Help choose - 85 L 1.2 or 135 f/2

I also have both on my 5DII, the 85L is the ideal distance, f1.2 is unique bokeh and best for lowlight without flash, colours and contrast are great!

I never tried the 85 1.8, some people say you can't see the difference on a picture, others say it's a big difference. I once asked comparison pictures on different forums but no one wanted to post the demandede same pictures with both lenses @ f1.8 and once f1.2 vs f1.8. So for the moment I keep it, I don't want to buy the 85 1.8L to test and cannot rent it.

First I had the 135L on my 40D, it was too long with the cropfactor, but now on my 5DII it's great, fastest focus, this is one of Canon's best lenses (if not the best). I sold my 200 2.8L to put a 1.4 TC on my 135L cause it's almost the same quality. The only problem (like a lot of people) is that I don't use it so much. I need to use it more, or go out only with this lens

So 85 1.2L & 135 2L are really complementary lenses.
If a 85 1.2L III would have the same AF speed as the 135L there would be only the 85 1.2L III

135L!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

cy88 wrote in post #11416699
I agree with your points, except - 70-200 F2.8 IS is no 135L. There is a extremely visible difference with bokeh @ F2 vs F2.8. Also, in a darker place like the gym, that extra stop can come in handy.

I would have done the same if I were you, but just wanted to point that out.

Totally agree with you, that's why I put the essential "almost" as my exit clause

I use the 85/1.2 for bokeh... the 70-200 just to *get* the shot at a one-stop higher ISO. I use 70-200 f/2.8 ISO1600-3200 for ballet instead of 135 f/2 ISO 800-1600.

cy88 wrote in post #11416699
I agree with your points, except - 70-200 F2.8 IS is no 135L. There is a extremely visible difference with bokeh @ F2 vs F2.8.

Now here is 135mm @f2.0 vs 70-200mm f2.8 Ver II @f2.8 but at 200mm setting.
100% crops of the OOF area.

135mm f2 @ f2.0 vs 70-200mm f2.8 ver II @ 135mm and @ 200mm (moved to keep same subject size)

135mm f2.0, I don't know why it is soft. I did use 10sec timer on solid tripod. I don't have liveview. This was using 1dmk2. Wish I took more than one shot.

Thanks for the comparo... the MarkII really is awesome. I did see some sensor boogers... time for some cleaning

edit: 70-200 f/2.8 at 200mm is a good equalizer... since the 135mm may be too long indoors, outdoors they are practically similar.

For those of you that have both the 85L and 135L, do you regularly use both? I'm planning to order the 85 shortly, and I borrowed a friends 135 and I really like it. I'm just wondering if now that I will be getting the 85L should I keep my eye out for a nice used 135L or should I save my money? I'm currently in the planning and building stages of running a small part time photography business. I'm still undecided on my exact niche, but I'm 90% sure it will be family portraits and some weddings. I have a 70-200f4is for the longer shots, but I really only use it for wildlife/sports.

jakeg1999 wrote in post #11499440
For those of you that have both the 85L and 135L, do you regularly use both? I'm planning to order the 85 shortly, and I borrowed a friends 135 and I really like it. I'm just wondering if now that I will be getting the 85L should I keep my eye out for a nice used 135L or should I save my money? I'm currently in the planning and building stages of running a small part time photography business. I'm still undecided on my exact niche, but I'm 90% sure it will be family portraits and some weddings. I have a 70-200f4is for the longer shots, but I really only use it for wildlife/sports.

My rule of thumb is always to go for the most expensive glass first, in this case, the 85L! Once that is done, it is easier to convince our better half the need for the "cheaper" glass. 135L can be had for $850 in the used market.

ebann wrote in post #11499906
My rule of thumb is always to go for the most expensive glass first, in this case, the 85L! Once that is done, it is easier to convince our better half the need for the "cheaper" glass. 135L can be had for $850 in the used market.

