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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 16 Oct 2005 (Sunday) 19:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

 
this thread is locked
lankforddl
Senior Member
Avatar
747 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Minnesota
     
Jul 14, 2010 22:09 as a reply to  @ post 10535690 |  #4141

When I see the 135L images it makes me wonder if I even see these colors and sharpness in real life. Try and figure that one out.


5DIICAN17-40CAN50CAN85CAN100CAN135CAN70-200

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 525
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Jul 14, 2010 23:17 |  #4142
bannedPermanent ban

lankforddl wrote in post #10538587 (external link)
When I see the 135L images it makes me wonder if I even see these colors and sharpness in real life. Try and figure that one out.


Yeah, you are right. :)


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thatkatmat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,340 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 199
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, don't move here, it's wet and cold
     
Jul 14, 2010 23:48 |  #4143

hawking_0103 wrote in post #10535690 (external link)
Squirrel model :p

I'll see your squirrel and raise you a chipmunk

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4116/4795598918_b8f2b24aff_b.jpg

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

My Flickr (external link)
Stuff
"Never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." -Jimmy Conway
a9, 12-24/4G, 24-70/2.8GM, 100-400GM, 25/2 Batis, 55/1.8ZA, 85 /1.8FE, 85LmkII, 135L...a6300,10-18/4, 16-50PZ, 18-105PZ

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Karizmatik
Goldmember
Avatar
1,298 posts
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Here, there, everywhere.
     
Jul 15, 2010 02:21 |  #4144

AHHH! Adorable.


Karizmatik | Twitter (external link) | Blog (external link)

5DMKII 35L 45TSE 50L 135L

"The best revenge is living well."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Jul 15, 2010 02:57 |  #4145

bahhh..... so I dont really find myself doing a lot of macro work like I thought I would. And even when I do I find my 35L allows me to get in pretty damn close to get macro like shots.

I think I am going to come back to the ever so loved 135L and give up my 100L for it. Even though I am seriously going to miss the IS on the 100L (which is why i got it to begin with). I cant justify having both... So the 135L makes more sense. For some reason though I cant get myself to make the FS or FT add for my 100L :(

I will say after having both lenses, the 135L has the better AF in terms of accuracy and speed IMHO.


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jul 15, 2010 02:59 |  #4146

Exactly why I sold my 100 macro a while back. Thought it would be fun to try and I knew the 100 made a good portrait lens as well but I never really took to chasing small things so the 100 went away.

(This was the non L version...)


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:07 |  #4147

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10539831 (external link)
Exactly why I sold my 100 macro a while back. Thought it would be fun to try and I knew the 100 made a good portrait lens as well but I never really took to chasing small things so the 100 went away.

(This was the non L version...)

yah it makes sense though. If your not really doing a lot of macro stuff with a macro lens then why keep it or have it. In my case, however, I bought it because of the IS. Which make no mistake has been awesome on this lens. I can hand hold this lens to 1/10 without any blur. I cant say the same for the 135L. My safest I felt shooting with the 135L was 1/60 hand held.

I think im super confused right now, lol. I bought the 100L over my 135L because I wanted a lens that didnt make me push the ISO up and allow slower shutter speed shots in low-light conditions. But now that I have that I find I dont really find myself in those conditions with 100mm lens to begin with. I mean I dont know about you folks, but, anything over 85mm is pretty much outside territory for me unless your inside a large interior space or looking for tight framed shots.


Bah.... I dunno what to do. I hate deciding between lenses!

Both lenses have there pros and cons in my eyes.


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bridge99
Goldmember
Avatar
3,325 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Kent, UK
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:12 |  #4148

JayStar86 wrote in post #10539848 (external link)
yah it makes sense though. If your not really doing a lot of macro stuff with a macro lens then why keep it or have it. In my case, however, I bought it because of the IS. Which make no mistake has been awesome on this lens. I can hand hold this lens to 1/10 without any blur. I cant say the same for the 135L. My safest I felt shooting with the 135L was 1/60 hand held.

I think im super confused right now, lol. I bought the 100L over my 135L because I wanted a lens that didnt make me push the ISO up and allow slower shutter speed shots in low-light conditions. But now that I have that I find I dont really find myself in those conditions with 100mm lens to begin with. I mean I dont know about you folks, but, anything over 85mm is pretty much outside territory for me unless your inside a large interior space or looking for tight framed shots.


Bah.... I dunno what to do. I hate deciding between lenses!

Both lenses have there pros and cons in my eyes.

