Not impressed by the 135L

85L vs 135L. Two different pieces of glass. Grab what you like and can afford and go shoot.

I have to be honest imo 135L is one of the canon's sharpest L and the bokeh is amazing wide open. But after owning all 3 (85,135 and 70-200 II) i have to admit that the 135L has been collecting dusts. I sold one and repurchased it again about a month later but haven't used it much at all. It's in the marketplace fs section and this will be it.

With that being said, i'm still impressed with images it produces though.

Thorrulz wrote in post #15399212
There's your opinion again, now take your argument over to the 135L thread and see how it holds up. Better yet why not have a Mod move your initial posting over to the 85L thread where it really does belong.

Here is a better way to put your title you made for this thread without putting one lens over the other in performance or image quality. How about "Which specialty L lens do you prefer between the 85L and 135L"? Please give reasons for your selection and examples if possible please. But seriously, by looking at the two lens threads and picking one over the other and making a post with that title shows to me an individual that has jumped to a conclusion and is offering no evidence to show his findings are correct.

And there is no possible way you can prove your theory is correct because it isn't possible due to all the varialbles included in taking a photo with any specialty prime lens. Primes with different focal lengths exist for a reason not only because one is better than the other at delivering your imagined imaged quality. That is more up to the artist wielding the tool than the actual tool.

Pardon me now while I go make a post with the title "Not impressed with the 85L".


And btw everyone I am having a good day and filled with the Christmas Spirit, just hard to believe some of these postings are made without thinking moreso of how the title should be stated.

Again, outspoken. Allow me to reply.

The title was made for dramatic effect, though you seem to be overly cerebral and therefor borderline socially inept to the point of overlooking the luring appeal of strongly worded titles. A true mark of intellect is development of the capacity to transition to and from normality, and to not be stuck in perpetual high-minded purgatory. Regardless, the title is completely fitting given that it is a completely subjective statement, and bares no words nor implied meanings of having absolute value.

With that said, if "there is no possible way you can prove your theory is correct," then don't ask for examples and evidence, as clearly, by your mind, that would be redundant.

EnsitMike wrote in post #15399274
Again, outspoken. Allow me to reply.

The title was made for dramatic effect, though you seem to be overly cerebral and therefor borderline socially inept to the point of overlooking the luring appeal of strongly worded titles. A true mark of intellect is development of the capacity to transition to and from normality, and to not be stuck in perpetual high-minded purgatory. Regardless, the title is completely fitting given that it is a completely subjective statement, and bares no words nor implied meanings of having absolute value.

With that said, if "there is no possible way you can prove your theory is correct," then don't ask for examples and evidence, as clearly, by your mind, that would be redundant.

Your strongly worded alluring title that you have for this thread is something I do recognize and appreciate thank you. It allows for easy identification of a troll such as yourself who likes to bait and switch which is all you have done for a contribution to this "topic" since you started it.

I can hardly wait to see your next posting on what you're "not" impressed with next. It ought to be good for some holiday chuckle. You may now continue on.............

Thor, I think the OP titled it like he meant it. No one made you click on it so you don't have to like it. It's his opinion, just like you have yours and I have mine. We all shoot as it behooves us, and use the glass we prefer, or simply like, or can afford...whatever the reasons they're our own just like our opinions.

It's almost always a matter of perspective and that comes from personal experience. You take a guy that shot medium format with prime lenses and that's what he'll favor because that's what he grew comfortable with. The guy that's never shot anything but a Rebel with a kit lens is in his element with that equipment. Sometimes when we break out of our "box" we find ourselves capable of much more than we ever imagined.

I know a guy that shoots almost exclusively with the 135L, doing weddings, and makes a very nice living with it. I find it's not for me. The 70-200 2.8L IS suits me better. The thing is, we all shoot our style and find our comfort zone and have our clients. That's what makes it interesting! And sometimes difficult for the client, choosing a Photographer and picking a style they like as well.

Me, I just like the way the 200 f2 LOOKS! Fat and all. lol That's my story and I'm sticking to it! (Now if I could only Afford one!)

I wish I owned one of both lens here

love the 135L used the 85L but its not the sort of lens I found locked in focus to do stuff like this. The 85 is beautiful and for other stuff, two totally different lenses

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Looks like Julie pegged it, never bring a knife to a gunfight!

