How come a lot of 135L owners are selling this lens?

Curious. This lens has a rich history of satisfied owners. They rave about its bokeh, color rendition and sharpness, yet it seems like a lot of 135L owners also ends up selling this lens, sometimes not keeping it for too long (based on the date code the lens were made). I thought this lens is one of the few that you just had to keep but in POTN, ebay and CL, there's never been a short supply of these lenses circulating the market.


WHY?!??!?!?!?!

^^ true, I am curious too.

It is a good question. Maybe people just prefer zooms.

Its a great lens, but its also likely a prime impulse buy lens. Potential buyers see some samples shot by a skilled photographer with razor thin DOF, great bokeh and say "thats for me" and buy it. Then the reality sets in that after a while razor thin DOF makes their photos look the same, when they can get them in focus because their technique doesnt match their gear. Ultimately the realize they can have a 70-200IS, or some other equally appealing new toy and they move on.

^^Or maybe because the price is more affordable compared to other primes; easy to buy and easy to sell and vice versa.

Or maybe they're buying the 70-200 IS II?

I bought it an loved it, but when it came time for me to try and upgrade to something else, the 135L was something I knew I could do without and would sell pretty quickly.

I just think it's a lens that people may be able to easily do without. But I could be wrong.

Cheapest L prime, aside from the 200/2.8, which is usually overlooked anyway. Easy to buy on a whim.

If you don`t shoot much portraits, the 135L is like a specialty lens. Yeah, it`s a nice sports lens, but is it practical to have a single long FL ? I can`t imagine shooting it outdoor for sports? Zoom seems to be better at that field, so it varies the FL. Moving around the crowd during sports event just to change FL will drain your energy.

I sold mine because I found it to be an odd focal length. It was often too long for most indoor shots, and too short for most outdoor. Sure there are shots where it was amazing, but I found that in this length, I really preferred the versatility of the zoom. Got the 70-200 2.8 IS II and haven't looked back.

The thought did cross my mind about selling this but after hooking this up to FF, the focal length makes more sense than when it was attached to a crop

It's an amazing lens, but quite a funny focal length. It's pretty good for close up portraits on FF, but then an 85 is probably better for that... and on a crop its a bit too long for most portraits and for tele work a 70-200 is probably more appropriate.

It's probably the kind of lens that takes amazing photo's when you don't really mean to... it's not that high on many wedding photog's gear lists.

h_A_Z wrote in post #10245183
The thought did cross my mind about selling this but after hooking this up to FF, the focal length makes more sense than when it was attached to a crop

Indeed. It's even not quite so good on a 1.3 crop. There's something so inexorably right about it on FF. I do concede that it's a lens that one could live without, although it's fairly close to the far end of the list of lenses I'd sell.

All of you brought some great and valid points. I think Im one of the few who will end up keeping this lens until it dies on me, maybe because it fits my style of shooting (Candid and Portait). I cant justify spending almost $2k to its next identical prime focal length (85L)

i just purchased one today, because my 85mm was my most used lens on crop, and i've moved to full-frame.

anyone have a similar experience? if so, how did it pan out for you?