Just keep the 100L and buy the 135L when you can afford too, then your only problem is what one do I take with me today.....


1DX II 5DMK3 II 24-70L II 35L II 85L II 100L II 135L II 300L II 70-200L II
bridgephotography (external link) 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:16 |  #4149

bridge99 wrote in post #10539859 (external link)
Just keep the 100L and buy the 135L when you can afford too, then your only problem is what one do I take with me today.....

just so im not the only one that thinks this, but, do you find the 135L has faster and more accurate AF over the 100L? Also, my eyes are saying that the 100L is sharper than the 135L?

sound about right to you?^^^

Unfortunately in my case I will have to decide between one of the lenses. I have other pressing camera needs in the form of lighting gear that is going to eat up a good chunk of money.


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
darosk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,806 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:18 |  #4150

Karizmatik wrote in post #10539750 (external link)
AHHH! Adorable.

I WANNA EAT IT IT'S SO ADORABLE!!!

Great job matt...


Tumblr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Youtube (external link)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:19 |  #4151

Macro lenses are flat field so they're generally sharper edge to edge which can give the impression that they're sharper overall than other lenses because of the lack of distortion around the edges, etc.

However, that doesn't mean they're absolutely sharper in the center-cut sweet spot.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bridge99
Goldmember
Avatar
3,325 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Kent, UK
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:21 |  #4152

JayStar86 wrote in post #10539871 (external link)
just so im not the only one that thinks this, but, do you find the 135L has faster and more accurate AF over the 100L? Also, my eyes are saying that the 100L is sharper than the 135L?

sound about right to you?^^^

yep the 135L AF can be a lot faster but then the 100L is a macro and meant to really be used as a macro its just really good as a portrait lens as well, and I would say the 100 is sharper but it should be, its a macro, thats why you need both ;)


1DX II 5DMK3 II 24-70L II 35L II 85L II 100L II 135L II 300L II 70-200L II
bridgephotography (external link) 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:30 |  #4153

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10539882 (external link)
Macro lenses are flat field so they're generally sharper edge to edge which can give the impression that they're sharper overall than other lenses because of the lack of distortion around the edges, etc.

However, that doesn't mean they're absolutely sharper in the center-cut sweet spot.

bridge99 wrote in post #10539888 (external link)
yep the 135L AF can be a lot faster but then the 100L is a macro and meant to really be used as a macro its just really good as a portrait lens as well, and I would say the 100 is sharper but it should be, its a macro, thats why you need both ;)

ok so my observations are accurate between the two lenses. Assuming my only two other lenses are 35L + 85 1.8.... and if you had to decide between the two..... 100L or 135L.... which would it be?

and, how slow a shutter speed are you guys able to use with the 135L without blur hand-held?


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:37 |  #4154

JayStar86 wrote in post #10539913 (external link)
ok so my observations are accurate between the two lenses. Assuming my only two other lenses are 35L + 85 1.8.... and if you had to decide between the two..... 100L or 135L.... which would it be?

Do you want to be able to shoot small things really closely? Get the 100... 100 makes a great portrait lens .. The 135 doesn't do Macro so well.

and, how slow a shutter speed are you guys able to use with the 135L without blur hand-held?

I'm the world's worst person to ask. I routinely hand hold the 300 f/2.8 and the 500 f/4 down to as low as 1/60 in extreme cases (shooting helicopters) but I suck eggs at hand holding my 135. :(

I have a hunch it's becuase the 135 has the most mass out at the front element and once it starts to "swing," it's hard to dampen.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JayStar86
Goldmember
Avatar
3,531 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: VanCity, BC
     
Jul 15, 2010 03:42 |  #4155

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10539936 (external link)
Do you want to be able to shoot small things really closely? Get the 100... 100 makes a great portrait lens .. The 135 doesn't do Macro so well.



I'm the world's worst person to ask. I routinely hand hold the 300 f/2.8 and the 500 f/4 down to as low as 1/60 in extreme cases (shooting helicopters) but I suck eggs at hand holding my 135. :(

I have a hunch it's becuase the 135 has the most mass out at the front element and once it starts to "swing," it's hard to dampen.

nope.... not planning on shooting small thing really closely. This is going to be a tough one. Not sure If I want to give up my 100L for the 135L or not. Good thing is I have time to decide.:confused:


---Jay---
Gear and Feedback
flikr (external link)

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

3,444,446 views & 31 likes for this thread
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 Joonpark9
925 guests, 320 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.