135mm L - Good Travel Lens?

I've been considering buying a 24-105 as a travel lens, but am concerned by it being an f4. Having read a number of reviews, and the thoughts of owners on here, I'm just not sure it's the right lens for me.

Which had led me to...the 135 L

I've long admired this lens, but have never really given it any lengthy thought due to its fixed focal length.

Has anybody used a 135 L as part of their travelling kit, and if so, how did you and it get along?

Andy.

Does your travel consist
Of making exceptional narrow depth of field portraits with a 3-D look from blurred background?
Of making action stopping indoor sporting event photos? All at world class sharpness and color?
Is your travel for travel experiences or for photography?
Is it what you need for travel or WANT for travel?

The answers for you will tell you to buy it. Or not. Heck, we don't know.
I'm just being sarcastic on a Friday.
It's stellar piece of glass, but is it what YOU want for travel?
Enjoy,
J.

It's a long lens. A great lens, but a long one.

Nobody can tell you that is is a versatile lens, because it plainly is not. As a single lens for a holiday, it would be very limiting.

The zoom would find much more use. I doubt anyone would suggest it for a holiday, but I may be wrong and will watch the thread to see.

Graham

I'd only just bought it when i went to york for a short break. I also had my 35 1.4 with me which i'd only just bought to. The 35 got used far more i have to say

i carry it with me on 90% or more of my trips. great for people shots, and other things. just last week, i was taking pictures of parents giving their kids blessing drinks and statues at a shrine in japan. a few weeks ago it was my daughter's expression while she was experiencing shopping with my wife for the first time in hong kong. one of my favourite ones last year was penguin walking on the beach near capetown.

note that it's only 1 lens in my travel arsenal and it will only be used for a relatively small percentage of shots. i generally bring the (in order of priority 24-70 L, the 85 1.8, a 1.4 teleconv, sigma 15mm fisheye, the 135 L. then depending on what else i'm expecting, i'll add the 80-200, 50 1.8, bigma, and/or possibly a second body. you also have to think about bag weight and its impact on your trip, as well as the pausing to take photos, swap lenses, then take several more. my family is pretty well used to this (finally...) but i do most of my travel on my own.

if you are considering the 24-105, obviously it would cover a decent range. you could combine that with a teleconverter and take it to 147mm. i'd probably find f4 a bit limiting as would not having any primes. what other lenses do you have?

My current line up consists of; 17-40 L, naughty nifty fifty, and a 70-300 DO IS USM.

All great lenses, but I was found wanting when shooting late in the evening and wanted something with a bit of reach. Looking back at my travel photo's my most used focal length with the 70-300 was between 70 and 150, hence the thought of the 135.

I currently also have plans to buy the 35 L, as I had set the money aside for a 70-200 L IS (in doing so, selling the 70-300), but have shied away from this as, however much I wished it to be, I just don't think the 70-200 L IS is a travel lens.

My $.02: if f/4 is concern, why not 24-70mm f/2.8?

I dont think you can go wrong with the 24-105 for an all purpose travel lens; granted it's one or perhaps two stops slower than you may prefer, however it has a nice range and IS. If are shooting late in the evening you will require a tripod for any lens, so the longer exposure times required for the f/4 are not a huge problem. I think the only downside with the 24-105 compared to faster lenses concerns DOF (but you already have your nifty fifty). After much 'agonizing' I chose the 24-105 over the 24-70 and have been very happy...it's a great lens.

Yep, I have the 135 f2L in my bag almost all the time. I usually carry it with the 35 f1.4L. and a 1.4x teleconverter.

I found that most of the zooms get used mostly at one end or the other of the range. The Primes are generaly faster and sharper. I generaly like the color/contrast from them better (personal pref). And they are usually a bit lighter/smaller. I also find myself putting a little more thought into the shot, rather then just turning the zoom ring.

Both the 35 and 135 feel a lot easer to hold on the camera then my 24-70 2.8. That said I am contemplating selling my 24-70 and getting the 24-105 f4 for when I just want to carry a single camera and lens, as I find myself not using the 24-70 much anymore. Or I might use the cash toward a dream lens 300 f2.8L


If you are outdoors, at the park and such, family pics etc. I like the longer working distance of the 135, great bokeh and color, speed of the f2, small size, AND it will work with the tele-convertors. If I am going to be shooting mostly indoors I might carry the 85 1.8 instead of the 135.

All that said I don't think you will go wrong with either choice.

IMHO, it's way too long. My main travel lens is the Tokina 12-24, which suits the way I shoot on holidays. I also take a Tamron 28-75 F2.8.