 |
|
|
jj sach md
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 23, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 42
|
|
Review Date: Apr 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
It's not a white lens (doesn't attract attention), superb optics, relatively light
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Had this lens of about 3 years and absolutely adore this lens for quality of optics and what I consider to be value for money for L glass. I have used this for candid wedding photography and outdoor portraits/candids. Also used this as a macro lens with extension tubes. Lens has solid build. Colour in photos is amazing. I hardly do any post production on photos from this lens.
I have used it on both full frame and crop 1.6x sensors preferring it on the latter - I have more use of it on a crop sensor camera as a portrait lens and also a semi-telephoto for candids etc. On full frame I always found myself wanting more reach with this lens.
|
|
 Apr 28, 2008
|
|
animefx
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 22, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Perfect color reproduction, contrast, and wonderful bokeh even on a crop camera! Tack sharp wide open and even sharper stopped down a little. Canon's best lens ever.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing bad to say about this lens.
|
|
|
I'll recap what I said for the pros (and lack of cons) here:
Simply an amazing lens! Well worth the price. The results will blow you away, if not you or your camera is at fault, not this lens. Honestly the focal length will take some getting used to on a crop camera, especially indoors. Having said that I am fine with the focal length and I feel its made rethink how I compose my subject in the frame. Perfect color reproduction, contrast, and wonderful bokeh even on a crop camera! Tack sharp wide open and even sharper stopped down a little. Canon's best lens ever.
A future mkII version could have weather sealing, rounded aperture blades, f/1.8, and maybe IS. Although, I wouldn't want IS if it hurts the image quality.
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2008
|
|
william nunn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 6, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Apr 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $899.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
nicely balanced on a 1.6 crop body
super fast
f2!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
You will really enjoy it. A little learning curve but so is life.
Highly recommend
|
|
|
Apr 3, 2008
|
|
ask72883
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $850.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Bokeh, sharpness, amazing for portraits
|
|
Cons:
|
weight (only if you're walking around with it for a long time)
|
|
|
I'm a pretty novice photographer that only used borrowed lenses from different friends who were into digital photography. I used a certificate I had and got myself a EOS 350D. I got to preview the 17-40 4.0, 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, 135 2.0, and the 85 1.8.
I love taking candid portrait shots but whenever I tried to get these shots with either the 50 or the 85 my subjects would always seem self-conscious and their expressions became utterly staged. This one didn't give me away as easily. I was far away enough to take amazing shots and even at 2.0 the pictures were so sharp it simply amazed me. Most of my shots are taken between 2.8 and 6 and all of these were very clear. One thing to note is that the majority of my shots were outside (this maybe a little too close indoors for 1.6x crop bodies like mine.)
My overall goal is to move to a FF camera (and get into landscapes) one day but so far my experience with this lens has been nothing short of remarkable. And I know that this lens is a keeper even with a new body. It focuses quickly and is silent and overall weight really isn't an issue. I highly recommend this lens if you have the disposable income. Heck, use the stimulus package this summer and save up for this.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2008
|
|
hsk06
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Feb 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 1061
|
|
Review Date: Mar 27, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $899.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, excellent contract, sharp, Isolate subject well
|
|
Cons:
|
little heavy on 1.6 camera
|
|
|
Couldn't be happier.
The colors are so vivid, contract and sharpness are wonderfull and it's really fast (lot of light for f2 --> can take with faster shutter speed).
Take pictures at Carnaval or events and see the background vanishs away, stunning bokeh (main selling point for me)
|
|
|
Mar 27, 2008
|
|
crimson400
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 21, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 21, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $699.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Unbelievable image quality, fast focus, good balance with 5D and 1D cameras. Great price for tack-sharp images.
|
|
Cons:
|
No one told me to buy it earlier!
|
|
|
As far as primes go, this one should be in every Canon shooter's kit. It produces some of the best images I have ever seen. Some photogs become too reliant on zoom lenses and forget to use their feet. Primes will always be twice as sharp and this lens proves it.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2008
|
|
kesava
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1080
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
everything
|
|
Cons:
|
its the only one of three lenses from canon that can produce this quality of images
|
|
|
stunning
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2008
|
|
davidrwilliams
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 15, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 434
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great lens - very good image sharpness, contrast and bokeh, fast and accurate focus in a small, light and easily portable package.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not much - see below.
|
|
|
Pretty close to the perfect lens at this focal length. Everything that can be said, has been said in other reviews.
Still, there's room for improvement, as the lens would be perfect if updated to include Canon's latest lens upgrades - circular aperture, weather sealing, and enhanced coatings to reduce high-contrast purple fringing (as per 70-200 f/4L IS).
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2008
|
|
Dr Jimson
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 3, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 80
|
|
Review Date: Mar 10, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp. Nice weight. Perfect for candids. Fantastic bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
This is probably my sharpest lens and I have a few L primes and zooms. Great for candid portraits at weddings (much more discrete than 70-200 2.8). Bokeh is excellent and is great for getting rid of busy backgrounds.
