The 135 is know for sweet bokeh and color. This type of work would benefit from a nice macro lens in the same range, Canon 100L IS or the standby proven 100 2.8 macro. I know from experience that you need tubes on the 135 to get close enough
And I agree, a heavy lens but purely sweet on color and bokeh.....enjoy it!
Karl
The 135 is a sweet lens; IMO it is a great lightweight portrait and lowlight event lens. I've rented one many times; eventually plan to own one but had other priorities since my 70-200 does such a great job (although weighs more than twice as much)
The 135 F2L is one of the many reasons to own Canon gear. It is one of the best lenses you can buy and considering its price, one of the best bargains you can take advantage of.
I've never thought of this lens as large or heavy either. It is a 135mm f2 you understand right? I really enjoy it for portraits and volleyball. It's a much less intimidating lens than the 70-200 f2.8-now that one actually has some heft to it.
Canon 135mm f/2.0L. I think the old political phrase "pry from my cold dead hands" applies here. As long as I shoot Canon I'll shoot the 135. A truly legendary lens.
Have rediscovered this lens since we got the 1Dx. The 1Dx has offered focus accuracy that I wasn't getting as well before. Shots well focused at 2.0-2.5 look quite good. Quite a good value the 2.0; the 2.8 soft focus possibly and even better value, but the 2.8 lens is never discussed.
I have such a love/hate relationship with this lens. In the past decade, i've bought/sold 3 copies. All are awesome and super sharp, but I rarely use 135, and I find the size/weight hard to handhold at anything lower than 160/sec shutter speed.
