Thinking of selling 135L...

kin2son wrote in post #14867987
Oh and f2 vs f2.8 is moot for 99.99% of people

Moot is a little strong and the percentage I think is just a "bit" high.

One stop can be a huge difference when it is needed (for example indoor sports).

Also you could say the same about f/2.8 and f/4! One stop here too! Which would you prefer to use for an inside event, an f/2.8 or the f/4 (pick the FL 24-Xs also 70-200s).

And I would think more than 1 out of 1000 photographers that this is not moot for.

But you are right in some don't need the difference!

I sold my 200 2.8L, my 135L, my 70-300 IS USM and my 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 (old and worn) and moved to a Σ70-200 2.8 OS. It was most definitely the right decision. Now I am thinking of selling my 85 1.8, too. If you can afford the Canon IS II model, even better. I say go for it.

I sold my 135 twice and since bought another and it's not going anywhere from here on out. Love this lens.

imagesbybarbara wrote in post #14868309
I sold my 135 twice and since bought another and it's not going anywhere from here on out. Love this lens.

did you try 70-200mm f2.8 IS II?

I usually prefer the 85 L for portraits and the 70-200 MK II for events on full frame. Excellent combo. These lenses compliment each other very nicely.

breakeyg wrote in post #14868250
Leave off the irrelevant things.

| Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

It's not your thread, nor are you a moderator!

Plus, explaining about the need of an extra stop is hardly irrelevant.

Thus comparing the f/2.8 aperture of the 70-200mm IS MKII to the f/2 aperture of the 135L with the use of an analogy is quite pertinent!

If I had a 1500 bucks laying around I would sell my 135 and grab a mk II and give it a whirl. Love the 135 and the size, but I am getting sick of changing lenses. I would love to have a more versatile lens (in that range) with "prime quality" (if it really does) and a semi wide prime such as the 35L.

Trying to sell mines I barely used the 135 compared to the 70-200!

I have both, i use the 135 more for outdoor portraitures but i dont know if i'll be still using it because i just got the 50L. I use the 70-200 II for sports and in church or candits at events, ppl says its heavy?? They are jux lazy. Im only 5'6; 140 and i loaded the 24-70 on a 5d2 and 70-200 on a 7d (recently traded) on a 5-7hrs wedding without a problem and on my next event the 70-200 will be glued on the 1d3 body.

5W0L3 wrote in post #14865776
yes... as in yes i would regret it? lol

Sorry I meant sell it.. The 70-200 can reproduce the magic of the 135mm if you can shoot it at 200mm wide open IMO. And it's so versatile you can do loads more with it as well

I sold mine since I used my 85L more, don't miss it that much, also sold my 35L it wasn't wide enough for me

I have both but have not used the 135L much since getting the 70-200L II. It is perfect for event photography !!

5W0L3 wrote in post #14865676
Will I regret it?

I am an event/portrait photographer and my 135L only ever gets used about less than 5% of the time I am shooting..

You should free the lens (135L) as soon as possible!

chenga732 wrote in post #14867612
Does anyone have both lenses, 135mm and 70-200 f2.8? Which one do you use the most?

I have both. The 70-200 f/2.8 II gets way more use. After reading this thread, I am also considering selling my 135L.

I sold my 135L after getting the 100L and 70-200L IS II. I know, two different lenses with very different applications, but I found my 135L was starting to become a paperweight as I found the difference between f/2 and f/2.8 minimal in terms of image rendering. It was only really noticeable with side by side comparisons when both wide open. I have zero regrets. If I need ultra fast lenses, my 3 primes fulfill that need.