I guess I should make that clear to those that don't see beyond the mere words...pick the right tool for the job at hand.

I found it exasperating when I got my first DSLR, which lens to use? Sometimes it seems you just never have the RIGHT one! But it's all in learning the parameters of each lens, how they work with the camera, and what shot you're going for. Simple enough, right? lol

Maybe we should add Camera Brand to the list of things not to talk about... politics, religion and camera brand, oh and car make, and carbonated beverage, beer, food, now focal length....aaaaggghh...​impossible! Isn't it nice we all have such varied opinions?

I had both, sold both, and much preferred the 135L over the 85L. The 135L was super flexible for a prime. I shot sports with it and it was ultra fast with super sharp images. I shot portraits with it. I shot candids with it. My 85L was a great portrait lens but it was so specific for duty that I couldn't justify the expense. I sold the 135L when I bought the 70-200LII. I miss it dearly for its speed, light weight, beautiful bokeh, and sharpness. I also miss the stealth qualities without waving around a big white nose. I do not miss the 85L with its limited abilities and finicky focus even though it's an impressive chunk of glass.

Had the 135L. Wasn't impressed. It may well be Canon's sharpest lens or whatever, but you can't look at a photo and say, "Ah ha! That photo is so sharp only the 135L could have taken it!" Further, I found the working distance to be quite a handicap. As far as AF speed, 85L detractors make it seem like the lens is a dial up modem. Granted it's not suited for action, but it's not like you're on hold with a customer service rep in India waiting for it to focus. Lastly, the 85L is effectively two full stops faster - 1.3 stops in aperture and 0.6 stops in hand-holdability. Really the only thing I liked about the 135 is that it's smaller and lighter than a 70-200.

sgtbueno wrote in post #15398164
By far the 135L is the best L lens

For YOU, perhaps. I had one and while it is a very nice lens, I didn't find handy for my shooting style. The longish fixed focal just wasn't handy for ME. The 70-200 f/2.8 while a stop slower, just works better for me. If I need f/2 I can always use my 85 f/1.8, although I'm rarely in a situation where I must have f/2.

Oh, my. I'll bet some folks families are glad they're bickering here rather than about which wine to serve with dinner.

Seriously: shoot with what you love. Don't keep what you don't like. Buy what you want, use what you need.

Exactly, I had the same feeling and re-bought 135L after selling both and buying 70-200 II
Don't miss the 85L at all, f1.2 too narrow, slow af, heavy,....
Concerning 135L I had the same feeling as the other 2 posters here above, 135mm too long, but this is really an outside modelling lens or candid, and you can see exactly which pics are made with 135l, it really makes an "image signature", foreground & background nicely blurred, also great bokeh thanks to the longer focal length, in some cases it's even a bit exagerated, looks like a painting

dog rocket wrote in post #15408891
I had both, sold both, and much preferred the 135L over the 85L. The 135L was super flexible for a prime. I shot sports with it and it was ultra fast with super sharp images. I shot portraits with it. I shot candids with it. My 85L was a great portrait lens but it was so specific for duty that I couldn't justify the expense. I sold the 135L when I bought the 70-200LII. I miss it dearly for its speed, light weight, beautiful bokeh, and sharpness. I also miss the stealth qualities without waving around a big white nose. I do not miss the 85L with its limited abilities and finicky focus even though it's an impressive chunk of glass.

Don't get it if you don't like it.

LostArk wrote in post #15408913
Had the 135L. Wasn't impressed. It may well be Canon's sharpest lens or whatever, but you can't look at a photo and say, "Ah ha! That photo is so sharp only the 135L could have taken it!" Further, I found the working distance to be quite a handicap. As far as AF speed, 85L detractors make it seem like the lens is a dial up modem. Granted it's not suited for action, but it's not like you're on hold with a customer service rep in India waiting for it to focus. Lastly, the 85L is effectively two full stops faster - 1.3 stops in aperture and 0.6 stops in hand-holdability. Really the only thing I liked about the 135 is that it's smaller and lighter than a 70-200.

That's debatable. There are several photos I've seen on this site that I went wow, that looks that a photo from a 135L, and sure enough it was.