I've been toying with the idea of going to an all (or at least all except my UWA Zoom ) prime lineup... I've noticed whenever I'm using any of my longer zooms it's either at one end of the zoom or the other. So I tossed my 70-200mm f/2.8 to the wolves and picked up a canon 135L to replace it. The reasons?

• I love fast glass
• I think I love primes
• it has crazy fast AF
• it's MUCH smaller and lighter than the 70-200 and gives me the reach I need, even with the 1.4 TC in the bag
• it works very well with a 1.4 TC making it a 189mm f/2.8
• that front element is sexy as hell (I'm not going to lie).
• if I'm going to keep zooms around I want the 70-200 IS over the non IS version, so selling the 2.8 non IS lets me test my prime theory... If I don't like it I can sell this to contribute towards the 70-200 IS

So it came UPS on Friday. I didn't have much daylight left when I walked out of the building, but of course I wanted to test the new toy... bear in mind these first few shots are at ISO3200 and I didn't go crazy on the NN because I wanted to leave as much sharpness in them as possible:









this is the only shot at ISO1600. I had to actually BACK OFF the sharpening I do to my files I post online because there were sharpening artifacts on her wiskers:


back to 3200 (and B+W because the WB sucked on this shot):


more shots coming...

Saturday was way to busy to even shoot anything more than the grocery store for my PAD... Sunday I bargained to get outside with the dog so I walked him on the beach for ~30 minutes... He's a bit of a PITA on the leash (he's a puller) so I didn't have a ton of time for any of these shots... Also, I'VE TURNED OFF ONE OF THE TWO SHARPENING STEPS I USUALLY USE WHEN I SHARE ANYTHING ONLINE!!! I've shared my action with anyone who wants it (it's the NSOP framing action, that's exactly what I use for all my shots you see, just with my sig on them) so you can go see what I usually do... I've turned off the USM step that happens in the beginning. Leaving it on lest OVER sharpening artifacts in the shots when sharpened... So bear in mind this have about half of my usually sharpening on them. Not NONE, just half of what I usually do (in camera was still on, NN add a tiny bit, then one sharpening step in the framing action).

anyway, the shots:
















now these last 2 are with the 1.4 TC. These are both WIDE OPEN with the TC so they're at 189mm f/2.8 (check the exifs):




This thing is incredible. Now I know how people get sucked into fast primes. It's crazy sharp, it has great colors and contrast, and it's just fun to use. It's much smaller/easier to use compared to the 70-200mm f/2.8, especially a non IS version. I seem to be able to hand hold this bad larry down to about 1/60th or 1/90th w/o issue which surprised me... It's very comfortable in the hand, and much less intimidating than a 70-200mm (it's black, but also the size makes it less intimidating too, the hood is large though (which I love))... I'm not sure how well I'll fair with all the lens changes a prime forces on you, but if I can deal with that I'm sold on primes so far. The IQ is just amazing.

This lens also can be shot wide open with a 1.4 TC. I was amazed at how well it takes the TC. The IQ holds up and the AF is still lighting fast. I won't hesitate to use the 1.4 as needed. I did test it with the 2.0 as well, but it seems to have a noticeable effect on the IQ wide open. I own a 300 f4 already so I have no need for the 2.0 with this lens, but it might help other people. It can still AF very quickly with the 2.0 and if you stop it down a bit it's usable. It's not as sharp as it is on it's own or with the 1.4, but it is usable if the 2.0 gets the shot and the other options wouldn't...

+1 for canon's prime lenses. This thing is a beauty. Oh, and can you say bokeh? I'm not as into it as some other members here *cough* matt *cough* since I shoot primarily landscapes/travel shots, but wow, is f/2.0 fun to play with on a lens this fast.

Nice, Ben. Great write-up as always.

agreed, man that thing is sharp.

When/if I get some good shots with the 70-200 f/4 L, I'll do a review of it.

your cat looks unimpressed as always

bump for second post having content now.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

Oh, and can you say bokeh? I'm not as into it as some other members here *cough* matt *cough* since I shoot primarily landscapes/travel shots, but wow, is f/2.0 fun to play with on a lens this fast.

I like 2.8 what can I say...

I'm sorry, but "Slow Children" cracks me up every time.

And after seeing all these shots I feel compelled to go out and prove the worth of the 70-200.

Nice Ben, really great sample shots and great review.

I'm going to hang onto my 70-200 for now but you give a good argument.

ps-fix your grammar error "Know I know..."

Originally Posted by tardypizza

I'm sorry, but "Slow Children" cracks me up every time.

my parents use to say they put those signs up for me...

And after seeing all these shots I feel compelled to go out and prove the worth of the 70-200.

Yeah do it. I still love the 70-200. I just want to try this whole prime thing and see if it's for me. Plus fast primes are so sexy looking...

Originally Posted by thechickencow

I'm going to hang onto my 70-200 for now but you give a good argument.

yeah, the 70-200 is a great lens. I'll miss some aspects for sure. Time will tell if I keep this and I'm done, if I add another 70-200, or if I sell it and go back....

ps-fix your grammar error "Know I know..."

fixed, thanks.

The biggest for me for the 70-200 is the motorsports stuff, specifically rally that I'll want to shoot if I'm ever not competing. I can't see being able to get consistent framing with a prime for something like that.

