Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM (Thread 2)

Really like that one Chris, love the cut she's giving! lol

More purple, just a coincidence?

And jdotuk, that capture of Mr. Farley is precious!

Thanks a lot, hahaha, yeah a lot of purple lately, don't know what's happening And even more is coming soon

I'm seriously considering selling my 70-200 2.8 is (version 1) for this lens...
I shoot portraits... and I feel like I have a ton of money tied up in the 70-200. We will see, I'll keep debating myself

goaliejake22, open up some of your portrait sessions in Bridge and take a look at the focal lengths you used with the 70-200. That will tell you a lot as to where the 135 would work for you. I love my 70-200 2.8L IS and don't want to give it up, nor my 100L Macro...so I'll have to wait for this beauty. Did rent one though and used it at a wedding, can see it's virtues for sure which made me want it all the more. Luck on your debate!

@Dankata, that is a lovely shot....

the colors, the bokeh, it's great. nice job.

^^ agree. dankata kills this thread

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Finally received this lens in the mail! After going through this thread, I just had to get it and after and hour shooting and reviewing the files and I am truly in love! This thing is incredibly sharp and the way it renders pictures is just remarkable! I cant believe that I got Sigma 85 before this lens, I should have got it long ago.
Just a test shot of our doggie, the focus is spot on and surprisingly fast, well to me anyway.

goaliejake22 wrote in post #15131619
I'm seriously considering selling my 70-200 2.8 is (version 1) for this lens...
I shoot portraits... and I feel like I have a ton of money tied up in the 70-200. We will see, I'll keep debating myself

GJ22, I actually sold my 70-200 MkII a while back for this, kept it for a while, sold it to go back to a 70-200 and just this past week, sold the 70-200 for another 135 and a 200 f2.8 so I know the agony of this decision. In the end, I did what wannabegood suggested and after looking at focal lengths found that I was at the long end or near 135ish about 90% of the time so the decision was easier for me. One thing I love is that once you set the MA on a prime, its spot on. With a zoom, you might get it right at one end but then its off at the other. There's no way to compensate for that really. In addition, the primes I have (and have had) are noticably sharper than any telezoom I have owned other than the Canon MkII and even there, they might still be a touch better. Definitely better than my MkI IS, and a fair bit better than my non-IS. AF is as fast or faster as well.

If you find your focal lengths are like mine, consider the combo I am using as an alternative. It should be a push on cost to sell the 70-200 and pick these two up if you went that route. Hope it helps. Here's a quick test I just took for you...literally straight out of the camera since I have no editing stuff at work. This is wide open, no crop, no sharpening, nothing done to it at all other than resizing for this site....

That little carving reminds me of Max Renn (James Woods' character) from Videodrome.

Football

Agent Provocateur wrote in post #15093129

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/snezhana/806126​6223/
* by Agent Provocateur 007, on Flickr

superb.

Yeah amazing shot Agent ^^^^^^

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …anielstoychev/8​097899109/