I completely agree, and have made up my mind to get the 85L. I am just waiting until Jan 7/8th when the lens rebate ends as I am looking to buy a 5D Markii or I may hold out for the Mark3. If I buy the body with the lens before the 8th, I will get $260 or double the rebate off the lens. I am secretly hoping to gather more info on the Mark3, like price or a due date but I am 99% sure that I won't gain that info by then. Plus, who knows, maybe some stores will offer some sort of sale or discount on the 5d after Christmas, although I doubt that too. In the mean time if I see a good deal on a 135L, I may pick it up. However, I am still trying to find out if it will get much use after I get the 85L.

So, for those of you that have both, when do you find yourself using the 135L over the 85L? Is it mainly due to reach? If so, could you have made it work with the 85L?

OP, you can drop the idea of 85L, AF is too slow for indoor sport. The Sigma 85mm is not fast either. And for sport like basket ball, I think you need a zoom, otherwise, you will need to wait until the player come to the shooting range. I use the 135L for a ball room dancing once, I need to wait for the dancer to come close.

So, I would say a 70-200 2.8. You may not need IS because you need fast shutter speed anyway. But if to choose between 85L and 135L, then definitely 135L. I know many people use 85 1.8, but I am not a big fan of it.

gte357s wrote in post #11499990
OP, you can drop the idea of 85L, AF is too slow for indoor sport. The Sigma 85mm is not fast either.

I agree with this. Even with a 1D driving the 85L the lens takes far too long to acquire focus on a new subject in a sports environment.

I shot sports with the 85/1.8 and 135L for a while and it is workable. The 85 is best for basketball under the basket and the 135L is good for volleyball.

I've never shot basketball from the bleachers because it is a terrible perspective for the game, but the reach of the 135mm would be better there.

I use the 70-200/2.8 II now that I have a 1D Mark IV. If you can live with f/2.8 in the gyms you shoot and with the body you have, the zoom is better than the two primes. I find the 70-200 AF is more accurate than the 85/1.8 and the zoom is simply better than waiting for the framing you want.

Incidentally, I also shoot basketball with a 24-70 under the hoop now too. I used to occasionally use the 35L for this.

jakeg1999 wrote in post #11499969
I completely agree, and have made up my mind to get the 85L. I am just waiting until Jan 7/8th when the lens rebate ends as I am looking to buy a 5D Markii or I may hold out for the Mark3. If I buy the body with the lens before the 8th, I will get $260 or double the rebate off the lens. I am secretly hoping to gather more info on the Mark3, like price or a due date but I am 99% sure that I won't gain that info by then. Plus, who knows, maybe some stores will offer some sort of sale or discount on the 5d after Christmas, although I doubt that too. In the mean time if I see a good deal on a 135L, I may pick it up. However, I am still trying to find out if it will get much use after I get the 85L.

So, for those of you that have both, when do you find yourself using the 135L over the 85L? Is it mainly due to reach? If so, could you have made it work with the 85L?

I had both. Sold the 135L because my 70-200/2.8IS worked well. The 85L portraits is amazing, and even shooting some "action" with it, i.e. ballet, it works great too! But perhaps for some extremely fast action, i.e. basketball, the 135L would probably be better on full-frame... or 85/1.8 on crop.

I own both ... 85L and 135L ....
definitely in my case, 85L is more versatile : larger DOF range, more light and sharper, deeper colours rendition, micro contrast .
135L is longer (can be useful daytime for action/sport but still too short for me), a bit less CA, but as soon light is falling down indoor or outdoor, 135L is definitely too slow compared to the 85L.
In real life, AF are really similar -> at least for tracking sport or action events (cars, bikes, running people, dogs show, etc)

I don't know about basket-ball , but I imagine they are slower than dogs, so it shouldn't be an issue (assuming distance is not a problem if you get an accreditation).

I will sell my 135L2.0 and 300L2.8 soon to buy a 200L2.0. And keep 24L,85L, 200L with a 5DMKII+ 50D (to be replaced by a future Canon D7000 or K5 equivalent)

85 mm 1,2 for sports ? you will have only 1/50 shots in focus

85L will completely annihilate the 135L at f/1.2, and the 135L will turn around to kick the 85L to the curb and stomp it to death at 135mm. pick your poison.