135 and 35 L owners, sharpness comparison input needed

So I have a 135L and I already know the quality of image this lens produces. Now, I'm looking at my next prime lens purchase and the 35L is at the very top of my short list.

Can you comment about its shaprness @ similar apertures of the 135L (F2.0-F8.0) at least. Are they similar? Will I be disappointed If I was to compare its sharpness, as well as its bokeh and colors to the 135L?

If you haven't seen them yet - there are quite a few review sites out there with opinions and samples; try photozone.de and the-digital-picture.com.

Might help

Both are the best you can get in their focal lengths, so if they aren't good enough there's no other choice '

The 135L is probably the more optically "controlled" lens in the sense that there's no hidden nasties (the 35L has crazy "CA" (lateral and longitudinal) at large apertures...but the 135L can't even reach those apertures)

The 135L will give much more background blur for a given framing and aperture...making bokeh evaluation difficult, as you're comparing different focal lengths

eye2i wrote in post #10394157
Will I be disappointed If I was to compare its sharpness, as well as its bokeh and colors to the 135L?

No, you won't be disappointed.

I own both and the 135 is sharper wide open and also has a lot less CA & vignetting. But when the 35 is stopped down to 2.0 the difference is minimal, IMO the 135 is slightly better.

You may find this helpful:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …&FLI=0&API=0&Le​nsComp=108

photoPanda wrote in post #10394158
If you haven't seen them yet - there are quite a few review sites out there with opinions and samples; try photozone.de and the-digital-picture.com.

Might help

mmahoney wrote in post #10394907
I own both and the 135 is sharper wide open and also has a lot less CA & vignetting. But when the 35 is stopped down to 2.0 the difference is minimal, IMO the 135 is slightly better.

You may find this helpful:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …&FLI=0&API=0&Le​nsComp=108

Just finished reading it. helped a lot. Thanks guys!

mmahoney wrote in post #10394907
I own both and the 135 is sharper wide open and also has a lot less CA & vignetting. But when the 35 is stopped down to 2.0 the difference is minimal, IMO the 135 is slightly better.

You may find this helpful:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …&FLI=0&API=0&Le​nsComp=108

From that comparison, both at 2.0 (with the 135 being wide open) the 35l looks sharper in the center, but the 135 better mid frame and in the corners. By 2.8 they're both excellent.

I love that 135L.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/

Do you have a full frame camera?
Do you want a prime lens that offers a 35mm FL and a 1.4 aperture?
Do you have any other choice?

Then there you go.

jdang307 wrote in post #10413905
I love that 135L.

Yep .. the more I use it the more I like. And it's one of a very few lenses that gives uncompromising performance wide open.

I have both 135L and 35L They are diff FL and complement each other on my 5D2. Get the 35L you won't regret.

I have had the 135L for a while and just got the 35L a few days ago. I have not really compared them side by side, but the 35L is very sharp, even wide open, and I am not disapointed.