Canon EF 135mm f/2L II On the Way? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
photojoern.de said:
I use mine almost exclusively for sports on a 7Dii. It was excellent when I went to an NFL game as a fan, it was just below the stadium lens size limit. I suspect it would be the same for many venues. With a 1.4x in a pocket, it gives a lot of reach and still only f2.8.
I'm looking forward to picking up a 6D sometime in the next year as the used price continues to drop, then it will get used more for portrait and concerts.
Not as versatile as a 50mm or zoom maybe, but I'd be willing to bet most parents would love to have one at the gym during their child's game if they new what it could do.
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
ahsanford said:
Yep, but if Sigma's fictional 135 /f2 focuses as inconsistently bad as their 35 and 50 f1.4...I don't think Canon have much to worry about.
Upvote
0
Bennymiata
Canon Rumors Premium
I have been waiting for a good 85mm portrait lens, and waiting, and now that the Sigma 85mm Art has been released, I pushed the button and bought the new Tamron 85mm f1.8. The Sigma is just too big and heavy and no IS.
To me, anything longer than 50mm SHOULD have IS.
Even for portraits, it can be a godsend, and for video - it's an absolute necessity.
The 135mm also interests me, but if it doesn't have IS, I wouldn't consider it.
However, if it does get IS and BR, then it will eventually go into my bag.
To me, anything longer than 50mm SHOULD have IS.
Even for portraits, it can be a godsend, and for video - it's an absolute necessity.
The 135mm also interests me, but if it doesn't have IS, I wouldn't consider it.
However, if it does get IS and BR, then it will eventually go into my bag.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
The 135mm is my most recent lens and according to LR, I only have about 500 shots (I've kept) with it so far this year, however I don't ever recall the AF lacking in speed or accuracy. While I haven't benchmarked, timed it etc. it has felt as fast to focus as say my 85mm f/1.8. Ai Servo has worked very well, errr as well as one can expect on a 6D.
This lens was on my wish list for a long time. Hard to completely justify as there is some decent overlap with a 70-200 f/2.8, 100mm macro, fast 85mm, etc. But it's an awesome lens and takes superb portrait shots.
Of course, I'll never complain when Canon releases a "newer, better" version of any of their lenses, this one included.
Upvote
0
CarlMillerPhoto said:
I think Tamron might add one to their growing SP line-up and it will have VC. I'd love to see it go to f/1.8, but f/2 is fine if it's tack sharp.
GMCPhotographics said:
The so-called poor mfd is excellent with a max magnifcation that 85mm lenses can only dream of. Most 85mm can only focus around 80-85cm and this focuses at 90cm. Would I like it to improve further, of course but that's not a major concern even with current lens.
I agree with the rest of what you said, it's a 20 year old design and could be improved and IS would be a must for me.
Upvote
0
Can't believe someone is arguing in favor of an 85 1.2 + 1.4x. That would be the most awkward shooting experience yet. It's so front heavy that it would probably snap the teleconverter right off. When we were kids we had these inflatable toys that had a weight at the bottom, and you could hit it and it would bounce back up. Not sure what those were called, but that lens combo reminds me of that.
These:
Not to mention that the 135 is a lot better wide open than an 85 + 1.4x, it's a lot cheaper, faster AF, and personally, I like the look of the 135mm to the point where I just sold the 85 about 5 years ago. The 135 is still one of my most used lenses in spite of it's notoriously inaccurate AF. At $1k, that lens should be in everyone's bag.
If they added IS and managed to improve IQ, I would preorder.
These:
Not to mention that the 135 is a lot better wide open than an 85 + 1.4x, it's a lot cheaper, faster AF, and personally, I like the look of the 135mm to the point where I just sold the 85 about 5 years ago. The 135 is still one of my most used lenses in spite of it's notoriously inaccurate AF. At $1k, that lens should be in everyone's bag.
If they added IS and managed to improve IQ, I would preorder.
Upvote
0
ranplett said:Can't believe someone is arguing in favor of an 85 1.2 + 1.4x. That would be the most awkward shooting experience yet. It's so front heavy that it would probably snap the teleconverter right off. When we were kids we had these inflatable toys that had a weight at the bottom, and you could hit it and it would bounce back up. Not sure what those were called, but that lens combo reminds me of that.
These:
Not to mention that the 135 is a lot better wide open than an 85 + 1.4x, it's a lot cheaper, faster AF, and personally, I like the look of the 135mm to the point where I just sold the 85 about 5 years ago. The 135 is still one of my most used lenses in spite of it's notoriously inaccurate AF. At $1k, that lens should be in everyone's bag.
If they added IS and managed to improve IQ, I would preorder.
To be sure, I wasn't arguing that it should be done. I was questioning the opinion that it couldn't be done, turns out the manufacturer agrees with me.
As for a pissy little 85 snapping the TC right off, I don't think so. I have put my 300 f2.8 on the end of a TC and used the body mount on a tripod with no ill effects.
Upvote
0
verysimplejason said:50mm with IS and USM please...
+1000 ... a good 50mm f/1.4 IS is much more useful than a 135 f/2. Although I'd take both if the 135 has IS.
I seem to be the odd ball. The 35 f/1.4 is just not quite enough, where the 50 f/1.4 makes the image pop like 3D. 35mm is not quite wide enough and not quite tight enough.
My favorite focal lengths right now are 24, 50, 135, and 400 ... in that order
Upvote
0
I use the 135 f2 since years, and do not have much to complain about. One important factor IMO is it's compact size and discretion compared to any (white) 70-200. It could be improved a bit optically (mainly at f2) and weather sealed. The minimum focus distance is already quite good for a 135mm. IS is of course a welcome addition, but I wouldn't like a 1.2 kilo monster for 1900€. Knowing Canon I have no doubt that by improving a bit everywhere, they can produce a spectacular lens, the question is at what cost ?
I am afraid if you put IS + 1.8, price, size and weight wil increase a lot. I prefer a compact, affordable f2 lens over an f1.8 overpriced and bulky one.
I am afraid if you put IS + 1.8, price, size and weight wil increase a lot. I prefer a compact, affordable f2 lens over an f1.8 overpriced and bulky one.
Upvote
0
I agree with symmar22. I have loved the original formula,-still shoot it regularly,-and never doubt its delivery (with high enough shutter speed and careful focusing technique).
I am just gonna go ahead and leave this image here again and I will quote some Oingo Boingo:
"My creation--Is it real?;
It's my creation...my creation;
It's my creation."
Happy shoong y'alls!
I am just gonna go ahead and leave this image here again and I will quote some Oingo Boingo:
"My creation--Is it real?;
It's my creation...my creation;
It's my creation."
Happy shoong y'alls!
Attachments
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
AE-1Burnham said:
Have you seen the Sony 135mm f1.8? It doesn't look much different to the ef 135mm f2 L. I think your photoshop jpeg would be more accurate if it was a 135mm f1.4 L
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics said:
Thanks GMC for the comment. I had consulted the Sony (if you look at the lens diagram attached from BH of the Sony the external casing is likely a "form over function" decision). I would prefer the 135 designed my way (as I have PSed it above). I think Canon could manage..? Thoughts are welcome.
Attachments
Upvote
0
