135L vs 85L vs 70-200L II

[WhoIreland]

Interested in owners of a combo of some of these lens

I had a 85L II and sold it as I found keeper rate on 5d mk2 was low with focus issues.
But loved the 1.2 effect when it worked
To me, the 70-200 II was more useable and I think it's a super lens

But since buying the 5d mk3 I'm having a little seller remorse as I feel it would be more useable now.

I've also heard the 135 has a unique look but never used it

So my questions are
Is the 85 better on 5d3 ?
Does 135 produce something better than 70-200 II ?

I do some weddings, but mostly i shoot for personal or portrait. Perhaps the more subtle 135 would allow me a little more street

Is there a good reason to own a combination of these lens, or are they too similar to justify high prices?

 

[iso79]

Buy all three seriously.

 

[RLPhoto]

http://ramonlperez.tumblr.com/post/33253428138/fast-prime-shoot-out-pt-1-85mm-1-2l-ii-mini-review

 

[Loswr]

Buy all three seriously.

I did...

 

[Random Orbits]

I never had much problem with the 85L II on the 5D II if I only used the center point for single shot. Using the outer points usually returned blurred images. But yes, the 5D III's focus accuracy makes it much more of a joy to use.

I find the 85L and the 70-200 II to be a good combination and that the 135 to be close to the 70-200. The 135 has a 1 stop advantage and is smaller, but usually the 70-200's zoom versatility trumps those advantages.

 

[[email protected]]

The 70-200 II is an amazing step up from the 70-200 ... which also was a superb lens. The 70-200 II is my absolute workhorse, and I never leave home without it. If I had to be stranded on a desert island with 1 lens, that's it. Besides, it is sturdy enough to serve as an offensive weapon if needed. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

 

[Crapking]

Buy all three seriously.

I did...

Me three...

Each has a place on the 5d3, but here is one of my favorites with the 85/1.2, it always reminds me why I got that camera/lens....


N Seymour 5d3-132 by PVC 2012, on Flickr

 

[ChilledXpress]

Yea... all three. I did just that, each lens has it's niche... Still not too keen on the 85L, better with the AF on the 5D3 but still sloooooooowwww. It does give a certain "look" though.

Love the 135L, still my fave... first prime and it was a gift from my wife years ago. So I can blame here for my addiction to primes! It is quite possibly one of the best street photography lenses available... sneaky black and razor sharp. Fast AF, great compression... it is different from the 70-200.

When I shoot wedding I put the 70-200 on and everyone stares at it, they can see it from a mile away. I take a few shots, make sure people see me take it off and go for the 135... then they go back to normal buisness not thinking it's a tele. I get great candids this way. On the street, not one stares or cares. Try that with the 70-200.


34/52 Weeks of Sailor - Ginko... by David KM, on Flickr

Summertime and the livin's easy... by David KM, on Flickr

Not a Little Mermaid... by David KM, on Flickr

 

[wayno]

I have the 70-200 and agree it's awesome - in a 'meat and potatoes' sort of way. It doesn't have the uniqueness of the 85 lenses (I have the Sigma and I'm very happy with it) but it's obviously very good. I'd vote for an 85 and the zoom. Not sure just how useful the 135L is alongside the zoom - there are benefits (focussing distance, extra stop etc) but I consider it a luxury add-on from the zoom whereas an 85 is quite a different sort of lens.

 

[RS2021]

Buy all three seriously.

I have the three...but considering letting go of the big bad white monster....

 

[PavelR]

I never had much problem with the 85L II on the 5D II if I only used the center point for single shot. Using the outer points usually returned blurred images. But yes, the 5D III's focus accuracy makes it much more of a joy to use.

I find the 85L and the 70-200 II to be a good combination and that the 135 to be close to the 70-200. The 135 has a 1 stop advantage and is smaller, but usually the 70-200's zoom versatility trumps those advantages.

135 delivers far better contrast and sharpness.

 

[skitron]

Buy all three seriously.

I have the three...but considering letting go of the big bad white monster....

I guess it comes down to "do you need zoom and IS enough to warrant keeping the 70-200?"

 

[ihendy]

I have all three and shoot on a 5d mkII. I find the 135L stays home the most and I tend to always bring the 85L and 70-200 II 2.8L. The 135L only get's used if I want to cut down on weight or I want something a little less conspicuous. I'm not selling the 135 though, I know I'll regret it.

 

[ewg963]

Yea... all three. I did just that, each lens has it's niche... Still not too keen on the 85L, better with the AF on the 5D3 but still sloooooooowwww. It does give a certain "look" though.

Love the 135L, still my fave... first prime and it was a gift from my wife years ago. So I can blame here for my addiction to primes! It is quite possibly one of the best street photography lenses available... sneaky black and razor sharp. Fast AF, great compression... it is different from the 70-200.

When I shoot wedding I put the 70-200 on and everyone stares at it, they can see it from a mile away. I take a few shots, make sure people see me take it off and go for the 135... then they go back to normal buisness not thinking it's a tele. I get great candids this way. On the street, not one stares or cares. Try that with the 70-200.


34/52 Weeks of Sailor - Ginko... by David KM, on Flickr

Summertime and the livin's easy... by David KM, on Flickr

Great shots there!!!

 

[kbmelb]

I've never owned the 70-200 II but I had the mkI. I personally rarely used it. I found its size/wt inhibiting. So I sold it to get the 85LII. Some time later I purchased the 135L and wanted to kick myself for not buying it years ago.

