I had the 135mm f/2 L lens for quite a while. As a person who first used 35mm cameras quite a while ago — back when it was really common to get a 135mm lens for your telephoto — I liked the focal length. The most useful purpose for the lens for me was low-light events and environmental portraiture, though I also carted it along for landscape photography. (This was back when I carried nearly 10 lenses into the field. I don't do that any more!)
It is a really beautiful, classic lens, and I had no questions about it performance at all.
But I sold it.
Given the quality of modern zoom lenses (and one other thing I may mention below), I simply found that I wasn't using it enough to warrant keeping it. In most cases where I might shoot it at f/2, I could use an image stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8L zoom and get virtually the same performance with more flexibility. Regardless of the pro/con arguments for that... I simply found that I was using the zoom far more than the prime... until I hardly used the prime at all.
I notice that your 70-200mm is the f/4, so the argument is a bit different... but it might be worth considering the pluses/minuses of moving to the f/2.8 zoom instead of getting the prime.
Dan
(I do use a comparable lens on my Fujifilm system, the 90mm f/2. It is a long story that I won't burden you with here!)
TheLinguist wrote:
In the market for a new portrait lens and the 135 has been on my radar for some time but my question here is:
I’m looking to use this lens primarily at night for portraits here in Shanghai, lots of neon and bright lights around as well as looking to shoot within old alley ways and the bund.
I’ve looked all over and no single review or YouTube video seems to address this ALTHOUGH I have seen on IG a photographer use this lens often at Disney but he hasn’t been on in a while.
I would also be using it for indoor portraits with correct lighting etc.
Against the Sigma I’ve read the Canon af is more reliable although I’m not against the Sigma if it gets the job done.
Would be using it in a 5 D IV in conjunction with:
16-35 F4
24-70F4
50 1.4
70-200F4
Any advice given will be much appreciated....Show more →
Thank you Dan! You seem very experienced and your post had me very interested. I’ve decided to rent the 135 and go from there, so how about this Fujifilm lens you mentioned? gdanmitchell wrote:
I had the 135mm f/2 L lens for quite a while. As a person who first used 35mm cameras quite a while ago — back when it was really common to get a 135mm lens for your telephoto — I liked the focal length. The most useful purpose for the lens for me was low-light events and environmental portraiture, though I also carted it along for landscape photography. (This was back when I carried nearly 10 lenses into the field. I don't do that any more!)
It is a really beautiful, classic lens, and I had no questions about it performance at all.
But I sold it.
Given the quality of modern zoom lenses (and one other thing I may mention below), I simply found that I wasn't using it enough to warrant keeping it. In most cases where I might shoot it at f/2, I could use an image stabilized 70-200mm f/2.8L zoom and get virtually the same performance with more flexibility. Regardless of the pro/con arguments for that... I simply found that I was using the zoom far more than the prime... until I hardly used the prime at all.
I notice that your 70-200mm is the f/4, so the argument is a bit different... but it might be worth considering the pluses/minuses of moving to the f/2.8 zoom instead of getting the prime.
Dan
(I do use a comparable lens on my Fujifilm system, the 90mm f/2. It is a long story that I won't burden you with here!)
I shoot two systems — a Canon full frame system based on the 5DsR using zoom lenses and a Fujifilm APS-C system based on the XPro2, mostly using primes but occasionally a couple of zooms. I mostly use the Canon system for landscape, wildlife, and long-exposure night photography, while I primarily use the Fujifilm for street and travel photography. (Both get used for events, depending on the specifics.)
I don't generically recommend primes over zooms. Today's zoom lenses are really excellent and very flexible. Image quality of the best of them is up to that of excellent primes, especially when you consider the potential advantages of "cropping in camera" with the zooms over cropping in post when you use primes.
I use the 90mm f/2 Fujifilm lens on the XPro2 in several situations — portraits (usually environmental and not in studio) and when I need a longer lens and I'm only carrying primes. For example, one set of lenses I might carry would include it along with the 14mm f/2.8 and the 27mm f/2.8. If shooting handheld in very low light — or at night — I might substitute a couple fo Fujifilm f/1.4 lenses for those f/28 lenses.
The 90mm f/2 feels to me, in terms of its performance, a whole lot like using the Canon 135mm f/2.
Dan
TheLinguist wrote:
Thank you Dan! You seem very experienced and your post had me very interested. I’ve decided to rent the 135 and go from there, so how about this Fujifilm lens you mentioned?
Makes sense and I see your point there, thanks for the response, I’m hoping I like the 135 but also ready to get the 85 if it’s better.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I shoot two systems — a Canon full frame system based on the 5DsR using zoom lenses and a Fujifilm APS-C system based on the XPro2, mostly using primes but occasionally a couple of zooms. I mostly use the Canon system for landscape, wildlife, and long-exposure night photography, while I primarily use the Fujifilm for street and travel photography. (Both get used for events, depending on the specifics.)
I don't generically recommend primes over zooms. Today's zoom lenses are really excellent and very flexible. Image quality of the best of them is up to that of excellent primes, especially when you consider the potential advantages of "cropping in camera" with the zooms over cropping in post when you use primes.
I use the 90mm f/2 Fujifilm lens on the XPro2 in several situations — portraits (usually environmental and not in studio) and when I need a longer lens and I'm only carrying primes. For example, one set of lenses I might carry would include it along with the 14mm f/2.8 and the 27mm f/2.8. If shooting handheld in very low light — or at night — I might substitute a couple fo Fujifilm f/1.4 lenses for those f/28 lenses.
The 90mm f/2 feels to me, in terms of its performance, a whole lot like using the Canon 135mm f/2.
