Got a 135L last week...LOVING THIS LENS

In case anyone here was considering this one, just wanted to report that I'm STOKED on it so far.  I have shot mainly L zooms until now (24-70 v1, 100-400), and been very happy with them, but the optics on the 135L have been mind blowing.  I just love the colors, sharpness, and depth of field available.  It seems like every shot is better.  Autofocus has been good for sports.  Here's a few shots of the kinds of things I regularly shoot...kayaking, friends, and my dog

Anyway, I know that these images aren't perfect, but I'm just really happy with my new lens!  Even wide open, it seems sharper than my 24-70 at f/8!   All shot with my 5d3.

Cheers!

Stephen

Shot 4 could have used a smaller aperture, but your joy and enthusiasm more than compensate.
--
How to inspect a used EOS 7D before purchase:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4701677448/how-to-inspect-a-used-canon-eos-7d

It's a lovely lens, and I've had mine for very many years.  At one time it had an awful lot of postings here, but the improved quality of the zooms has shifted the emphasis.  But it is heavy... ...Coming from film and Minolta, I do remember wishing that Canon offered a modern 135 F/2.8 with USM motor, so that I could have the portability that Minolta's 135 F/2.8MD offered..

It's a special lens indeed. Balances lovely on the 5D III.

I just love using mine wide open too so made sure I did AFMA for it with my 5D III. My copy nails focus wide open at +5.

Innit great??! Congratulations on your choice. Mine is about a month old now, and I love it. Brilliant thing.

I am glad you are enjoying this lens.  I bought one a year ago.  I love shallow depth of field photography.  I just wish this lens had IS.  The IS would compensate for my shaky hands.  But I guess the lens has an old design and at the time they did not offer IS.  Optically speaking, I have no complaints.  I love taking action shots.  Although if your subject is moving towards you, you will be limited by the fixed focal length.  That is why sometimes I wish I had the 70-200 F2.8 IS.  But that lens is so heavy, expensive, and it is one stop slower.  Nevertheless, if you learn how to use the 135L, you can take photos that are out of this world.

Thank you for sharing your pictures.

although IS would be handy in low light I often read that adding IS to a lens is a compromise on the IQ. Was one of the reasons given for why the 24-70L II didn't get it.
Maybe someone can offer more insight in to the truth behind that? Think I've read it's to do with the internal design that has to change by adding IS.

lastcoyote wrote:

although IS would be handy in low light I often read that adding IS to a lens is a compromise on the IQ. Was one of the reasons given for why the 24-70L II didn't get it.
Maybe someone can offer more insight in to the truth behind that? Think I've read it's to do with the internal design that has to change by adding IS.

I have the 24mm and 35mm IS primes introduced last year and so far I am very happy with them. I use them for landscapes with 72 year old shaky hands and on a tripod (sometimes with the IS left on) and am getting better results than with my older non-IS versions or with my f/4 zooms. I'm very much looking forward to IS versions of my 50, 85 and 135mm Canon primes.

You should test this dubious idea against the 35IS and the myriad of Canon telefoto zooms.

I just recently saw images made with the 135 and indeed thought, what was used to shoot these portraits?! The background rendering is truly buttery smooth (bokehlicious!). It's now #1 on my wish list because part of owning a FF slr is the ability to get rendering like this which would be impossible on smaller sensors with crop factors.

Love the portrait!  Very nice.  JS