Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

Rules & Guidelines | PayPal Gift Warning
How to post Feedback | How to Red-Flag a thread
  

FM Forums | Buy & Sell Photo-Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2005 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF
  
 
robertmealing
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Anyone have a Canon 135 2.8 SF they are interested in parting with?

Thanks,
robert



Feb 02, 2005 at 07:31 PM
jpbuse
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Robert is a good guy. No worries to selling to him!


Feb 02, 2005 at 07:32 PM
robertmealing
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


...bump...


Feb 03, 2005 at 08:48 PM
akivisuals
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Great lens. I had a few WTB posts on this lens too. Nobody wants to get rid of a light, sharp, relatively fast lens that can do soft focus as a bonus! Fortunately I got a PM and bought one from a FM'er here. Good luck bump!


Feb 03, 2005 at 09:12 PM
nytrashman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


i purchased a 135 f/2.8 SF from a fellow FMer and it should arrive tomorrow. it is a relitivly fast and a very sharp lens that i think is often overlooked. i sold my original copy of this lens and have regreted it almost immediaely, hence the purchase of a used copy here. good luck looking for one, i am sure someone will offer one to you.

George



Feb 03, 2005 at 10:11 PM
robertmealing
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


I hope something comes through, I'm trying to save a little cash. I'm going to Europe (France, England, Prague), my first trip, next month. I was just going to take my s500 with me, but decided I had to have my D60. I want to travel very light, and I want the gear to be inconspicuous. Just taking a 24 2.8, 50 1.8 and hopefully the 135. I do like to take portraits, so the 135 would be a nice addition for that as well.

I've read really good reviews about this lens, seems that most people really like it. May not be L quality, but for the price it gets very high ratings.

Fingers crossed.

robert



Feb 04, 2005 at 06:50 PM
lisafx13
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Bump. I just got this lens and LOVE it. Wouldn't sell it for the world. If no one has a bargain for you, 17thStreet Photo has them new for $259 grey market. Well worth the price IMHO

Lisa



Feb 05, 2005 at 03:09 PM
moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


robertmealing wrote:
Just taking a 24 2.8, 50 1.8 and hopefully the 135. I do like to take portraits, so the 135 would be a nice addition for that as well.


On a 1.6x crop factor body, I'd recommend the 85/1.8 over the 135/2.8. Even the 50/1.8 can be used for pleasing portraits on a D60, though the 85/1.8 would be preferred outdoors, I think.

May not be L quality, but for the price it gets very high ratings.

The 135/2.8 is easily "L quality." It just doesn't have a red stripe. It's better than any of the 70-200L zooms at 135mm, certainly. Even so, if I were only carrying three lenses on a trip to Europe with a D60, and two of them were the 24/2.8 and 50/1.8, I'd probably go for the 85/1.8 for the third. If I could carry a fourth as well, it would be the 135/2.8.



Feb 05, 2005 at 03:20 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


I don't agree... I have had the 135 SF for a short time previously and it performed much worse than my 70-200F4L in terms of contrast, bokeh and especially sharpness. I'll post a few sample pictures in the next thread...


Feb 05, 2005 at 04:28 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Bokeh test...
http://www.galant-ho.com/download/135test.jpg

ISO1600, so pardon the noise.

Edited by nutek on Feb 05, 2005 at 10:03 PM GMT (Reason: Title: Bokeh test instead of Contrast and Bokeh)



Feb 05, 2005 at 04:39 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


mudlake
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


One I took yesterday with the 135/2.8:

http://mudlake.smugmug.com/photos/15370186-O.jpg



Feb 05, 2005 at 04:45 PM
moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


nutek wrote:
I don't agree... I have had the 135 SF for a short time previously and it performed much worse than my 70-200F4L in terms of contrast, bokeh and especially sharpness. I'll post a few sample pictures in the next thread...


Your 135/2.8 was misfocused (obvious in the comparison you posted), and possibly a bad copy. The 135/2.8 is sharper and delivers better contrast than any of the 70-200L lenses.

Edit: I see, you were focused on the edge of the lamp, not the poster. In that case, I'm not sure what you're trying to say... the lamp edge is clearly sharper with the 135/2.8 and shows more contrast (on the lamp edge) than the 70-200. Furthermore, had you stopped the 135/2.8 down to f/4, you would have seen even better performance out of it. The comparison you made there isn't even equal due to the differing apertures.



Feb 05, 2005 at 04:53 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


I was referring to the bokeh in that picture, not the focus. Yes I did have a bad copy in terms of focus, and thus sent it back. The lenses were compared wide-open, which should give the 135SF an edge in terms of bokeh, if anything.

The focus was right smack in the center of the thumbnail picture using the center focus point. The 135SF was front focussing, so it will render the edge of the lamp sharper. I wouldn't say the 135SF is a bad lens, but just that it just doesn't match up with the L lenses in the bokeh department.

Edited by nutek on Feb 05, 2005 at 10:01 PM GMT

Edited by nutek on Feb 05, 2005 at 10:02 PM GMT

Edited by nutek on Feb 05, 2005 at 10:05 PM GMT (Reason: removed "contrast" - agree with moondigger's point)



Feb 05, 2005 at 04:57 PM
moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Whoops... I edited my original post... go back and see what I wrote.


Feb 05, 2005 at 04:59 PM
moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


nutek wrote:
I was referring to the bokeh and contrast in that picture, not the focus. Yes I did have a bad copy in terms of focus, and thus sent it back.


Contrast is increased when a lens is stopped down. It's still not a valid comparison because the apertures were different.



Feb 05, 2005 at 05:00 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


I made an edit too... I was referring to the bokeh in the pictures.


Feb 05, 2005 at 05:02 PM
moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


To make a valid comparison of the contrast of bokeh, you have to shoot at the same apertures. Obviously f/2.8 will be more out of focus than f/4, but contrast will be lower as well.


Feb 05, 2005 at 05:10 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


Bokeh is not how *much* "out of focus" there is. Yes, at f/2.8 the same lens will have more out of focus area than at f/4 - that is a function of depth of field. Bokeh is more about how "pleasing" the out of focus areas area, especially for specular highlights. In the example I have shown, the bokeh of the 135F2.8 is clearly not as pleasing (ok, to me) than the 70-200. This is probably attributed to the number of diaphragm blades (6 vs 8) and the different optical construction of the lenses.


Feb 05, 2005 at 05:16 PM
nutek
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


sorry to the OP for crapping on your thread :o
We'll take it to the Canon board for further discussion if need be.



Feb 05, 2005 at 05:24 PM
robertmealing
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · WTB: Canon 135 2.8 SF


nutek wrote:
sorry to the OP for crapping on your thread :o
We'll take it to the Canon board for further discussion if need be.



Well.. it keeps bumping it at least. Still very interested in the lens..

robert



Feb 05, 2005 at 06:05 PM
1
       2       end






FM Forums | Buy & Sell Photo-Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password