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 29 Dec 2014 (Monday) 19:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200L vs 135L

 
jackandmom
Member
Avatar
218 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Holly Springs NC
     
Dec 29, 2014 19:56 |  #1

Hi there! I am really hoping for some feedback and not sure where to post. I currently have the 70-200 2.8 v1. And I am interested in the 135L. Waste of money considering the 70 - 200 does the 135? My 70-200 needs calibrating. It just doesn't seem as sharp. Shooting with a canon 5D MKIII

Thoughts??? Thank you. This is for outside portraits of children and family.



Nicola Lane Photography,
Raleigh Newborn Photographer (external link)Professional Photographey Services, Cary, Holly Springs and Apex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Dan ­ Marchant
Do people actually believe in the Title Fairy?
Avatar
5,388 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 1684
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Where I'm from is unimportant, it's where I'm going that counts.
     
Dec 29, 2014 20:08 |  #2

Can't see any point personally. The 70-200 gives you extra flexibility to shoot in more confined spaces than you would be able to with 135L. The only plus for the 135 is that it is f/2 rather than f/2.8 - not really a significant difference.

The 70-200 really is a good lens so if yours needs calibrating get on it. Well worth it.


Dan Marchant
Website/blog: danmarchant.com (external link)
Instagram: @dan_marchant (external link)
Gear Canon 5DIII + Fuji X-T2 + lenses + a plastic widget I found in the camera box.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sportmode
Senior Member
Avatar
549 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2010
     
Dec 29, 2014 20:09 |  #3

Why not get the 70-200L calibrated first?


5D Mark III, 6D, EOS-M 22mm f/2 | 24-70mm f/2.8L II | 50mm f1.4 | 100L | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | Rokinon 8mm Fisheye

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,235 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 1510
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 29, 2014 20:14 |  #4

The 135L beats the v1 70-200 in terms of sharpness and bokeh. The mkII version is much closer in both characteristics. Many of the 135L owners in the user thread sold the 135 for the mkII, but many later repurchased the 135 as it has a look thats unique.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 835
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
     
Dec 29, 2014 20:19 |  #5

I had the 135 and sold it to put money toward the 70-200 2.8 IS II. I do not miss the 135. I actually found that lens tricky to use at F2. Razor thin depth of field at that focal length, and no IS to boot. Those who like it, like it a lot. But I'm much happier with the 70-200 because I'm stopping down to 2.8 or more in the 135 range anyway with portraits. Just my experience.


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,423 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 345
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 29, 2014 22:05 |  #6

Why do you say your 70-200 needs calibration? How do live view shots in a tripod compare to viewfinder shots?

If you are used to the weight of a 2.8 here, then you might also concider selling your v1 and buy a vII instead of adding the 135/2.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,806 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 868
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
Post edited over 4 years ago by ejenner.
     
Dec 29, 2014 23:33 |  #7

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17356640 (external link)
The only plus for the 135 is that it is f/2 rather than f/2.8 - not really a significant difference.

In that case they might as well sell the 70-200 f2.8 for the f4 version. Same difference, so clearly not significant. Cheaper and lighter too. And the OP says for outside, so speed should not be a factor.

But, yea, the OP doesn't give good reasons for getting a 135L IMO either.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,343 posts
Gallery: 1716 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10809
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 30, 2014 02:07 |  #8

Heya,

Rent the 135L after you calibrate and get your 70-200L working perfectly. Then compare the two. See what speaks to you the most for your needs.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JoeyBaccala
Goldmember
Avatar
4,464 posts
Gallery: 75 photos
Best ofs: 8
Likes: 1902
Joined Feb 2010
Location: 9WON4
     
Dec 30, 2014 02:32 |  #9

gonzogolf wrote in post #17356648 (external link)
The 135L beats the v1 70-200 in terms of sharpness and bokeh. The mkII version is much closer in both characteristics. Many of the 135L owners in the user thread sold the 135 for the mkII, but many later repurchased the 135 as it has a look thats unique.

