Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 15 Sep 2012 (Saturday) 16:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is the 135L better than 35L?

 
n1as
Goldmember
2,330 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Sep 15, 2012 16:16 |  #1

Which of the two is better optically? Color, contrast, sharpness (esp corners), bokeh?

Mechanically (AF)?


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Sep 15, 2012 16:31 |  #2

I'm not sure that there is any point in a direct comparison between a 35/1.4 lens and a 135/2, but...

Color and contrast: very good on both. If forced to choose I would say the 135L is a little better here.

Sharpness: The 135L wins wide open, especially in the corners. The 35L is probably a little better in the center, though they are both excellent. Stopped down to f4 and beyond they are both excellent across the frame.

Bokeh: No contest. The 135L is much better, which is hardly a shocker when comparing it against a wide angle. The 35L can produce nice bokeh in some situations, but it can also produce rather ugly bokeh on occasion.

EDIT: Forgot to address mechanical (AF) quality. They are similar in build quality. The 135L has extremely fast AF and most likely beats the 35L, for whatever that comparison is worth.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bonbridge
Goldmember
Avatar
1,265 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 421
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Netherlands
     
Sep 15, 2012 16:32 |  #3

The 135 is probably better in sharpness and bokeh (wide open). But it is a total other focallength. You just can't get the bokeh you get from a 135 on F2 with a 35mm. on F1.4.

Both lenses are listed as 1/3 of the holy trinity. So you really can't go wrong with any of those. Look at the focallength first not at all other aspects. There is not much to compare with focallengths which are miles away from each other. The color, contrast and bokeh are great on both of them.


5DII + 6D | 16-35/4.0L IS | Σ35/1.4A | 40/2.8 | Σ85/1.4A | 70-200/2.8L IS II
iMac Retina 5k | i7 | 24Gb RAM | 512GB Flash | 4GB M295X

Website (external link) | flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Sep 15, 2012 16:52 |  #4
bannedPermanent ban

Your decision should be solely based on focal length requirement and nothing else.

No point comparing apple with oranges.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
Avatar
7,359 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
     
Sep 15, 2012 17:26 |  #5

bpark42 wrote in post #14995841 (external link)
I'm not sure that there is any point in a direct comparison between a 35/1.4 lens and a 135/2, but...

kin2son wrote in post #14995928 (external link)
Your decision should be solely based on focal length requirement and nothing else.

No point comparing apple with oranges.

I was hoping I wasn't the only one who thought the above as soon as I saw the thread title.


Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery (external link)My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
n1as
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
2,330 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Salem, OR
     
Sep 15, 2012 17:36 |  #6

I'm not comparing apples to oranges. I'm not choosing a lens based on factors other than focal lengths despite what my Q would suggest.

I'm just wondering. We can say the 200 f/2L is a better lens than the 50 f/1.8, or the 50 f/1.2L is better than the 70-300 USM even though they are very different lenses. The question is about overall quality and optical performance.

Based on my experience, I'd say the 135L has less issues / flaws / weaknesses than the 35L but I've not owned a 135L for a couple of years.


- Keith
http://darwinphoto.zen​folio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
11,865 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 3631
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Rathdrum, Idaho
     
Sep 15, 2012 17:40 as a reply to  @ n1as's post |  #7

The only thing these 2 lens have in common is the red ring on the barrel...absolutely no way you could compare these lens against each other..both are made for different uses.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smorter
Goldmember
Avatar
4,506 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 15, 2012 19:37 |  #8

n1as wrote in post #14996056 (external link)
We can say the 200 f/2L is a better lens than the 50 f/1.8, or the 50 f/1.2L is better than the 70-300 USM even though they are very different lenses. The question is about overall quality and optical performance.

I have both 200 f/2L and 50 f/1.8 and actually I think sharpness wise they are similar

The 50 f/1.8 is obviously a better lens when 200mm is too long. And the 200mm is obviously a better lens when 50mm is too short.


Wedding Photography Melbourneexternal link
Reviews: 85LII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Sep 15, 2012 20:31 |  #9

135L is probably my most favorite lens, optically, Canon makes.

I like the 35L a lot, but no comparison to the 135L. Totally different use, rendering, abilities, etc...

That being said, 135L >> 35L :)


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Sep 15, 2012 21:00 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

n1as wrote in post #14996056 (external link)
Based on my experience, I'd say the 135L has less issues / flaws / weaknesses than the 35L but I've not owned a 135L for a couple of years.

Care to list the issues/flaws/weaknesse​s of 35L?

It's sharp wide open, bokeh quality is great, colour/constrast also top notch.

You know the biggest flaw of 135L? No IS ;)


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Sep 15, 2012 21:04 |  #11

Which is better, a baseball or a bat? ;-)a


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,606 posts
Likes: 415
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Sep 15, 2012 21:17 |  #12
bannedPermanent ban

drzenitram wrote in post #14996801 (external link)
Which is better, a baseball or a bat? ;-)a

Bingo...stupid comparison.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,505 posts
Likes: 3436
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Sep 15, 2012 21:25 |  #13

Both no good. Buy 200 f2 L. :)


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kermit4u
Senior Member
Avatar
904 posts
Gallery: 81 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 502
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Hartsville, SC
     
Sep 15, 2012 23:41 |  #14

Hogloff wrote in post #14996848 (external link)
Bingo...stupid comparison.

a bat has more uses


]6Dmkii.gripped|7Dmkii gripped|5DC gripped|7Dmkii gripped|Canonet QL17 Giii|too many yet not enough lenses https://www.jeffowenph​otography.com/ (external link)
https://www.instagram.​com/jeffowenphotograph​y/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dingie256
Member
190 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: New York, NY
     
Sep 16, 2012 02:23 |  #15

135L - 35L = 100L
There you go, it'sbetter by 100L


450D | Canon 17-55 | 70-400 4L IS | 24L II | Elph 300 HS :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,457 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is the 135L better than 35L?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
861 guests, 214 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.