Understanding my new 135L - advices welcome!

Hi! I went to the park today try my newly arrived 135L and the results are leaving me somewhat perplex.

85mm f1.8 was my favorite focal lenght on crop. The 135L must be quite equivalent but the shallower DoF is making quite a difference. I believe for near objects, I will be better stopping down to f2.8, f3.5 to get a larger DoF. The lens clearly shine for far subject.

Here an exemple of what I am talking about;

Somehow, I dont know why, I though that would make a nice image. To my surprise, the DoF is so thin that it hide too much details.

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

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/24246728@N05/8​357584414/

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

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

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

Bokeh does look kinda painful.

CA at 2.0 is pretty normal, but I would expect it to be sharper indeed! My 600d with old pentax 50mm is a lot sharper at 100% and f2.

Maybe you have a bad copy?

What aperture did you use with the flower shot?

It is easily one of canons best lenses, just look at the 135 thread. I'd put this down to user error, I've not seen any bad shots with the 135. Also use the hood that's what it's there for.

Here few images that seems well focussed. (I got a lot of picts that are front focussed, especially objects at 10m, however when I shoot a chart at 2-3m, it's mostly back focussed by a good 3cm.)

I uploaded full size. please check at "original", at 100%.

I think the branch show well the poor quality feeling I got while the cat look nice enough. However I feel the lens is behaving a bit like what I would expect from a zoom. It does not feel as reliable as my Sigma 35mm f1.4 so far.

EDIT: Flickr didnt make any full res, it's useless. i will upload crops.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Looks good to me? Maybe you are expecting too much because almost everyone here says this is like Canon's best?

The pics look good to me..
Looking at the crops you did....are you expecting those small single elements of the image to be super sharp, as they appear to the eye when taken on context of the entire image? The acorns in the park bench zoom aren't event the point of focus for the image (seems to me it's the leading edge of the bench).

If you want a crisp close up of the cat...get close to the cat.

Maybe I just don't get it.

Jethr0 wrote in post #15455576
Maybe I just don't get it.

Nah I think you are spot on.

And let's not forget all those samples were shot @ f2 -f2.2.

The kids playing is the best, the flower is probably a user error, not sharp at all.

Yes it's a world of difference with 85 1.8 which I had also in past.
Not only the f2 but also the 135mm zoomfactor makes the bokeh look like a painting with the centre sharp.

That's the reason I re-bought it (even on top on my 70-200 II), it's the only reasonable compact lens that gives this type of images.

The only thing you need to remember is : try to use it as much as possible, don't forget it when the event takes place where it's ideal for, as with the longer focal length its an outside modelling / candid portraitlens. It's also great for sports, but for this I prefer a zoom.

Take a look at the 135L sample database what kind of magical pics Dankata takes with couples on honeymoon !

Yes it's all f2.

I didn't say that my copy was bad. However I feel the 135L might be a tad overhyped. Still for the price, it's certainly a good value.

update: Something strange. I tried the 135 on my t3i. Very nice feeling and very very crisp at 100%. I was expecting less sharp than the 6D. I put back the lens on my 6D and tried again on the cat face at 3m. The lens is clearly back focussing. -4 MA seam to do the trick. However it seam to make far object out of focus a bit... I dont know exactly what's going on about that... can a lens both back focus and front focus depending on distance?

I think you just need to keep learning how to use it well. A couple of the shots to me look like there is camera shake going on... especially the last flower shot in the first batch. Your later shots do look better so looks like you are figuring it out.

On your last comment... full frame will expose sharpness weakness in your lenses more than crop bodies.

1. My 135L also has auto focusing (inconsistency), I sent it to Canon and they fixed it. You should print out a focus chart (I used A4), try to shoot at it from around 2 meter. It should be spot on almost very time using single point.

2. Sometimes lens needs MA adjust. The best way to find out it to shoot focus chart as I said above.

3. I am still experimenting with my 135 L, but indeed the most memorable pictures are shooting far subjects. It shines most for me at the distance of 8-10 meter or more and at that distance the lens is irreplaceable.

4. The lens is still not as sharp as my 100L. And the rendition is different also. The 100L has the punchy, contrasty modern look meanwhile the 135 L has bit of softer feel.

At 1/4000? I doubt it. It was very sunny.

I might be wrong but I am under the impression that it is the other way around. Smaller sensor use a smaller part of the lens while having just as much resolution. Thus being softer. They say you can get sharper images from bad lens on Full Frame. I am not talking about corner softness here of course.

@Vaflower;

I did test with a chart and the results are varying quite a lot. I didn't use a tripod though but I was laying down. Not much place for motion. The focus is not always spot on.

However I just changed the MA to -5 and it seam to help with softness.

Tomorow I will mount the lens on tripod and test on a chart again. Do you unfocus the lens each time between the shot to make a fresh AF?