It is a bit long for standard portraiture on a crop body.
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2008
|
|
neridah
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 17, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 970
|
|
Review Date: Mar 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 7, 2008
|
|
NorthShooter
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 2, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $899.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast, sharp, light and small.
|
|
Cons:
|
Would have been even better with IS.
|
|
|
I needed a new lens for indoor sports, as my 70-200 f/2.8 IS forced me to use ISO 3200, which produces too much noise. The 135mm f/2.0L is perfect for that use on my 20D. Fast, silent and precise focusing, low weight (the 70-200 2.8 IS is a brick in comparison), it handles very well and the build quality makes it a joy to use. It is VERY sharp. I smile every time I mount it on my camera cause I know the photos will be good.
If you look through the lens from the front, it looks like a WIDE tube filled with glas.
The lens is perfect for portraits - I don't find it too narrow on my 20D. The DOF is very narrow at close distance, so unless you're directly in front of the face or stop down, you can't get both eyes in focus. Obviously, this effect makes subjects in focus really stand out.
The lens should be well suited for concert photographers located in the pit: its wide aperture is the only thing that helps for fast-moving artists on stage.
There is a little bit of play in the focus ring along the optical axis - from other reviews I hear that this is normal.
The 135mm f2.0L is my new favourite lens.
|
|
|
Mar 3, 2008
|
|
SJMD
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 15291
|
|
Review Date: Feb 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
This lens is as great as every one here says and you will not be disappointed.
You get what you pay for.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 5, 2008
|
|
ibilly
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 432
|
|
Review Date: Feb 4, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The image it gives, inconspicuous while having good reach, very fast, build quality. Very sharp at 2.0, sharper than my camera at 2.8.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, a bit long on a crop body for portrait work, dof makes you paranoid about EXACTLY where you're focusing
|
|
|
This is my second 'L quality' lens (17-55 IS being the first) and I am actually blown away. This lens will really make you other lenses feel soft and insufficient much like the effect a Victoria's Secret model in runway getup would have on your average (female) fast food patron.
Its barrel is chock-full of glass in a wonderful way and it's a stop faster than your average expensive fast tele but it's still (comparatively) light and compact. While it does get sharper 1+ stop down, at 2.0 it's still much sharper than many other lenses.
I really do love this lens and I am ever-impressed with the results it returns. Using it is a newfound source of pleasure in my life and while I feel it's expensive, it's very close to justifying its premium. It has opened up new options as its bokeh/dof combo, color rendition, and sharpness give me the ability to get 'that look' effortlessly where I would previously have to concoct a deliberate circumstance to achieve similar results, even with my fast 30 and 50mm primes.
I've looked at comparison ISO 9000something charts online and it's sharper than the venerated 70-200 L lenses–a stop faster. 2.0=2.8 and 2.8=4.0! It really is a joy to use and it performs like no other lens I've used so if you're considering it and can afford an L, I heartily recommend it.
P.S. As an added bonus is inconspicuousness–people aware they're being shot will be less self-conscious and other will be less likely to notice.
|
|
|
Feb 4, 2008
|
|
fhernandez
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 219
|
|
Review Date: Jan 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I bought this lens to shoot Indoor Track and Field in low light gyms. I am nothing but mesmerized by how sharp and fast this lens is. The range is not
a problem for track meets where the subject is coming towards you
|
|
Cons:
|
none that I can think of. I think it is priced in the high end but you definetely get what you pay for,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 28, 2008
|
|
amosher
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jan 26, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $895.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Razor sharp, gives you the speed you need for indoor sports
|
|
Cons:
|
not cheap, but the perfect tool to have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 26, 2008
|
|
M__G
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 3, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness, bokeh, light weight and black (compared to my 70-200f/2.8IS), affordable
|
|
Cons:
|
very minor CA at f/2 and high contrast edges (almost a positive aspect compared to 85f1.8 and 100f2)
|
|
|
I used this lens on the 20D and now on the 40D. The focal length is not ideal for the 1.6 crop, if you intend to do mostly portrait stuff, because you have to stand far away from your model. I use it not only for head shots (with that lovely creamy bokeh), but also for some tele applications, where a fast and relatively light weight prime is more handy than my big, heavy and white 70-200f/2.8IS.
The 135 produces very minor (almost negligble) Chromatic Abberations at high contrast edges when wide open and the sharpness is aready very good. Stopped down to f/2.8 the CA is gone and sharpness improves a little from almost excellent to absolutely excellent.
With the 135f/2 you get a sharp, fast, tele and portrait prime with a great cost/performance ratio (at least by L standards). It's simply one of the best lenses ever made by Canon.
Nevertheless I think I will be enjoying this lens even more, when I will be adding the next affordable Canon full frame to my camera arsenal (i.e. the 5D successor). But this is not the fault of the lens.
|
|
|
Jan 6, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
383
|
503694
|
May 20, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
96% of reviewers
|
$1,301.92
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.80
|
9.41
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
