Wheeeeeee!!! Just bought my first L prime!!!!

Total impulse buy...sort of. I have been lusting after the 135L for years and lately I've been browsing dozens of ads for a good deal on one. Seems like a great FL for street photography on a full frame and the results I've seen out of it have been impressive.

Today I walked into a local camera shop and spotted a used, but absolutely pristine 135L. The glass is clean, the body was perfect, wide open CA was pretty much absent, and images were tack sharp. Focus was lightning quick and deadly accurate.

Came with a genuine Canon hood, a good quality Kenko UV filter, all paperwork, box, Canon leather pouch, etc. I turned it over, it's a UZ date code, putting it at being one year old!

I talked the guy down to the equivalent of $780!!!

I think I just got myself a screaming deal on a gorgeous lens!! I can't wait to take it out shooting!!!

That is all...just wanted to share the joy with fellow L-nuts. (By the way, this is my 4th L...I also own a 16-35L II and have previously owned a 70-200L and a 17-40L...I hate to admit it, but there's something amazing and different about handling and using an L...I'm a little sad to be giving up the super light weight and small size of the 100 f2, but I think it'll be well worth it for the pictures!)

-Tamas

Nice, you have the best L lens, it is just amazing.

Ditch the UV filter and you'll have the PERFECT lens!

I do most of my work indoors at church events. My 135 is either #2 or #3 most used...wide open...drop dead sharp, paper thin DOF, fantastic bokeh!

The 135L is epic! You will love it. Might be a bit long for general purpose street photography imo but it certainly does a good job at it.

Nice one. The 135L is tempting but I'd find it hard to justify - the 85 F/1.8 is doing great and the Sigma 150 macro is awfully close and a beautiful lens in itself, if only it were F/2.

I also have an almost-pocketable old MF 135 F/2.8 with adapter that I haven't even tried on the 5D yet.

bratkinson wrote in post #15396079
Ditch the UV filter and you'll have the PERFECT lens!

I do most of my work indoors at church events. My 135 is either #2 or #3 most used...wide open...drop dead sharp, paper thin DOF, fantastic bokeh!

yes! dont use those uv filter, you're taking away from an amazing glass

Thanks!!! Glad to hear that!

Here are some SOOC samples, playing around in the store. I'm sure these aren't even representative of the best the lens can do, since I had the UV filter on it (may take it off to see if IQ improves), they were handheld, and the ISO was between 800 and 1600. The scenes (being poorly lit) were also rather low on contrast. Still...I love the sharpness, colour, contrast and lack of CA out of this monster!!

All at f2, which is where I think this lens will stay for the rest of its life with me hahaha

First shot I ever took with this lens (yeah, yeah, it's a Nikon box haha...it was the first thing I saw with lots of fine writing to determine sharpness/AF accuracy):

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​297046424/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​295996979/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​297046068/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​295996673/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​295996557/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​295996409/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​297045342/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/56150019@N07/8​297045142/

I love my 135L, my wife thinks I love that lens more than her, and she is right LMAO

bratkinson wrote in post #15396079
Ditch the UV filter and you'll have the PERFECT lens!

I do most of my work indoors at church events. My 135 is either #2 or #3 most used...wide open...drop dead sharp, paper thin DOF, fantastic bokeh!

Yeah, I'm very pleased with it...I usually keep a UV filter on lenses, but I think this will be an exception (With the 16-35L II I justify it by thinking that it completes the weathersealing and since it's my most-used lens, it cuts down on a LOT of accidental bumps and bruises (the hood's pretty tiny)...but this lens will be used much less and for specific purposes...I think it'll get the lens cap treatment

SiaoP wrote in post #15396085
The 135L is epic! You will love it. Might be a bit long for general purpose street photography imo but it certainly does a good job at it.

Yeah, I want to see how it is for street photography, but the reason I wanted this (I was tempted by the Sigma 85 1.4) is because I wanted something slightly longer than the 100 f2. The 100 often had me too close to my subjects and therefore having them pay attention to me/cover their faces/smile at the camera, etc...it often wasn't quite far enough for true candids, in my experience.

phreeky wrote in post #15396088
Nice one. The 135L is tempting but I'd find it hard to justify - the 85 F/1.8 is doing great and the Sigma 150 macro is awfully close and a beautiful lens in itself, if only it were F/2.

I also have an almost-pocketable old MF 135 F/2.8 with adapter that I haven't even tried on the 5D yet.

Living in Korea I don't have the luxury of playing the Sigma lottery, so Sigma was out because of that...I've owned the 85 1.8 and found it too short on full frame and to be honest I was extremely displeased with it wide open (stopped down a bit, it was fantastic, but wide open had way too much CA and was noticeably softer). So I sold that and got a 100 f2, which, for the most part was great, but never truly got into that lens.

sgtbueno wrote in post #15396092
yes! dont use those uv filter, you're taking away from an amazing glass

Thanks, I think I'll break my UV-habit for this lens

sgtbueno wrote in post #15396104
I love my 135L, my wife thinks I love that lens more than her, and she is right LMAO

.....

BTW, what do you guys think of the samples...considering they're high ISO, handheld, no MA, no PP, wide open...good enough?

They look a bit softer than I'd have expected from a 135L. Nothing that would rule out using it at F/2, but I still expected a little better. Were those with the filter on?

Congrats on the 135L -- I love mine. I do agree with the others, though, that you should ditch the UV filter. That glass is too good to put anything in front of it.

LowriderS10 wrote in post #15396172
BTW, what do you guys think of the samples...considering they're high ISO, handheld, no MA, no PP, wide open...good enough?

They look a little bit soft to me too...

Tbh I was never wowed by the sharpness of this lens wide open when I owned it (Yes I do pixel peep sometimes). The WOW factor mainly comes from the compression imo (due to the rather long focal length) combined with fast aperture (that's pretty much how everyone uses it right? )

Don't forget the samples you see on the web are reduced in size. and I personally find stopping it down to f2.8 is a hell lot sharper.

So at first I kept shooting it wide open because I can, after a while I start stopping it down which totally negates the point of owning it.

Yes it's black, rather light and it's relatively cheap. But it's also quite restrictive and lack of IS ruins it for me...

phreeky wrote in post #15396200
They look a bit softer than I'd have expected from a 135L. Nothing that would rule out using it at F/2, but I still expected a little better. Were those with the filter on?

Agreed, but not by that much.. If you're sure you nailed focus on the guy with the glasses in that crop, I would look into micro-adjusting it. It's probably not off by too much, but here's a 100% crop from my 135L .

Again, don't freak out, I'm sure the lens is fine, it just needs to be adjusted to your body, a very easy process.

edit - see below post for wide-open example.