Never ever try a PRIME lens.. Going back to a ZOOM, you get too obsessed w. IQ

Klaus dk wrote:

Igor Sotelo wrote:

Klaus dk wrote:

Igor Sotelo wrote:
[…]. Though I noticed that whoever used the 135L lens, thinks really highly of it.

If I'd bought a very expensive lens only to find I weren't too wild about it, I would probably be more inclined to sell it than to share my frustration in public.

This is not a comment on the quality of the EF 135/2.

I think very highly of almost all my prime portrait lenses from 100mm to 180mm, don’t really have plans to sell any whatsoever.

Maybe could sell my Pentax D FA 100mm 2.8 WR Macro to buy the new version that’s about to be launched, by the road map.

Anyways, would like to try the EF 135mm 2.0L, maybe should have it too to complete a bit better my EF system, because of it’s special rendering.

I opted to go with zooms first for my Canon’s, though it must be said several EF L primes are excellent too.

I probably should have made it more clear that my comment addressed your staement: "Though I noticed that whoever used the 135L lens, thinks really highly of it."

I suppose people who don't think highly of an expensive lens will not use it, and will not write about it.

Yeah, probably the photographer that doesn’t like the won’t comment much about it. Was in a hospital, didn’t read well.

I saw several really positive reviews on the web and YouTube, about the EF 135mm 2.0L (not to take anything from the RF 1.8 version that must be great too), and my guess is that I should have it.

Since I’m amateur photographer and have 4 systems, there are some holes in the lenses lineup here and there, with most urgent priorities and used market prices to consider. Sometimes it gets complicated.

The EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II is a great portrait lens too, as an option to the 135mm L lens. But I have the impression the zoom can’t really give the look of the 85mm 1.2L and the 135mm 2.0L probably renders nicer.