Canon EF 135mm f/2L IS Coming in 2017 [CR2]

[Talley]

Why would I want this if I already have the 200 F2 IS?

Oh well... I guess this lens would work. I think they are just going to give new coatings and add IS and to make the build a bit different to lower production costs. This will be a huge seller for them and they want to maximize profits so this is about all they will do.

It'll be a good lens for sure... I may add it to my kid but between 85 1.4 Art and 200 F2 IS I'm covered....

 

[Mr. Shakes]

You just made my day - this is THE lens I most want from Canon ;D ;D ;D ;D

Me too, because then I might be able to afford a used 135mm f/2L!

 

[ahsanford]

Why would I want this if I already have the 200 F2 IS?

Um, because physics, gravity and such actually exist?

Perhaps you'd like a lens that is a fraction of the size and weight?

Or not to look too conspicuous?

Or to shoot handheld for a long periods of time comfortably?

Or to fit more lenses in your bag?

Or to shoot indoors?

- A

 

[mclaren777]

I'm really excited about the 85mm IS so this rumor about is releasing before the 135mm IS gets announced has me on pins and needles!

 

[Jopa]

+1 -- great example. I've not shot these 135 lenses, but as much as folks rave about the 135L, see Dustin's reviews of other 135mm options. The 135L can clearly be outresolved by some more modern offerings.

Thank you Adam!

I also saw Dustin's review of the new Milvus 135 - that's what I expect from Canon now

All Canon has to do marry up modern optics to their AF and this will be a win.

Indeed!

Why would I want this if I already have the 200 F2 IS?

I hope it will be smaller / more portable than the 200/2 Compression (distance / framing) should be very close: http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/

 

[Maximilian]

2017 seems to become a really interesting year for prime fans

 

[AvTvM]

2017 seems to become a really interesting year for prime fans

to me only an EF-X 135/2 STM IS along with a highly capable mirrorless FF camera would be exciting ... unfortunately, all we are getting is ever larger, fatter and way more expensive mirrorslapper lenses. Boring.

while i am highly interested in a 135 prime with IS, i will not buy more DSLR stuff from Canon, but rather start divesting out of a system without future.

 

[Pippan]

Good for you, AvTvM, you're the only one marching in step.

 

[Maximilian]

2017 seems to become a really interesting year for prime fans

to me only an EF-X 135/2 STM IS along with a highly capable mirrorless FF camera would be exciting ... unfortunately, all we are getting is ever larger, fatter and way more expensive mirrorslapper lenses. Boring.

while i am highly interested in a 135 prime with IS, i will not buy more DSLR stuff from Canon, but rather start divesting out of a system without future.

As we - at least I - do not have any of your virtual EOS X bodies no virtual or real EF-X lens would fit to it.

And on the other hand you funnily still seem to be able to ignore or bend the laws of optics in a way that all the developers and builders of this equipment (not only Canon) cannot do. : : :
Bigger apertures lead to bigger lenses. Add IS and it makes the optical formula even bigger.

Maybe you should do some crowd funding or even launch your own company if you really can do so.

 

[Hflm]

2017 seems to become a really interesting year for prime fans

to me only an EF-X 135/2 STM IS along with a highly capable mirrorless FF camera would be exciting ... unfortunately, all we are getting is ever larger, fatter and way more expensive mirrorslapper lenses. Boring.

while i am highly interested in a 135 prime with IS, i will not buy more DSLR stuff from Canon, but rather start divesting out of a system without future.

I am using the A7rii with Canon 5dIv's professionally (until recently I was using Nikon instead of Canon). I find dual pixel AF to be a game changer. It allows me to use the 5div like a mirrorless camera, which focuses faster than my A7rii, especially with longer focal lengths where OSPDAF usually gets into trouble, and in low light (sensitivity to -4ev). Focussing is even faster in my opinion than with OVF. For Canon it should be easy in my opinion to just use a 5div like body with DPAF alone and all the recent lenses without mirror (or providing smaller flange with adapter). So this aspect paired with market share is the reason, I have no doubt that Canon provides a system with future. I didn't think so about Nikon any more and Sony's SLT just has too small a market share with outdated lenses to become a future player (different with FE-mount).

 

[Woody]

I find dual pixel AF to be a game changer. It allows me to use the 5div like a mirrorless camera, which focuses faster than my A7rii, especially with longer focal lengths where OSPDAF usually gets into trouble, and in low light (sensitivity to -4ev).

