[Adam Pek]

I have problem I can't decide between 135mm f/2 and 70-200 mmf/2.8 with no IS.
135 mm gets the best reviews, lens that is compared to Leica lenses. Just GREAT!!!
The second choice lens is 70-200mm f/2.8 great quality for the zoom lens but not even close to 135mm but it does cover bigger range.
Artist says 135mm
Bussinessman says 70-200
What to do?


help please!!!

[sdjeffy]

What do you plan on using the lenses for? That's probably the most important question. If it were me, I'd go with the 135 1.2 now, and then wait for the 70-200 and get the IS version when you can afford it...

Adam Pek, on February 7 2007, 08:02 AM, said:

I have problem I can't decide between 135mm f/2 and 70-200 mmf/2.8 with no IS.
135 mm gets the best reviews, lens that is compared to Leica lenses. Just GREAT!!!
The second choice lens is 70-200mm f/2.8 great quality for the zoom lens but not even close to 135mm but it does cover bigger range.
Artist says 135mm
Bussinessman says 70-200
What to do?


help please!!!

[MikeWarren]

Without IS, I would probably pick the 135. This is one of Canon's absolute best lenses. You could combine it with the 1.4TC and have a 190 F2.8 equivalent. Might depend on whether you are on a 1.6, 1.3, or full frame sensor. Very much depends on your style of shooting - do you like shooting with primes?

[stephen seward]

135 2.0 hands down

I have both the 70-200 IS and the 135

the 135 is sharper, smoother bokeh, and lighter than the 70-200

It would be the perfect portrait lens for FF sensors, it's a little long on cropped stuff.

[Adam Pek]

I need a long lens for a church shots other than that portraits and candid photography during reception. I will use the lens with 30D. I will get the 5D soon but that will be for my wide angle lens.

[Floyd]

If you're going to be using the lens in the church, you have to remember that you don't have much space at times to foot zoom...so the 70-200 would be more useful to you. At the same time, you won't be using the IS version....so a tripod (or at least a monopod) is in order.

I'd say to go with the 135L right now and see how you like it. You can always get ALL your money back (minus shipping) with this much sought after lens.

Good luck!

[C.J. Scott]

Adam Pek, on February 7 2007, 08:02 AM, said:

I have problem I can't decide between 135mm f/2 and 70-200 mmf/2.8 with no IS.
135 mm gets the best reviews, lens that is compared to Leica lenses. Just GREAT!!!
The second choice lens is 70-200mm f/2.8 great quality for the zoom lens but not even close to 135mm but it does cover bigger range.
Artist says 135mm
Bussinessman says 70-200
What to do?
help please!!!

I say, choose the 135 mm over the 70-200 mm non-IS. But really, the IS version of the 70-200 rocks!

[jkantor]

If you don't have a zoom in this range, the zoom will be much more useful. (And it has so much mass that holding it steady isn't a problem as long as your muscles hold out.

[J. Scott Kelley]

REALLY depends on what you're shooting. portraits, 135, no contest IMO. events (weddings, etc) 70-200.

However, I !!HIGHLY!! recommend getting the 70-200 IS. the Nikon equivalent is my workhorse and I wouldn't trade it for ANYTHING. Seriously, with the combination of events and portraits that I shoot, I would not want any other [long] lens. Maybe get the 135 now and trade up to the IS when you can (unless all you shoot is strictly portraits).

[Adam Pek]

Thank you everyone for the advice.
- And the winner is ................ Canon 135mm f/2.0
I just got it few days ago. I can't even describe how good that lens is. Contrast, blur, bouquet, and color are just incredible. WHAW!
Here is one of the first pictures I took with that lens.

1/2000 sec
f/2.2
ISO 640
focal lenght 135.0
Image is not adjusted.

[stephen seward]

people who own that lens understand it's power

I get about the same speed out of it as the 70-200 IS i.e. 1/30th at 2.8 with the IS, or 1/60th at 2.0 without is just fine.

cheers, nice shot