I see a huge difference between the 135L and 70-200 mkI but from what I read the mkII is a different case. So I'd say if size and weight aren't as important as versatility go with the 70-200 mkII. IQ seams negligible.

The 85L is in a class all it's own and can not be compared.

 

[aaronh]

I hope no one minds if I hijack this thread a bit (add to it?)... I too am thinking over some of these combos. I currently have a 5D2, 24-105 and the 70-200L 2.8 IS II. I love the 70-200 and I consistently get shots with it that I'm mostly happy with but I do hate how big and conspicuous it is. I'm doing quite a bit of traveling this year and hate to lose telephoto but also am wary of lugging around a big white lens (I'm going to Africa, China, and potentially SE Asia). I was thinking of switching up my kit a little bit.

I was thinking of selling the 70-200, 5D2, and 24-105 and getting a 5D3, 85 1.8, and 135. BTW, I also have a 35 1.4 and a 50 1.8.

I do a fair amount of portrait work and some weddings. I think I'd like to use primes but I guess I'm afraid I'd miss the convenience of the zooms and IS. What are your thoughts? Thanks!

 

[elflord]

Is there a good reason to own a combination of these lens, or are they too similar to justify high prices?

I have the Sigma 85mm and the 135L -- the pair can be had for less than $2000.

Since you're wondering specifically about AF performance -- the 135L is a speed demon. The focus limiter is a nice touch for this (btw it also focuses at about 1m)

I don't believe the three lenses are all that similar. The zoom is a zoom with IS (it's also slower, heavier, and more conspicuous). The 85L is short enough to be usable indoors but doesn't focus very quickly (for example it's not a sports lens).

The 135L autofocuses very sharp but is a very long lens for using indoors. I usually use it as an outdoor portrait lens -- I mount the 135L if I'm outdoors and the Sigma if I'm inside.

 

[elflord]

I hope no one minds if I hijack this thread a bit (add to it?)... I too am thinking over some of these combos. I currently have a 5D2, 24-105 and the 70-200L 2.8 IS II. I love the 70-200 and I consistently get shots with it that I'm mostly happy with but I do hate how big and conspicuous it is. I'm doing quite a bit of traveling this year and hate to lose telephoto but also am wary of lugging around a big white lens (I'm going to Africa, China, and potentially SE Asia). I was thinking of switching up my kit a little bit.

I was thinking of selling the 70-200, 5D2, and 24-105 and getting a 5D3, 85 1.8, and 135. BTW, I also have a 35 1.4 and a 50 1.8.

I do a fair amount of portrait work and some weddings. I think I'd like to use primes but I guess I'm afraid I'd miss the convenience of the zooms and IS. What are your thoughts? Thanks!

Do you use the 24-105 much or do you find yourself using the 35L and 50mm f/1.8 all the time ? One way to get a toe in the water would be keep your existing kit and pick up the 135L, and sell the 24-105 if you're not using it.

 

[RS2021]

I hope no one minds if I hijack this thread a bit (add to it?)... I too am thinking over some of these combos. I currently have a 5D2, 24-105 and the 70-200L 2.8 IS II. I love the 70-200 and I consistently get shots with it that I'm mostly happy with but I do hate how big and conspicuous it is. I'm doing quite a bit of traveling this year and hate to lose telephoto but also am wary of lugging around a big white lens (I'm going to Africa, China, and potentially SE Asia). I was thinking of switching up my kit a little bit.

I was thinking of selling the 70-200, 5D2, and 24-105 and getting a 5D3, 85 1.8, and 135. BTW, I also have a 35 1.4 and a 50 1.8.

I do a fair amount of portrait work and some weddings. I think I'd like to use primes but I guess I'm afraid I'd miss the convenience of the zooms and IS. What are your thoughts? Thanks!

If you plan to travel keep the 24-105L...hell it is an IS ...and with 35L you are set.

Never can go wrong with 135L but its use in a trip is rather case dependent. But, if you are dying to spend money, then consider the 70-300L with more reach and stellar IQ and IS and less weight than the 70-200 2.8 II. Perhaps even the lighter 70-200 f4 IS. For outdoors travel shots they both do very well as you don't want the weight and there is presumably more light outdoors that f4 and up works just fine.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

I hope no one minds if I hijack this thread a bit (add to it?)... I too am thinking over some of these combos. I currently have a 5D2, 24-105 and the 70-200L 2.8 IS II. I love the 70-200 and I consistently get shots with it that I'm mostly happy with but I do hate how big and conspicuous it is. I'm doing quite a bit of traveling this year and hate to lose telephoto but also am wary of lugging around a big white lens (I'm going to Africa, China, and potentially SE Asia). I was thinking of switching up my kit a little bit.

I was thinking of selling the 70-200, 5D2, and 24-105 and getting a 5D3, 85 1.8, and 135. BTW, I also have a 35 1.4 and a 50 1.8.

I do a fair amount of portrait work and some weddings. I think I'd like to use primes but I guess I'm afraid I'd miss the convenience of the zooms and IS. What are your thoughts? Thanks!

I'm a fan of using a fast standard zoom (I use the Tamron 24-70 VC, but the Canon MKII is even better) supplemented with the 135L (on a second body) for event and wedding work. If I need a bit more reach I throw a 1.4x tele on the 135L and have a 189mm f/2.8 prime that is still very handholdable and produces nice image quality. It works well for me. The 85mm is one of Canon's best values; I just don't use mine a ton.