canon 135 f2 L

[bobc163]

Hi Guys,
really getting into this camera (5DMK111) and really enjoying what I can achieve
I am seriously:D looking at the 135mm f2 L USM
I would appreciate some feed back
at present 24-105 F4L, 17-40 F4L,50mm F1.2 L, 100-400 F4.5-5.6 L
I prefer some street photography with landscape and portrature thrown in
Bob

[MissionMan]

I don't think you can go wrong with this lens. It's supposed to be incredible, just have a look at some of the sample shots with the lens and it should be a no brainer.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=135mm+f2+samples&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=qQRjU6XwBsblkAXCtoCoBQ&ved=0CDIQsAQ&biw=1200&bih=764

I haven't seen anything bad in any of the reviews I've seen for this lens.

[JM Tran]

My fave Canon lens for portraiture and wedding work outdoors.

However if you havent bought it yet and in no rush, maybe wait out for the Sigma 135 f1.8, with the way Sigma Art lenses are doing atm, you know it will be optically better than the Canon equivalent.

[kevin301]

Hi Guys,
really getting into this camera (5DMK111) and really enjoying what I can achieve
I am seriously:D looking at the 135mm f2 L USM
I would appreciate some feed back
at present 24-105 F4L, 17-40 F4L,50mm F1.2 L, 100-400 F4.5-5.6 L
I prefer some street photography with landscape and portrature thrown in
Bob

Is it a focal length you're comfortable working with for portraits?
From review sites and sample images online, it looks to be top-notch optically. If you shoot a half-body portrait af f/2, you're not going to have much of the environment in focus :D

[watfish]

Hi,

I have a 5D3 too, and recently purchased the 135 f/2. I absolutely love it, and now I'm always trying to find excuses for keeping on the camera. The downside is that you really need a bit of room and light to use it. I find it great for outdoor shots of my baby, which is what I bought it for.

Here is a quick comparison test that I did as soon as I received the lens that shows the bokeh and background compression compared to my other lenses. Please note that I am not an advanced photographer, and I understand that this is not a very good test, as the distance from subject was changed in each shot to get the subject framing similar across the shots. Also note that this simple comparison does not take into account any other aspects of the lenses such as image quality, focus speed, etc. But I hope it will be helpful in your consideration of this lens.

Minimal post processing applied, mainly adjustment of exposure, as the lighting was changing between shots. All shots taken as max aperture of each lens, with the focus point on the front of the lowest fruit.

First the boring background:
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7411/13476319045_c078bc24b9_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwRE9n)WEB5D3_2014-8543 (https://flic.kr/p/mwRE9n) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

135 f/2
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7323/13476431443_422b3e73a9_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwSeyg)WEB5D3_2014-8545 (https://flic.kr/p/mwSeyg) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

100 2.8L
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7128/13476432543_7ec8b8c390_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwSeTe)WEB5D3_2014-8547 (https://flic.kr/p/mwSeTe) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

50 1.2L
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3762/13476317425_ca19591d79_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwRDEr)WEB5D3_2014-8551 (https://flic.kr/p/mwRDEr) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

70-300 f4-5.6L at 300
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7045/13476316685_1d7d720ff9_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwRDrF)WEB5D3_2014-8553 (https://flic.kr/p/mwRDrF) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

24-105 f/4L at 105
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3676/13476426733_09ca88f8a0_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/mwSda4)WEB5D3_2014-8556 (https://flic.kr/p/mwSda4) by cy1234 (https://www.flickr.com/people/54202375@N02/), on Flickr

[William W]

. . . really getting into this camera (5DMK111) and really enjoying what I can achieve I am seriously looking at the 135mm f2 L USM I would appreciate some feed back at present 24-105 F4L, 17-40 F4L,50mm F1.2 L, 100-400 F4.5-5.6 L I prefer some street photography with landscape and portrature thrown in . . .

With a 5D Series and “Street Photography” listed as your first priority, I would suggest that you consider the EF 35/1.4L USM for that purpose. I do and so if it were my kit I would buy the 35/1.4 if "Street Photography were my main aim.

