Will I regret it? (Sell my 70-200 2.8 is II for 135L and Sigma 50)

[dream mode] A EF 135 f1.4 IS L would be the penultimate temptation... [/dream mode]

MakisM1 wrote in post #17514271
[dream mode] A EF 135 f1.4 IS L would be the penultimate temptation... [/dream mode]

Wouldn't that cost roughly the same as the 200/2? Not that that would stop it from being a dream lens, of course.

From what I've read from others, is there really much to replace with the 135L? Maybe IS, but image quality wise is there anything to improve upon? I'm sure Sigma will find a way to make it 1.4, but almost seems like the depth of field would be too razor thin for that focal length.


Either way, I'm happy : ) I'm sure I'll be happy when they arrive. Now only thing to check is autofocus accuracy on both lenses and setting any MA.

GuitarDTO wrote in post #17514416
From what I've read from others, is there really much to replace with the 135L? Maybe IS, but image quality wise is there anything to improve upon? I'm sure Sigma will find a way to make it 1.4, but almost seems like the depth of field would be too razor thin for that focal length.


Either way, I'm happy : ) I'm sure I'll be happy when they arrive. Now only thing to check is autofocus accuracy on both lenses and setting any MA.

It's a great lens. There is room for improvement optically - the Rokinon and Zeiss show that - and also IS could be added. The trick is, both would make the lens a bunch more expensive. Right now it's at a lovely spot price/ performance- wise.

My 135 came today. This thing is suck me sideways amazing. Sharper than my 70-200 was yet with noticeably smoother bokeh. So happy with so many photos from a 30 minute walk around. Another member here was right, the lens is like a photography Cheat code. Kai at Digitalrev was right. The bokeh is like blueberry cheesecake creaminess. My copy couldn't be more perfect. 0 MA required, spot on focus at all focus points in all lighting. So happy.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rbEc​Lo

Lol, colorful way of saying how amazing it is. My two copies of my 135L was always softer than my 70-200 f/2.8 II. Perhaps contrast (perceived sharpness) was lower though, so that could have been it. Bokeh was smoother at f/2, but of stopped down, the 70-200 II's curved aperture blades had smoother bokeh. Both great lenses. Still kinda wish I had the 135L, but I would pick the 70-200 over it anyday when making money. Casual stuff, the 135L is a really nice gem of a lens. I will return one day and buy the 135mm f/1.8 IS if it ever gets released or the Zeiss 100 f/2 Makro to replace the 135L, but none of those really beat the bang-for-buck ratio of the original 135L. Good luck. The 135L is a workout shooting events! Zooming with your feet is strenuous for paid gigs, but if you can master it, it will pay in dividends (artistically, at least). Very few people, even on POTN have really pushed the limits of an amazing lens.

This was definitely the right choice for me over the 70-200. I don't like event photography, and the rare occasions I do people shoots the walking to zoom won't bug me. Walking around today, I felt a creative freedom that I didn't have with the monstrous 70-200. The 70-200 is still an amazing lens and I took a lot of photos that made me happy, but this was the right choice for me.

Makes total sense. I have to shoot events for a living, but if I didn't, I'd be more open to the 135L again. I definitely like the 85mm f/1.2 II though, might be my next lens, I just wished it focused as quickly as the 135L. I think a 135L (in spirit) in an 85mm focal length would be perfect.

I went with this combo last year (50A & 135L) and really happy with my decision. I also added the 85 1.8 to fill the gap a bit. OP you need to get the 50A asap... i guarantee you will love it. But if i do weddings, event every weekend i'd keep the 70-200 II.