This is quite a surprise given the amount of hype over Sony MILC camera capabilities in recent years. Were you using the A7R II with Canon lens through an adapter, or were you using native Sony FE lenses?

 

[Woody]

Now today with cameras like the Olympus E-M1II, in body stabilization is already much better than any lens stabilization quality. Since 2 years unstabilized Canon lenses already do have decent body stabiliation when using Sony cameras, and most likely will have Olympus/Pansonic kind of perfect stabilization once they release their new A7/A9 models, that also might keep up with most of the left 5D4/1DX2 advantages.

Canon is way too late on this, and even worse it might lead to the situation that Canon will be 10 years late to the body stabilization party as well because of a wrong strategy.

Really? If in-body stabilization is so terribly important and impressive, pray tell me why are the combined market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony not catching up to the Canikon duopoly?

 

[JoFT]

For me these IS lenses are part of the future. The 85 will come into my bag - and maybe the 135 too.. Today I use the Milvus 84/1.4 which is great... But the 35mm f1.4 has shown what Canon is able to do! This lens has no competitor!!! quality wise. If the 85mm and the 135mm both will follow the same track in performance: It will be great. I am bit concerned about the price tag going to come... And I hope it remains remarkably below 3k.


IS makes a lot of sense. for all who are discussing "mirrorless is the future"... I do not see this - with 7 years of mirrorless experience. (Panasonic). The best by fare is Dual IS: IBIS + OIS. We will see this will come from Canon, too. But they have the OIS glass..


And please keep in mind: an A7xII + 24-70 f2.8 + 70-200 f2.8 G-Master weights about the same like the 5D4 with similar glass from Canon....

 

[Ozarker]

You're killing me Canon. Just when I thought I was completely satisfied, you pull me back in!

Not all is lost though. I already have the old 135mm f/2L so there isn't a rush there. Not yet, anyway.

An 85L would be great! I just wonder why f/1.4 instead of f/1.2 and whether the difference makes any difference anyway. DOF would be razor thin on both, but what would the difference in bokeh be? Still, no real rush.

But next on my list is the EF 35mm f/1.4L II (Must have 1st), a Trioplan 100mm (Must have 2nd), and Helios 44/2 (Cheaper than dirt so why not? This one happens this week).

The horror is knowing $3k+ is going to slip through my fingers one way or another this year, and it is still January :-[

Is anyone else feeling beleaguered?

 

[Maiaibing]

I hope it will be smaller / more portable than the 200/2 Compression (distance / framing) should be very close: http://stepheneastwood.com/tutorials/lensdistortion/

This...

 

[Hflm]

I find dual pixel AF to be a game changer. It allows me to use the 5div like a mirrorless camera, which focuses faster than my A7rii, especially with longer focal lengths where OSPDAF usually gets into trouble, and in low light (sensitivity to -4ev).

This is quite a surprise given the amount of hype over Sony MILC camera capabilities in recent years. Were you using the A7R II with Canon lens through an adapter, or were you using native Sony FE lenses?

Generally, the AF is pretty good, unless you want to shoot sports. But brides usually aren't doing track & fields. The way OSPDAF is constructed, you get into two problems. First, when tracking a subject approaching or receding and focus is found, light rays from different sides from the lens are within the COC as the PD pixels are quite small and close, so no phase information is there anymore. Additionally, the pixels are half shielded and in low light data discrimination gets even worse. If you want to follow the subject, the AF system needs to let the subject get out of focus before phase information is available again. Fast motors, algorithms and removal of the final CDAF step for accurate focus speed things up a bit, though low light is still a problem.
The second problem is if the lens is strongly OOF, as is the case with teles quite often. Phase information is often not there and the lens racks back and forth until enough information is available and focus is found. But, if you only have an EVF and focused on a subject at close distance and see something further away or vice versa, everything is shown OOF! You don't see the subject through the EVF. You need to focus and then adjust the focus point to the exact location and refocus again (unless you only use the center point). Takes time. For this an OVF or hybrid VF is great. Sometimes I switch exposure preview off, to avoid this. Nevertheless I found the dual pixel AF to work much better in bad light and even as fast as with OVF when attaching a 70-200 at 200mm, for example. Doesn't work that well with my A7rii. Touch screen makes changing focus point additionally extremely fast.

