".  The 135L weighs 726g and the 70-200 II weighs 1695g.  If Canon produces a 135L 1.8, the lens will be very expensive at probably about $5K.

The 135L is a very sharp lens and is probably considered Canon's sharpest prime.  I have both and I'm always amazed at the sharpness of the 135L when I use it. 

I would suggest getting the 135L.  You will not regret your purchase

I use the 135 on both the 5DII and the 7D for different uses - stunning bokeh and I wouldn't  bet that the 70-200II is sharper at all. Quite a discrete lens for street shots - better than a large white for that.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14451
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2011, 03:29:00 PM »
The 135L is a very sharp lens and is probably considered Canon's sharpest prime.

Perhaps sharpest prime under $5000?  The 200/2, 300/2.8, etc., are noticeably sharper.

Where I am puzzled is I hearing more and more (see Neuro comments above) that the 70-200 2.8 II IS is almost as sharp as the 135L wide open.  It is more versatile but a bit heavier.  I am debating to buy this zoom lens instead.  Although for indoor use the 135L might be better due to faster prime.

When shooting both lens at f2.8, the test out there suggest the 135 is much sharper, but from real user, anyone experience with these and can comment?

I wouldn't say the 135/2 is 'much sharper' than the 70-200/2.8 II at f/2.8 - they are pretty close (TDP's ISO 12233 crops show a very slight advantage to the 135/2, photozone's resolution figures give a very slight edge to the 70-200 II away from the center) - note, that's the MkII, which is sharper than any of the other 70-200/2.8 lenses.  In real world use, those differences are not going to be visible at all.

The 135L does let in an extra stop of light, but I'd really say it depends on your use for the lens (indoors or out).  If you're shooting people under standard conditions (events, etc.), 1/60 s is usually enough to freeze movement.  At 135mm, you need about 1/125 s to have a decent keeper rate (assuming FF, on APS-C more like 1/200 s).  So, in dim light the 135L will give you the extra stop, with the 70-200/2.8 you have IS to allow you to handhold at 1/60 s.  Where the 135L will make the difference in low light is shooting action, where you need all the shutter speed you can get.  Also, it makes a difference in the amount of OOF blur for portraits. 

So, IMO the 135L is better for indoor sports, dance recitals, etc., and better for portraits - I use mine for those purposes.  Otherwise, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is better for general purpose use (assuming you don't mind the weight, and have the budget for it) - and with the great IQ and versatility, the 70-200 II is my second most-used lens.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #9 on: October 31, 2011, 04:03:06 PM »
Why always the assumption that the extra stop is going to be used with slow shutter speed?

Try iso400 instead of iso800 or 1/1000 instead of 1/500 - these are the places where the extra stop makes the difference. IS is a prop for those without tripod or monopod - IS doesn't stop the subject moving so you end up with a sharp background and blurred subject (unless panning).

Brian

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #10 on: October 31, 2011, 04:07:14 PM »
Personally I find the bokeh better from the 135L compared with the 70-200 II - this translates in a better IQ from the viewers point of view.

Always look at the bokeh - bad bokeh = ugly picture, particularly when cropped

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #11 on: October 31, 2011, 04:39:23 PM »
Well you guys are just too convincing and I am just too weak!  I just ordered the 135L from BH... :P
1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

phoenix

  • Guest
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2011, 07:15:30 PM »
With the ongoing rebate. Is that an indication they are trying to wipe out the stocks?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2011, 07:15:30 PM »

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2011, 07:37:50 PM »
No I dont beleive so phoenix.  At this time of year Canon always has some discounts on a number of lens and I dont beleive this has any linkage to how new or old the lens are.  It is more about what Marketing beleive is the best rebate strategy for the holidays.  For example you see the 85mm 1.2L II or the new 100mm Macro lens in the list of rebate and those are just two example of recent lens not going away anytime soon  :).

Last week-end I checked on ebay for how much the old version of the 24mm 1.4L was going for now that a version II exist and was surprise at how much it had retained its value still...

At this point and as you will read often in these forums, if you need it, buy it!  This is only a rumor site!  And from all the feed-back from our fellow friends above, it seem hard to go wrong with the 135L.

Your post helped me click the "buy" button for that lens... :P

Cheers
1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14451
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #14 on: October 31, 2011, 09:15:11 PM »
Why always the assumption that the extra stop is going to be used with slow shutter speed?

Try iso400 instead of iso800 or 1/1000 instead of 1/500 - these are the places where the extra stop makes the difference. IS is a prop for those without tripod or monopod - IS doesn't stop the subject moving so you end up with a sharp background and blurred subject (unless panning).

My point was that when you're in low light and have already bumped up the ISO as far as you can go...f/2 and 1/125 s for handholding at 135mm, vs. f/2.8 and 1/60 s at 135mm with IS, it's a wash and 1/60 s is enough to freeze people who are 'still' (but 1/30 s is not). 

Personally, I have both a tripod and a monopod...but I still find IS useful. 

Well you guys are just too convincing and I am just too weak!  I just ordered the 135L from BH... :P

Congrats - it really is an excellent lens, and like Brian, I also find the bokeh from the 135L more pleasing than that from the 70-200 II. 

Enjoy!
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 135L f/2
« Reply #14 on: October 31, 2011, 09:15:11 PM »