135L vs Sigma 85 1.4 , what would you do
/forum/topic/1162683/0

1
       2       3       end

DimaVazinovich
Registered: Sep 20, 2011
Total Posts: 346
Country: Israel

so im using right now a 5D2 X2 , some 17-40 and 35L 50 L 135L 100 MACRO ,

after i got the 35 im using 99% of the time that lens with the 50 on the other camera , starting to figure out that the 135L is just laying in my bag for no reason ,

i remmber i saw a post by tony about the 85 sigma , and how good is that lens at 1.4 and so on ,

what would you do ? stay with the 135 or get a 85 sigma instead ?



joelconner
Registered: Jan 23, 2009
Total Posts: 3534
Country: United States

others' mileage may vary, but my siggy 85 is still one of my favorite lenses...I love that thing. I have never had the 135, but I doubt I would use it (especially since I have a 70-200 if I am needing a long lens)



DimaVazinovich
Registered: Sep 20, 2011
Total Posts: 346
Country: Israel

i had the 70-200 F2.8 , sold it cause i never used it actually , and im feeling the 135 is a lil bit 2 much zoom for me ,

the 85L is 2 expensive right now , so the siggy comes next , i had the 50 sigma , amazing lens



Evan JF Roth
Registered: Apr 12, 2010
Total Posts: 420
Country: United States

Both!



Robin Usagani
Registered: Oct 26, 2010
Total Posts: 2808
Country: United States

i had both..... decided 135L is more for me. I love 135 too much to be using 85.



Mitch W
Registered: Nov 18, 2009
Total Posts: 2774
Country: United States

Didn't realize the 135 was priced as low as it is (relative to some of the other L lenses, that is). My 85 1.8 sees action during weddings and receptions, but the added reach of the 135 might be just what I need.



ryan21
Registered: Aug 08, 2009
Total Posts: 539
Country: United States

I still use the 135 for group shots, I like what compression does at 135 for a group of people a lot more than 85.



SloPhoto
Registered: Feb 18, 2008
Total Posts: 2341
Country: N/A

The 135 is flawless IMO. I could never find a single fault with it and it always produced whenever I picked it up......

But I rarely used it, and instead used my sig85 which has a ton of flaws. Yet it also has tons of character, and is my preferred focal length.



ichiban
Registered: Nov 24, 2009
Total Posts: 598
Country: United States

I got a siggy 85 for sale, haven't used it much (i got the 85L) great lens with no issues. I'm actually interested in trading for a 135 too so let me know in pm and i'll shoot you some pics.



ichiban
Registered: Nov 24, 2009
Total Posts: 598
Country: United States

oh darn it, just saw you're in israel, lol. -__-



Jon-Mark
Registered: Dec 12, 2011
Total Posts: 347
Country: Canada

I love my Sigma 85, however I do find it has more CA than most lenses, and I find the contrast/colour isn't as good as L glass. The focusing is much snappier than it's Canon counterpart, but still pales to the 135's speed IMO. 135 is very tight, doesn't leave a lot of room, but if you're okay with the focal length I would go with the 135L



form
Registered: Dec 14, 2005
Total Posts: 3439
Country: United States

SloPhoto wrote:
The 135 is flawless IMO. I could never find a single fault with it and it always produced whenever I picked it up......

But I rarely used it, and instead used my sig85 which has a ton of flaws. Yet it also has tons of character, and is my preferred focal length.


I have 85 and 135 and the 135 basically never comes out unless I'm trying to be lightweight/subtle and not shooting a ceremony (in which case I'd bring the 70-200 instead). I use 85 extremely often because I like the look of the focal length. 135 has a great look too, but it requires too much subject distance for many of the things I use 85 for.

135 has the flaws of huge flare and absence of IS...



DONIV
Registered: May 16, 2011
Total Posts: 242
Country: United States

the 135L locks on faster imo. love the compression. great for portraits. L series lenses seem to waay more reliable than sigma lenses. One of the most underrated lenses, but tend to use my 70-200 2.8 is ii a lot lot lot more.



louloulou
Registered: Aug 01, 2008
Total Posts: 1133
Country: Australia

I adore my 135L. However I wouldn't mind an 85 length though more for portraiture than weddings.



jmraso
Registered: May 26, 2004
Total Posts: 2232
Country: Spain

I use it all the time during the afte-rdinner shots while guests relax on the tables and find a lot of oportunities to capture nice images, other than this it only see the light in the church for head shots and very rarely in the park.

beautiful piece of glass that I will never replace for other focal or brand (at the moment).

I got rid of the 85L for weddings as having the 50 didnt much use plus its well known slowness.

Jaime



DimaVazinovich
Registered: Sep 20, 2011
Total Posts: 346
Country: Israel

jmraso , yeah i use my 50 and 35 most of the time , but sometimes you want to get a lil bit more distance and focal length in your lens , and not being close to your subject ,

altough i do love being close 99% of my wedding shots



ricardovaste
Registered: Jan 25, 2010
Total Posts: 3093
Country: United Kingdom

ejeroth wrote:
Both!


Yes. I don't think you can have only one fast tele lens...



jerbear00
Registered: Jan 17, 2011
Total Posts: 665
Country: N/A

Siggy 85. It's a great lens and has very snappy AF. 35L/85 would give you great variety



jerbear00
Registered: Jan 17, 2011
Total Posts: 665
Country: N/A

The 135L is a great lens but your not using it. Just because a lens is awesome means nothing if it doesn't fit your style



MattSepeta
Registered: Aug 07, 2010
Total Posts: 1059
Country: United States

I used both the sigma 85 + 135L for a year, then after borrowing a 70-200 II, I sold them and bought the zoom.

I did love them both, but to save space in the lens bag, the added flexibility, and the improved ISO performance on the 5DIII I figured I didn't need primes in the telephoto focal lengths if the zoom can match them in IQ.



1
       2       3       end