Originally Posted by thechickencow

I can't see being able to get consistent framing with a prime for something like that.

Yep. that's my concern as well... I've always loved the idea of primes and I've noticed I end up shooting at the long end of my 70-200 almost exclusively. And when it's not at 200 it's at 70mm. So for me I feel primes might work better, and they are sharper and smaller to carry (this takes the place of my 70-200 in my bag with a 1.4TC. It's much smaller and lighter for carrying on a daily basis). So I'm not sure about it myself, I've just been carefully observing how I shoot to see if this will work.

In theory it will, but I'll find out over the next couple of months. One thing I've learned though is that the easiest way to test something like this out is to buy it and use it for a few months. When you sell it you'll lose less than a one week rental. You just have to be able to afford buying it outright at the time.

Originally Posted by jacobsen1

I've noticed I end up shooting at the long end of my 70-200 almost exclusively. And when it's not at 200 it's at 70mm.

Yep, this happened to to me over the weekend. I'd go wide just to acquire the rider, then bring it in as tight as I could. Usually 200, or 400 w/ TC. I just couldn't get close enough. I did like being able to zoom out a bit, but it wasn't necessary. One day I think I'll tape my zoom ring just to see what it would be like. This past weekend's events has really made me want a 300 f/2.8 VR.

2 from last night, the first is hand held at 1/45th (by mistake) so a little soft. The second is hand held at 1/60th, about what I can hold if I'm careful.




Both have the sharpening backed down in PP...

I even took out the 50 and 85 last night but couldn't get anything I liked better than the few shots I took with the 135... Something about this FL has me hooked.

Hey, welcome to the forums Sam.
And yeah, no idea, but it is using a 1.4 TC so that's probably it...

yeah
plus the only area that is in focus are his eyes... Even the ground is OOF so it does give it a very strange effect.

I agree Ben, my 135 is probably my favorite lens and is always in my bag. I'd sell my 70-200 f/2.8 but I need it for sports and outdoor music competitions. (Or until I hit the lottery and get the 28-300 L!!)

nope.
sigma.

Ah ha! Where's your messiah now, Sigma luvver?

I've been converted to the darkside....
I never said they were better though, just great values. Plus they're black....

This is my next lens, though I need a flash as well so cant decide whether to get this or the 580 first...

Some more samples:












As for review, the only thing I would add is that I wish it had IS because I've been spoiled being able to shoot my 70-200 at 1/30" of a second.... the fast aperture of the 135L helps stop action and lets you get higher shutter speeds in low light, but IS would make it killer for things not moving.

Nice samples mark.

while I wouldn't argue IS would be nice, and our 70-200s prove you can have sharp glass with IS, I've been able to shoot mine at 1/60th without blur somehow. Obviously not consistently, but 1/90th and f2 work pretty well in lowish light.

Yeah, I find that 1/60th is about a 50/50 proposition for me so far. If I remind myself and use better technique (which I should do anyway), it definitely helps.

I'll still be shooting ~1/125" when I can, though.

The samples I posted all have high shutter speeds, but that's because I was shooting everything at f/2 and was being lazy with the ISO.

The front element is so rad!

Some shots to show the bokeh and the sharpness of the lens. These were shot in RAW, converted in ACR, and run through my border action, which adds just a bit of sharpening.

wow. fantastic shots mark. I've wanted one of these for a while, but since I have a 70-200 2.8 I don't know what would be better....

Originally Posted by Jayso

wow. fantastic shots mark. I've wanted one of these for a while, but since I have a 70-200 2.8 I don't know what would be better....

This is honestly one of the lenses I jumped the Nikon ship for--I should have had it from the beginning, even if I don't use it all the time.

Originally Posted by Markitos

This is honestly one of the lenses I jumped the Nikon ship for--I should have had it from the beginning, even if I don't use it all the time.

You aren't helping..............

Originally Posted by Jayso

You aren't helping..............

Hello, my name is Jason, and well, umm... I am a camera gear addict.

Originally Posted by Markitos

damn dude, love that shot.

and yeah, the 135L is an amazing lens. Not my favorite because it's long and I prefer wide, but when I'm needing this range, it always blows me away.

+1 that is an amazing shot mark!

When I have room, this is definitely my favorite portrait lens. I do think at some point I'll pick up an 85mm lens (hopefully the L), because I find that sometimes the 135 is a little too long (I was pressed up against the wall of the hospital room for both those shots), and the 50 is a little too short). Since I like shooting portraits so much, it makes sense to get the L eventually, although it might be too slow focusing for the kind of shooting I do (that and it's so freaking expensive!). In any case, it's nice to go back to shooting b+w and people--I bet you guys were getting bored with my other, landscapy stuff.

Fantastic shots.

Have I mentioned that this lens is crazy good??









Oh, and it looks good stopped down, too!

......................

Originally Posted by Jayso

......................

I put those up just for you!

Originally Posted by Markitos

I put those up just for you!

I know you did. jerk.






















Great shots mark, especially the chicken thing

Very impressive stuff!

busted this bad boy out the other day (trying to decide if I should sell it or the 70-200 f4 IS). Glad I did.

I really like the 2nd one in the last post. Really great.

I was wondering why you'd have the 70-200, the 100-400, and the 135. Seems like too much overlap/overkill to have all 3 and actually use them.