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 24 Feb 2014 (Monday) 06:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

To keep the 135 or not to keep.. That is the question

 
yamatama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
261 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 27, 2014 09:27 |  #31

davidfarina wrote in post #16721240 (external link)
You own a lens and dont use it for more than 2 hours since owning? Crazy dude youre not affected by gas hmm? :-P

Hahaha trust me I want to but right now i have college and I will be home at night so no testing for me today :(.


Nikon D750, 35 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G
My website www.williamdelacruz.co​m (external link)
FB like page https://www.facebook.c​om/WilliamDeLaCruzPhot​o (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
yamatama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
261 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 27, 2014 09:31 |  #32

kachadurian wrote in post #16721478 (external link)
I know I'm late to the party, but let me tell you a story. I shot the 135f2 for years and loved it. Then I bought a 70-200f2.8 IS (ver I) and later a 100L. After about a year I decided I didn't use the 1355L enough and sold it.

I didn't think I missed it. I've recently been going back as much as 8 years looking at images. I keep pulling out photos that I love and out of 90, 78 were shot with the 135L.

I didn't know what I was missing. Truth is, it's a limiting lens, but nothing does what it does.

Tom

I know that feeling bro, I just cant let my baby go haha, all my favorite shots are with the 135L.


Nikon D750, 35 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G
My website www.williamdelacruz.co​m (external link)
FB like page https://www.facebook.c​om/WilliamDeLaCruzPhot​o (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hairy_moth
Goldmember
Avatar
3,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 15
Joined Apr 2009
Location: NJ
     
Feb 27, 2014 10:33 |  #33

kachadurian wrote in post #16721478 (external link)
... looking at images. I keep pulling out photos that I love and out of 90, 78 were shot with the 135L.

I didn't know what I was missing. Truth is, it's a limiting lens, but nothing does what it does.

I don't disagree with you, and the OP has made the decision to keep the 135 for basically the same reason. I am curious, though: if at the time, you had had both the 135 and the 70-200 in your bag (my assumption is you would be using the 70-200 for candids, the 135 for posed shots) how many of the shots would still have been taken with the 135?


7D | 300D | G1X | Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 | EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro | EF 85mm f/1.8 | 70-200 f/2.8L MkII -- flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kachadurian
Member
125 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2014
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
     
Feb 28, 2014 09:38 |  #34

hairy_moth wrote in post #16721723 (external link)
I don't disagree with you, and the OP has made the decision to keep the 135 for basically the same reason. I am curious, though: if at the time, you had had both the 135 and the 70-200 in your bag (my assumption is you would be using the 70-200 for candids, the 135 for posed shots) how many of the shots would still have been taken with the 135?

I stopped carrying it after a few months, and just went with the 70-200 even when I had it in the bag.

Tom


www.kachadurian.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ken ­ Nielsen
Goldmember
1,510 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Portland OR
     
Feb 28, 2014 16:01 |  #35

"To keep the 135 or not to keep.. That is the question"

I dumped mine after it became obvious to me that it was very limited use for me. Usefulness is more important to me than quality.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,088 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2777
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Feb 28, 2014 16:04 |  #36

yamatama wrote in post #16721556 (external link)
I know that feeling bro, I just cant let my baby go haha, all my favorite shots are with the 135L.

I've never felt that the 135 has my favorite shots. Hell the Tamron @ 200mm 2.8 produces better results for me as far as dreamy creamy bokeh.

The only reason I own the 135 is because I can. I really just need to get rid of it.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,263 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6330
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 28, 2014 17:03 |  #37

Talley wrote in post #16724986 (external link)
I've never felt that the 135 has my favorite shots. Hell the Tamron @ 200mm 2.8 produces better results for me as far as dreamy creamy bokeh.

The only reason I own the 135 is because I can. I really just need to get rid of it.

you need to give it more time and work with it. The 70-200 is too easy to get really good shots, while great shots come from the 135.... at least that's my feelings on it. Once you start getting really nice results (I suspect the TS has), then it's hard to go back to anything else. Took me months to really get the groove of the lens, and while it's still hard to shoot with this thing, the effort is definitely worthwhile.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yamatama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
261 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 28, 2014 21:20 |  #38

So guys I finally tested the lens, initial impressions.. wow this lens is good. Its sharp, AF accuracy is spot on (even in low light) and the color rendition very very nice. Only downside. ITS HEAVY! but that was to be expected. I did a quick test shot with the 135 side bye side both at 2.8, canon was sharper but obviously its stopped down,but in all honesty its not by much.

Tamron

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

brian-2294 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

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

brian-2296 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

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

Screen Shot 2014-02-28 at 8.53.35 PM (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

So in conclusion, so far so good :D

Here are coupe more with the Tamron.
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

brian-2317 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

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

brian-2264 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

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

brian-2250 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

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

brian-2234 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

Nikon D750, 35 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G
My website www.williamdelacruz.co​m (external link)
FB like page https://www.facebook.c​om/WilliamDeLaCruzPhot​o (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
t4turbo
Member
171 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Feb 28, 2014 21:32 |  #39

The tamron looks good and i know i'm a little late, but i'm just wondering...

If you are shooting weddings at all, why wouldn't you have 2 bodies?

That would not only solve your range issues, but also provide some insurance in case one body goes out


6D 7D 50D Sigma 50 17-40L 70-200 2.8L 28-135 EOS M 22mm + 18-55
My Site -> www.jorellegatesphotog​raphy.com (external link)
My Facebook page -https://www.facebook.c​om/JorelleGatesPhotogr​aphy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yamatama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
261 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 28, 2014 21:40 |  #40

t4turbo wrote in post #16725538 (external link)
The tamron looks good and i know i'm a little late, but i'm just wondering...

If you are shooting weddings at all, why wouldn't you have 2 bodies?

That would not only solve your range issues, but also provide some insurance in case one body goes out

Here in Puerto Rico weddings are LOOOOONG. I did a wedding once with two bodies and Ijust didn't feel comfortable and the weight of the cameras were killing me. I do have a second backup body :) my trusty X100s.


Nikon D750, 35 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G
My website www.williamdelacruz.co​m (external link)
FB like page https://www.facebook.c​om/WilliamDeLaCruzPhot​o (external link)

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

4,532 views & 0 likes for this thread
To keep the 135 or not to keep.. That is the question
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 AstroNate
1345 guests, 258 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.