 

[douglaurent]

Now today with cameras like the Olympus E-M1II, in body stabilization is already much better than any lens stabilization quality. Since 2 years unstabilized Canon lenses already do have decent body stabiliation when using Sony cameras, and most likely will have Olympus/Pansonic kind of perfect stabilization once they release their new A7/A9 models, that also might keep up with most of the left 5D4/1DX2 advantages.

Canon is way too late on this, and even worse it might lead to the situation that Canon will be 10 years late to the body stabilization party as well because of a wrong strategy.

Really? If in-body stabilization is so terribly important and impressive, pray tell me why are the combined market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony not catching up to the Canikon duopoly?

The market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony mirrorless cameras seem to be much higher than those of Canon and Nikon. I am sure in total numbers a 5D4 doesn't sell more than a GH5 as well. Maybe Canon's turnover is higher because in comparison of the specs their cameras are overpriced.

Other than that, with your theory photographers around the world would still be stuck with Kodak film, because it had the largest market share in the last millennium.

 

[Hflm]

Now today with cameras like the Olympus E-M1II, in body stabilization is already much better than any lens stabilization quality. Since 2 years unstabilized Canon lenses already do have decent body stabiliation when using Sony cameras, and most likely will have Olympus/Pansonic kind of perfect stabilization once they release their new A7/A9 models, that also might keep up with most of the left 5D4/1DX2 advantages.

Canon is way too late on this, and even worse it might lead to the situation that Canon will be 10 years late to the body stabilization party as well because of a wrong strategy.

Really? If in-body stabilization is so terribly important and impressive, pray tell me why are the combined market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony not catching up to the Canikon duopoly?

The market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony mirrorless cameras seem to be much higher than those of Canon and Nikon. I am sure in total numbers a 5D4 doesn't sell more than a GH5 as well. Maybe Canon's turnover is higher because in comparison of the specs their cameras are overpriced.

Other than that, with your theory photographers around the world would still be stuck with Kodak film, because it had the largest market share in the last millennium.

According to data I have seen and to data gathered by Thom Hogan, who is a well known Nikon shooter with lots of contacts in the industry, Canon is around 47% in total, Nikon 27% and Sony 14-17% in market share. Canon last year is according to his data number 2 in market share in mirrorless, after Sony (clearly in lead). Canon is the only company gaining market share (together with Fuji, but their share is small).

 

[Pippan]

Now today with cameras like the Olympus E-M1II, in body stabilization is already much better than any lens stabilization quality. Since 2 years unstabilized Canon lenses already do have decent body stabiliation when using Sony cameras, and most likely will have Olympus/Pansonic kind of perfect stabilization once they release their new A7/A9 models, that also might keep up with most of the left 5D4/1DX2 advantages.

Canon is way too late on this, and even worse it might lead to the situation that Canon will be 10 years late to the body stabilization party as well because of a wrong strategy.

Really? If in-body stabilization is so terribly important and impressive, pray tell me why are the combined market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony not catching up to the Canikon duopoly?

The market shares of Panasonic, Olympus and Sony mirrorless cameras seem to be much higher than those of Canon and Nikon. I am sure in total numbers a 5D4 doesn't sell more than a GH5 as well. Maybe Canon's turnover is higher because in comparison of the specs their cameras are overpriced.

Other than that, with your theory photographers around the world would still be stuck with Kodak film, because it had the largest market share in the last millennium.

I learn something every day. I had no idea Kodak had been making film for 1000 years.

 

[TommyLee]

Why would I want this if I already have the 200 F2 IS?

Um, because physics, gravity and such actually exist?

Perhaps you'd like a lens that is a fraction of the size and weight?

Or not to look too conspicuous?

////

Or to shoot indoors?

Or to shoot handheld for a long periods of time comfortably?

Or to fit more lenses in your bag?


- A

or to shoot closer.......[ I edited this wrong...to add my comment...now corrected ]
you nailed it ...also saying not to shun the new tech..
it is time to use all that experience...
we will remember how great the 135/f2 (and 200/f2)....WERE..
but we can embrace the new improvements..
the 135 takes most 1.4-TCs and with I.S. will be such a blessing...
giving a 135f2 I.S. and 190f2.8 I.S. .... so very useful

it will certainly be $1900