Thinking about a 135L

I'd struggled between 135L and 70-200/4L for a while before getting my 135L...I'm happy with my choice ever since...yes I dont use it very often...but when ever I take pics with it I'm excited...and glad with the results...I never use 85L so I cant compare...

So I have both and I use the 85L more. And since picking up the 70-200 Mk II I haven't used the 135L nearly as much.

5dmk3, 5dmk2 then why using a crop body. I am waiting for the 135mm f1.8 OS Art.

I should add I am looking for 135mm also but would keep 85L.

Peacefield wrote in post #17084465
In favor of buying the 135L, it's probably one of the best values in the entire L line. Sample photos I've seen from others are stunning. And it would be a better outdoor portrait focal length than my current 85.

The things that hold me back?

One is the perennial talk about an IS version coming soon. IS would be great on a lens of this focal length. But I can safely assume that such a lens will not be available at such a "modest" price.

But here's my bigger question. I own the 85L. Love it on a 5D3. Put it on my 50D body and that beautiful lens has essentially become 135mm. But I have to believe that a 135 on the 5D3 will produce images more beautiful than an 85 on an older crop body, no?

Thoughts?

Heya,

Put the 85L on your 50D. Stop it down to F1.4. That field of view and that depth of field will be a very close representation to what 135 F2 will be on your 5D3. See how that works for you. The bokeh will be different obviously, but pay attention simply to distance to subject requirements for composition (full body) and pay attention to the look of the depth of field.

The 85L and 135L are absolutely amazing portrait lenses. The 85L has a big edge on depth of field on full frame. The 135L has super creamy bokeh and is more forgiving of autofocus. Both are worth having honestly. But if you can only have one, I would choose the one that does what you want the most. Either isolation with thinnest depth of field possible, or a balance between background smearing and isolation.

Waiting on a 135L IS, is just not worth it. You gain what, 2 stops real world from 4 stops on a moving person? Let's face it, even if they're holding still, they're still moving. You can't get your shutter too slow on this lens on a swaying, breathing person. You'll see want shutter speeds that stop motion. So IS really isn't going to be a total out of the park deal sealer. I would be more impressed if they produced it even sharper than it currently is, and added IS. But when you can get this lens in the $750~850 range, why would you think the IS version is better value when it debuts at $1500 probably? I'll take the old 135L for the cost any day unless it was a free gift.

Very best,

Thanks everyone.

I should say that I have the 70-200 2.8 IS v2. While a great lens, it's heavy and sometimes intimidating for my subjects. And though it's much sharper than my prior v1, the bokeh is not as nice as v1 and it can't touch what you get from a great quality prime.

So all that said, I'll wait for the next rebate offer or find a refurb on the cheap and pick it up. I can't get too hurt financially and I'm sure I'll love it. Thanks for the input.

Peacefield wrote in post #17088942
Thanks everyone.

I should say that I have the 70-200 2.8 IS v2. While a great lens, it's heavy and sometimes intimidating for my subjects. And though it's much sharper than my prior v1, the bokeh is not as nice as v1 and it can't touch what you get from a great quality prime.

So all that said, I'll wait for the next rebate offer or find a refurb on the cheap and pick it up. I can't get too hurt financially and I'm sure I'll love it. Thanks for the input.

There is a $100 mail in rebate going on until Aug 30th right now.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17087288
Heya,

Put the 85L on your 50D. Stop it down to F1.4. That field of view and that depth of field will be a very close representation to what 135 F2 will be on your 5D3. See how that works for you. The bokeh will be different obviously, but pay attention simply to distance to subject requirements for composition (full body) and pay attention to the look of the depth of field.

The 85L and 135L are absolutely amazing portrait lenses. The 85L has a big edge on depth of field on full frame. The 135L has super creamy bokeh and is more forgiving of autofocus. Both are worth having honestly. But if you can only have one, I would choose the one that does what you want the most. Either isolation with thinnest depth of field possible, or a balance between background smearing and isolation.

Waiting on a 135L IS, is just not worth it. You gain what, 2 stops real world from 4 stops on a moving person? Let's face it, even if they're holding still, they're still moving. You can't get your shutter too slow on this lens on a swaying, breathing person. You'll see want shutter speeds that stop motion. So IS really isn't going to be a total out of the park deal sealer. I would be more impressed if they produced it even sharper than it currently is, and added IS. But when you can get this lens in the $750~850 range, why would you think the IS version is better value when it debuts at $1500 probably? I'll take the old 135L for the cost any day unless it was a free gift.

Very best,

I find depth of field on full frame of the 85 1.2 and 135 are similar, I certainly could not give a big edge to the 85 on that (same framing of same subject).

For the same framing (subject distance proportional to focal length), depth of field depends only on aperture, irrespective of focal length.

(Background blur is a different story.)

agedbriar wrote in post #17094472
For the same framing (subject distance proportional to focal length), depth of field depends only on aperture, irrespective of focal length.

(Background blur is a different story.)

Exactly. To further show your point:

http://toothwalker.org​/optics/dof.html

If you need a light, fast (AF & Aperture) lens that has the 135mm length & has a more 'normal' look to it, the EF 135mm F2 L is the one.
Just buy it if you need it

Any 135mm f/1.8 IS from Canon will cost a lot more. I suspect the 135mm f/2 will keep its price or at least its utility for a while. The limit of the 135mm f/2 is the photographer behind the lens or the framing constraints of an event, i.e. basketball where people are traveling back and forth behind a line you can't cross. A Sigma 135mm f/1.8 OS is just speculation at this point. I wouldn't expect one for at least another year, and the price would be at least $1100-1800 anyways if you look at the pricing creep with each new art lens Sigma releases. A decent 135mm is rare, and only Canon has mastered it for accurate and speedy sports autofocus and Sony Zeiss for pure image quality.

^^ I don't mind 135mm f1.8 OS for $1500 if it is better than 135mm f2. So far sigma is delivering with their 35mm art, 50mm art. Hoping to see 85mm art soon.

New 135 from sigma bound to be sharp, although I still shoot with my 25+ years old 135mm f2.8, as it produces so well. Not always about how sharp it is but I like that Sigma is playing so good now, more please.

I got a great deal on my new 135l... $850 after mail in rebate..just got it in the mail today yahoo.

Where did you get the deal?

Thanks.