135/1.2 would you buy it?

I've been contemplating getting either a 85/1.2 or a 135/2.0 but I haven't reached a decision as of yet. I feel like the 135 might suit me better in terms of focal length but I wouldn't mind having the wide aperture of the 85. I doubt canon would ever make a 135/1.2 or 1.4 but I'd be all over it if they did.

Oliviero wrote in post #9096430
I've been contemplating getting either a 85/1.2 or a 135/2.0 but I haven't reached a decision as of yet. I feel like the 135 might suit me better in terms of focal length but I wouldn't mind having the wide aperture of the 85. I doubt canon would ever make a 135/1.2 or 1.4 but I'd be all over it if they did.

and ur point for opening this thread is...

a 135 f1.2 would be crazy heavy. have you considered weight being an issue?

Marloon wrote in post #9096445
and ur point for opening this thread is...

a 135 f1.2 would be crazy heavy. have you considered weight being an issue?

The 135L isn't a heavy lens by any standard (it's only 750g). The 85L is 1025g.

I've had both and prefer the 135L. f/1.2 on the 85L gives a very narrow DOF and suffers from CA on some circumstances. It's also pretty slow in focusing.

I'd jump on the 135L if the focal length suits you.

A 135mm f/1.2 would be larger than the 200mm f/2L in diameter, but slightly shorter. I suspect that would look rather ungainly. Expect it to cost in the same ballpark as the 200mm f/2L.
Given that, I wouldn't buy it. In fact if you can afford a theoretical 135mm f/1.2, then you might as well buy both the 85mm f/1.2L and the 135mm f/2L, and it would still take up less space in your bag and less money out of your wallet. That's what I've done. Not that I can drop $5,000 on a lens at this point.

Pete wrote in post #9096458
The 135L isn't a heavy lens by any standard (it's only 750g). The 85L is 1025g.

I've had both and prefer the 135L. f/1.2 on the 85L gives a very narrow DOF and suffers from CA on some circumstances. It's also pretty slow in focusing.

I'd jump on the 135L if the focal length suits you.

I think the OP is speculating on a 135 F1.2, not commenting on the current F2.0

Lani Kai wrote in post #9096547
...Not that I can drop $5,000 on a lens at this point.

Neither can I to be quite honest, I was just playing with the idea. I get that size, weight and cost would all be intimidating factors if such a lens were to exist. Still, I can't stop wondering what kind of pictures it'd be able to produce.

If it could pay for itself, of course.

Get both, they will cost you less than a 135 f/1.2 should it ever be made

Oliviero wrote in post #9096430
I've been contemplating getting either a 85/1.2 or a 135/2.0 but I haven't reached a decision as of yet. I feel like the 135 might suit me better in terms of focal length but I wouldn't mind having the wide aperture of the 85. I doubt canon would ever make a 135/1.2 or 1.4 but I'd be all over it if they did.

are you using a FF camera? if not you could gain quite a bit of DOF control by doing so instead of fantasizing about a lens that will probably never exist .

ed rader

neil_r wrote in post #9096698
Get both, they will cost you less than a 135 f/1.2 should it ever be made

Good point but you don't get the 1.2 on the 135 end like the OP's theoretical 135 1.2. Another idea to contemplate and would be cheaper is to get the 85L and a kenko 1.4TC and come up with a 120mm at similar aperture as the 135 F2.

No, F/1.7 maybe, or 1/2 stop faster than the current version. That would need an 82 mm filter, so still manageable, very likely.

I would prefer a 100 F/1.4, however, 72 mm filter thread, or better even a 105 F/1.4 (77 mm filter thread).

Kind regards, Wim

135/1.2 huh. What would be the point of a lens that... wide open... would only focus on the tip of the model's eyelash... rendering everything nearer or farther away with soft fuzzy bokeh?

I'd vote for the 135/2... It's a more versatile lens, IMO. I have it and the 85/1.8, which I prefer over the 1.2. (On the other hand, if Sigma comes out with the 85/1.4 that's been rumored, I might have to give it a try.)

Shoot with the 135/2 for a few months... If you don't like it, you can probably sell it for at least 90% of what you paid. You can't rent it for that.

But, really I can't imagine you not liking the 135/2... It's rare to hear anything other than "Wow!" out of new users.

Vivitar had a 135mm f1.5 at one point:

http://forum.mflenses.​com …-lens-bad-boy-t20417.html


I would imagine a 135mm f1.2 would be of the same caliber and complexity as the 200mm f2, and so likely a similar cost . I am not sure it would be worth it. I would think a 135mm f2 IS (or maybe f1.8 IS) would be more likely and cost effective.

A 100mm f/1.2L isn't unreasonable, I think.

I wonder if the price would be closer to the 85L or the 200 f/2L...