Gonzo speaks the truth. The 135L is a monster its seperation at f2 is uncanny and very like the 200 f2. Hence the reason they call the 135L the poor mans 200 f2. I own both pieces of glass and in the studio I prefer the 70-200 cause of the zoom and IQ but when room is not an issue I put the 70-200 away for the 135. They both have their place but if you are a shallow dof portraiture junkie like me the 135L is a better choice plus lighter weight is an advantage. I shoot portraits at f2 all day tack sharp with my 135;)


JOEY
5D MKII//SIGMA 50A/Helios 44-2/85L/70-200 f2.8LIS USM II
Flickr (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/josephkaminskiphoto​graphy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,116 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6182
Joined Sep 2007
     
Dec 30, 2014 09:24 |  #10

ejenner wrote in post #17356867 (external link)
In that case they might as well sell the 70-200 f2.8 for the f4 version. Same difference, so clearly not significant. Cheaper and lighter too. And the OP says for outside, so speed should not be a factor.

But, yea, the OP doesn't give good reasons for getting a 135L IMO either.

to be fair, a 70-200 F2.8 and 135F2 comparison is much different than a 70-200F4 vs 70-200F2.8 comparison. That's 1 stop across the entire range, the 135F2 is one stop at one focal length (though that 1 stop seems pretty dramatic since it's a telephoto stop).

The 70-200F2.8 @200mm F2.8 can give good separation, close to the 135F2. However, if TS is shooting the NON IS version, that's quite a bit of light loss and thus usability on the long end. For outside portraits, yes, the 135 is a winner, I'de take it over the 70-200.


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
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,806 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 868
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Dec 30, 2014 12:57 |  #11

Charlie wrote in post #17357353 (external link)
to be fair, a 70-200 F2.8 and 135F2 comparison is much different than a 70-200F4 vs 70-200F2.8 comparison. That's 1 stop across the entire range, the 135F2 is one stop at one focal length (though that 1 stop seems pretty dramatic since it's a telephoto stop).

I agree, that's a good point. It just hits a button for me when someone says there is not much difference between 2.8 and 2 when so many think f4 zooms are 'slow' where as f2.8 zooms are 'fast' (perhaps Dan doesn't think there is much difference between f2.8 and f4 either?).

Also I do agree that f2.8 at 200mm should be similar subject separation to f2 at 135, so I agree the separation difference is not a main reason to be getting a 135. If the OP said he didn't like the bokeh or weight of the 70-200 2.8 or needed something even faster for indoor sports the 135L might be a good choice. But is seems like he just needs his 70-200 fixing to get it decently sharp wide open.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
50,026 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6755
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Dec 30, 2014 13:11 |  #12

jackandmom wrote in post #17356621 (external link)
Hi there! I am really hoping for some feedback and not sure where to post. I currently have the 70-200 2.8 v1. And I am interested in the 135L. Waste of money considering the 70 - 200 does the 135? My 70-200 needs calibrating. It just doesn't seem as sharp. Shooting with a canon 5D MKIII

Thoughts??? Thank you. This is for outside portraits of children and family.


For what it's worth, after I got the 135mm f/2, I rarely used my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS MkI, so I sold it.

So count me in the "get the 135mm " camp.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_311
Checking squirrels nuts
3,761 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 553
Joined Mar 2011
     
Dec 30, 2014 13:19 |  #13

i'm contemplating selling the 135L for a 70-200 because i plan to do more events but i just cant do it. the look the 135L gives is pretty distinct to my style.


Canon 5d mkii | Canon 17-40/4L | Tamron 24-70/2.8 | Canon 85/1.8 | Canon 135/2L
www.michaelalestraphot​ography.com (external link)
Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | About me

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
burb1972
Member
126 posts
Joined Aug 2013
     
Dec 30, 2014 18:35 |  #14

im kinda waiting for the next 135, like an os or is, or if canon upgrades my 100 f2 to is. I am pretty happy with my 100 f2. I am actually confused and go back and forth about every day on it. The 100 f2 has the capability to take really good pictures. The 135 f2 can take great pictures. I dont know, i cross my mind.


mike parker
gear list 5dc, tamron 19-35, tamron 28-75, 50mm 1.8 mark 1, 28-70 3.5 canon(x2), 100 f/2 canon, 70-300 usm is, helios 44-2, vpk lens put into a m42 cap attached to a bellows, 430 ex

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flowrider
Goldmember
Avatar
3,585 posts
Gallery: 124 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 787
Joined Dec 2009
Location: 604
     
Dec 30, 2014 19:23 |  #15

I have a 70-200 Sigma OS right now and my next lens will be the 135L. I'm hoping they come out with a new one so I can get the old one even cheaper!


~Steve~
~ My Website-stevelowephoto.com (external link) ~ Facebook (external link)
Feedback Feedback Feedback

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

3,862 views & 4 likes for this thread
70-200L vs 135L
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 amaz0nacc0untssales
893 guests, 210 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.