Hi,

has somebody practical experience about the optical quality between both lenses ? Do not need the SF and also f 2 is not a must. Mostly use it for landscape and animal photography/safaris. Finally I want to replace my 2.8/70-200 L to get more superior image quality - zooms quality is very good for a zoom, but it remains a zoom...

Thanks Rainer from Germany

-- R. Krönke (Rainer.Kroenke@T-Online.de), February 23, 2002

Answers

I mean the 2.8/135 SF of course !

-- R. Krönke (Rainer.Kroenke@T-Online.de), February 23, 2002.

In order to get superior image quality than the zoom, it would seem that the 135 F2.0L is the way to go. It has USM, which the 135 F2.8 SF does not. The optics of the 135 F2.0L are extrememly highly rated, and will provide improvement over the 70-200, which I'm not convinced that the 135 F2.8 would.

The other lenses to complete the replacement of the 70-200 would, of course, be the 200 F2.8L USM and the 85 F1.8 USM (unless you can afford the amazing 85 F1.2L USM).

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), February 23, 2002.

Rainer,

The EF 2/135L is a very sharp and very fast lens. You will not be disapointed buying it. Take a look (hope link works):

Shot with Canon D30 + EF 2/135L + EF 1.4x Extender yesterday in Vienna.

If you want to sell your 2.8/70-200L please send me an e-mail.

Martin

-- uboot67 (uboot67@yahoo.com), February 23, 2002.

I don't have the EF 135 2.0L USM, but I have the EF 135 2.8 SF. The EF 135 2.8 SF was one of Canon's original EF lens offerings in 1987. The designation "Soft Focus" refers to the two levels of dial-in spherical aberration that softens and imparts a beautiful glow to the image. Unlike a soft filter, you can quickly vary the effect by changing the aperture or soft focus setting. AF works perfectly with soft focus engaged, but if you change soft focusing settings after AF, you'll have to refocus. The soft focus effect is only visible from F2.8 to 4, so you need to use Av or M mode and shoot slow film during the day. Highlights, especially on backlit subjects, enhance and intensify the glowing effect. When soft focus is turned off, this is an extremely sharp (Photodo 3.9 MTF), contrasty and flare resistant (7 elements) telephoto lens.

The front element does not rotate, nor does the barrel change in length when focusing. Although it uses AFD, it focuses surprisingly fast due to its IF design, almost as fast as ring-type USM. Moreover, the sound of the AFD motor is soft and muted, softer than most AFD designs. It has a distance window but lacks FT- M. Manual focus is loose and gritty, but slightly better than the EF 50 1.8 (MK I). I wish the minimum focusing distance was closer than 1.3 m (4.3'), but at least that's near enough for a head and shoulders shot. This lens has 52 mm filter threads and uses the massive ET-65 III (or ET-65 II) lens hood, a clip-on design.

I don't use this lens for anything except outdoor portraits of women and occasional street photography. It's too long for most studio or indoor use. Most women love the glamorous, blemish free glow it imparts. The 135 mm perspective makes models look thinner than 85 or 100 mm lenses. Compared to zoom or the EF 135 2.0L USM, the lens is small, light and nimble. Although build quality is a little plasticky, I've had no problems with this lens in over 12 years of use. For only $370, you won't see much better quality this side of an L lens.

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), February 23, 2002.

Thank you all together ! Regarding the 135 versions it is really not easy... I will buy the EF 2,8/200 thats sure. There was a test some weeks ago in german COLOR-FOTO with detailled MTF diagrams, where the 2.8/135 SF clearly outperforms the 2.0/135 wide open and 2 stops down ! I did imagine all, but not this ! So, I am a little confused...

Regards Rainer

-- R. Krönke (Rainer.Kroenke@T-Online.de), February 25, 2002.

Hi Rainer! I've read the same test in Color-Foto and couldn't stop laughing when I read the test results. Sometimes it's a little funny with them, Sigma always gets good results and in the last years Canon didn't get good marks very often. Just check who advertises in this magazine. From my personal use of the 135/2L lens I know how dam sharp it is and how good are the results are even for large prints. Maybe I've got a very good example and Color-Foto go a very bad one?????? I did some test shots with the 2.8/135SF too and returned it because it's to soft for my use. Here are two reviews of both lenses that show completly different result from Color-Foto.

http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/CaEF135_2LUSM- 48.shtml

http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/CaEF135_28Softfocus- 47.shtml

-- Martin (uboot67@yahoo.com), February 26, 2002.