But it really depends how one attacks “Street Photography”. Working at close quarters is perhaps the way many (most) Photographers who think of their Craft comprising “Street Photography” prefer to work, as doing so provides the more intimate perspective that a 35 (or 50) on a 5D Series Camera will provide and this perspective is usually more visually seductive in the final image.

But that does not mean that 135/2 is a not very useful tool, as here - for "Street Photography":
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/11961430-lg.jpg
“Midnight Acrobat”
135/2L @ F/2

*

For “Landscape and Portraiture thrown in” and as addition to the 50/1.2L that you already have, I think that the 135/2 is a sensible contender, provided that you have removed from contention the EF85/1.2 L MkII (or 85/1.8).

I would use an 85mm Lens for Portraiture much more than 135mm Lens, but we are all different and when investing in a top-quality, fast Prime Lens for any one purpose (in this case "Portraiture") one has to consider what Focal Length is:

a) the most practical for YOU ( for example 135mm is usually a bit long to be a very flexible lens, if you take most of your Portraits inside)
b) the Perspective that YOU like most as being part of your Portraiture Style and Technique (for example, for me 135mm is too long and not intimate enough for most Portraits longer than a Tight Half Shot - also the Shooting Distance for longer than a Tight Half Shot is too far away to engage the Subject - but again that's just a general comment on my technique - not how YOU should develop your style)

If you intend to build a 3-way or 4-way cache of Fast Primes, then the 135/2 does make more sense to begin, as FL =85mm although ‘different’ to FL = 50mm, is not 'as different to FL = 50mm' as a 135mm lens, so at the beginning to be packed up with a fast 50 and fast 135 as 'a pair', seems very sound logic, perhaps adding a fast 35 and/or a fast 85 later on, if it is your plan to have a set of Fast Primes.

*

Apropos the lens itself: I think that the 135/2L is a wonderful lens. It is well balanced, very sharp wide open, exceptionally fast AF and a delight to use in low, available light scenarios - the latter point always will attract my attention. . . and it is black, not white.

For Portraiture: http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10442919-lg.jpg
Available Light Portrait
135/2L @ F/2.5

*

As an additional point the 135/2 works exceptionally well with both the x1.4MkII and MkIII (equivalent 189/2.8) and very well with both the x2.0MkII and MkIII (equivalent 270/4). Having a 270/4 at your disposal might not interest you that much as you already have the 100 to 400L: but a 189/2.8 might be interesting for your kit (noting also that an x1.4 EF Extender has some limited value on the 100 to 400 that you have.

One miscellaneous quirk (which I guess is due to the credentials of the optical integrity lens) is that the 135/2 can produces very good results with the x1.4 and x2.0 EF extenders stacked together, even though many Sales Staff, and Technicians will tell you that is impossible to do.

*

As Devil's Advocate, you probably do need to have a purpose/use for the lens and to that end I suggest that you identify several concrete dot points as to how the 135/2 will actually allow to achieve more than the 24 to 105/4L that you have, because that Lens is very useful for Street Photography, Landscapes and Portraits, noted all with no lens changes, a variety of Focal Lengths and Image Stabilization:

The 24 to 105/4L

Street:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/16675275-lg.jpg

Landscapes:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17464349-lg.jpg

Portraits:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/16546075-lg.jpg


WW

[bobc163]

well the lens arrived last week and I took it out for a street shoot on the weekend
So far I AM VERY HAPPY with the results
I do find that at slow shutter speeds I most definetly have to use a tripod or monopod
I will post some shots when I have become a bit more familiar with this lens and its capabilities
Thanks everyone for your input
Bob

[William W]

Congratulations on your new puchase.
Looking forward to seeing some images made with your new lens.

WW

[fabian628]

good choice, its still a very nice lens, and tbh its quite affordable. Mine sat idle for 6 months, picked it up and just shot some random things in the garden and reminded me of the quality. Its no 200 f/2, but it still creates the beautiful bokeh lenses like the 100mm 2.8 macro can't unfortunately. (although you can hand hold the macro down to 1/10th, while the 135 is one of the most difficult lenses to shoot slow shutter speed. that and getting lulled into a false sense of security by the fast aperture :D )

Have fun and post up some pictures.