Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

P

PXL_Pusher

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

The sample shots of this lens are great and I love the saturation it seems to capture!

I currently own the 100mm f/2.8L Macro (which is also a great portrait prime) and have been trying to decide if to jump on another fast prime (ex. 135mm f/2L or the 200mm f/2.8L). The issue i'm running into is deciding between these primes or going for a 70-200mm f2.8L (non-MKII, simply because I don't have that in my current budget). For the 200 prime, I can get the same aperture out of the zoom, but how much would IQ suffer? and is the 135mm enough of a difference from my 100mm macro to make it worth it? I'm shooting with a 7D, and currently only have a sigma 50mm 1.4 as my other lens, so moving around for framing is not new to me. Anyone interested in giving me me their two cents?

Lastly, I know i'm being lazy by not making a trip to google, but is this lens weather sealed?
 

dstppy

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 26, 2011
981
0
Connecticut . . . ish.
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

PXL_Pusher said:
The sample shots of this lens are great and I love the saturation it seems to capture!

I currently own the 100mm f/2.8L Macro (which is also a great portrait prime) and have been trying to decide if to jump on another fast prime (ex. 135mm f/2L or the 200mm f/2.8L). The issue i'm running into is deciding between these primes or going for a 70-200mm f2.8L (non-MKII, simply because I don't have that in my current budget). For the 200 prime, I can get the same aperture out of the zoom, but how much would IQ suffer? and is the 135mm enough of a difference from my 100mm macro to make it worth it? I'm shooting with a 7D, and currently only have a sigma 50mm 1.4 as my other lens, so moving around for framing is not new to me. Anyone interested in giving me me their two cents?

Lastly, I know i'm being lazy by not making a trip to google, but is this lens weather sealed?
Aren't *ALL* "L" lenses weather sealed?

The 200mm L is on my short list as well.

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.
 
T

T2iShooter

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

No, not all L lenses are weather sealed. The 70-200 f/4 being a good example of non-sealed.

As for the 135 f/2 vs 200 f2.8 issue, it's mostly personal preference. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the 135 is slightly sharper. If you want the extra f-stop, and don't need the extra 65mm of focal length, and are willing to spend ~$300 extra, then go for it.

For the 200 f/2.8 vs. Original 70-200 f/2.8 IS, the prime is sharper, but the zoom is more versatile (being a zoom and all...).
 
P

PXL_Pusher

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

dstppy said:
PXL_Pusher said:
The sample shots of this lens are great and I love the saturation it seems to capture!

I currently own the 100mm f/2.8L Macro (which is also a great portrait prime) and have been trying to decide if to jump on another fast prime (ex. 135mm f/2L or the 200mm f/2.8L). The issue i'm running into is deciding between these primes or going for a 70-200mm f2.8L (non-MKII, simply because I don't have that in my current budget). For the 200 prime, I can get the same aperture out of the zoom, but how much would IQ suffer? and is the 135mm enough of a difference from my 100mm macro to make it worth it? I'm shooting with a 7D, and currently only have a sigma 50mm 1.4 as my other lens, so moving around for framing is not new to me. Anyone interested in giving me me their two cents?

Lastly, I know i'm being lazy by not making a trip to google, but is this lens weather sealed?
Aren't *ALL* "L" lenses weather sealed?

The 200mm L is on my short list as well.

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.

As T2iShooter pointed out, not all "L" lenses are weather sealed. And I could be wrong, but I believe I have heard that the more expensive L lenses have a more intricate (higher level) of weather sealing to protect it from the elements. What you said about the lens being low key when compared to one of the 70-200's - that's a major plus.

c-law : thanks for the links, i'm always reading reviews on there and have never noticed the comparison crop charts. Very useful :D
 

dstppy

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 26, 2011
981
0
Connecticut . . . ish.
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

PXL_Pusher said:
dstppy said:
PXL_Pusher said:
The sample shots of this lens are great and I love the saturation it seems to capture!

I currently own the 100mm f/2.8L Macro (which is also a great portrait prime) and have been trying to decide if to jump on another fast prime (ex. 135mm f/2L or the 200mm f/2.8L). The issue i'm running into is deciding between these primes or going for a 70-200mm f2.8L (non-MKII, simply because I don't have that in my current budget). For the 200 prime, I can get the same aperture out of the zoom, but how much would IQ suffer? and is the 135mm enough of a difference from my 100mm macro to make it worth it? I'm shooting with a 7D, and currently only have a sigma 50mm 1.4 as my other lens, so moving around for framing is not new to me. Anyone interested in giving me me their two cents?

Lastly, I know i'm being lazy by not making a trip to google, but is this lens weather sealed?
Aren't *ALL* "L" lenses weather sealed?

The 200mm L is on my short list as well.

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.

As T2iShooter pointed out, not all "L" lenses are weather sealed. And I could be wrong, but I believe I have heard that the more expensive L lenses have a more intricate (higher level) of weather sealing to protect it from the elements. What you said about the lens being low key when compared to one of the 70-200's - that's a major plus.

c-law : thanks for the links, i'm always reading reviews on there and have never noticed the comparison crop charts. Very useful :D
Weird; for L cash I'd have expected they were all sealed :/

Check that link again . . . when I pulled it up, it had the MKII instead of the previous gen selected.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,300
564
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

dstppy said:
Weird; for L cash I'd have expected they were all sealed :/
It depends on the design and intended use of a lens. Its not practical, for example, to seal a push-pull design, but it was popular a several years ago. Same for a TS_E lens. Any lens that extends while zooming or focusing is impractical to seal, but the design keeps weight and cost down. Some of the older designs were around before sealing became popular, so there are lots of choices.

If you need weather sealing, be sure to select a lens with that feature. Having a choice can be a good thing.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,143
1,413
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

dstppy said:
The 200mm L is on my short list as well.

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.
To be specific, you mean the 200mm f/2.8L II. "200 L" could also refer to the 200mm f/2L IS - which is not black, not low-key, definitely no where near $800, but is really REALLY sharp.

The 200/2.8L II is a very nice lens - I had one for a while, which I sold after getting the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. One thing to note is that you need a fair bit of light to handhold a non-IS lens at 200mm, especially on a crop body.

Mt Spokane Photography said:
dstppy said:
Weird; for L cash I'd have expected they were all sealed :/
It depends on the design and intended use of a lens. Its not practical, for example, to seal a push-pull design, but it was popular a several years ago. Same for a TS_E lens. Any lens that extends while zooming or focusing is impractical to seal, but the design keeps weight and cost down. Some of the older designs were around before sealing became popular, so there are lots of choices.

If you need weather sealing, be sure to select a lens with that feature. Having a choice can be a good thing.
It also depends on the design date, I think. A push-pull design isn't a problem - the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L has a push-pull design similar to the 100-400mm, but the 28-300mm is weather-sealed. Extending zooms like the 24-105mm and 24-70mm are weather-sealed, too.

Canon started offering 'dust- and weather-resistant' lenses in late 1999. Before that, the white primes and zooms did have weather sealing under the switches and focus/zoom rings (so the 100-400mm, 400/5.6L, 300/4L IS, etc. all have some degree of sealing) - what's lacking is seal at the mount gasket.

L primes after 2006 are also weather-sealed - so, the 85mm f/1.2L II from 2006 is not, whereas the 50mm f/1.2L (released in 2007) is, as are the 14mm f/2.8L II, the 24mm f/2.8L II, and the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS.
 

dstppy

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 26, 2011
981
0
Connecticut . . . ish.
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

Re: weather sealing -- I get it now. Makes sense. I'm too timid (with camera equipment) to NEED weather proofing. I DOVE into my car after my 15-85mm got sprayed with snow coming off a drift and was beading up on the camera/lens (just to dry it off). I suppose that fear will fade with time.

neuroanatomist said:
dstppy said:
The 200mm L is on my short list as well.

At $800 and it being a black lens, it's a lot more low-key than the 'big white lens' -- it's supposed to be REALLY sharp.
To be specific, you mean the 200mm f/2.8L II. "200 L" could also refer to the 200mm f/2L IS - which is not black, not low-key, definitely no where near $800, but is really REALLY sharp.

The 200/2.8L II is a very nice lens - I had one for a while, which I sold after getting the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. One thing to note is that you need a fair bit of light to handhold a non-IS lens at 200mm, especially on a crop body.
This is true - I only found out the f2 version existed yesterday and . . . wow. Sharpness does NOT come cheap over 100mm -- I was eyeing the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II after so much talk about it here and could just HEAR the wife spelling it out to me: d-i-v-o-r-c-e ;D

If I arrange some trip where I could use it (she likes to travel) -- I could easily throw that one by her in the form of a rental :)
 
T

Tastino0

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM



http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5961432338/




http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5951280293/




http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5955074578/
 
T

Tastino0

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM


http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5961432338/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5964429821/



http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5967184309/
 
T

Tastino0

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM


http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5980308179/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5983819946/


http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5972743493/
 

Dr.Jones

I'm New Here
Jun 17, 2011
23
0
25
Denmark
VictorJones.dk
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

Tastino0 said:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tastino0/5980308179/
Tastino I really like your photos, and the idea with black header and footer just works so very well. Your pictures look very crispy according to the image quality. This makes me wanna buy this lens even more!
 
F

fesapo

Guest
Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM

Dr.Jones said:
Tastino I really like your photos, and the idea with black header and footer just works so very well. Your pictures look very crispy according to the image quality. This makes me wanna buy this lens even more!
Agreed! Tastino, your shots are very nice to look at. The black bars and desaturation really give them a cinematic feel.