Canon 135mm, f2L on crop vs 200mm, f1.8 on FF

ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,078 moderator
edited July 10, 2006 in Cameras
Is the 135mm, f2L similar in performance on a 1.6x crop camera to a 200mm, f1.8L on a Full Frame camera? It would seem they are similar Field of View?

Would the 135mm on a 20D/30D be a good choice for indoor sports?

Thanks,

ziggy53
ziggy53
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums

Comments

  • PezpixPezpix Registered Users Posts: 391 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    ziggy53 wrote:
    Is the 135mm, f2L similar in performance on a 1.6x crop camera to a 200mm, f1.8L on a Full Frame camera? It would seem they are similar Field of View?

    Would the 135mm on a 20D/30D be a good choice for indoor sports?

    Thanks,

    ziggy53

    Honestly Ziggy, 135mm f/2 L is a fantastic and incredibly sharp piece of glass with a wonderful bokah in low light. Not to mention that you will get that effective length at 216mm (ish). Also, considering that it is the longest focal length Canon has under that magic f/2.8, it becomes a sports photograhy dream! Just remember, that shooting near wide open, you will see some drop off in detail. The 135 works really well from 2.8 and closed.

    Personally, I need to add that awesome lens to my collection... yes, it will be mine, oh yes... it...will...be...mine rolleyes1.gif
    Professional Ancient Smugmug Shutter Geek
    Master Of Sushi Noms
    Amateur CSS Dork
  • gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    Took a few hundred shots with it today actually (135 f/2) I know little about its rivals but when the light is gone shooting the downhill bikes race ..it just keeps giving me keepers over & over again on the 20D. Its focus speed is amazing.
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,703 moderator
    edited July 9, 2006
    I think the viewfinder of a 20D with a 135 looks almost exactly llike a 200mm on a FF camera. I noticed this composing bridge shots at Mackinaw Island with tripods side by side.

    There is another advantage as well - the 135f2 is an outstanding lens, and on an APS sensor camera you capture only the central portion of the image circle and omit any corner softness that might be seen on a FF camera.

    As 'gus says, it really is a very sweet combo.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    It's not ANYWHERE similart to a 200 f/1.8L.

    Why? Because you can actually carry around the 135L on your camera, handhold it, and shoot all day with it :)
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,078 moderator
    edited July 9, 2006
    Hey Pez and Gus and Path,

    This is what I was hoping to hear and confirm. I am close to having funds for a used version, in the $7-800 range. If anyone hears of one, please send me a "wakeup". If I hear of anything before I can afford it, I'll do the same for Pezpix.

    Within a couple of months, I may post in the Flea Markets here and at FM, if I don't find it before. Just trying to build the last bit of money and justification to coincide.

    Thanks,

    ziggy53
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,078 moderator
    edited July 9, 2006
    Andy wrote:
    It's not ANYWHERE similart to a 200 f/1.8L.

    Why? Because you can actually carry around the 135L on your camera, handhold it, and shoot all day with it :)

    Thanks Andy,

    Plus, you can purchase a brand new 30D and the 135mm, f2L, and still have change left over (a lot) versus the 200mm, f1.8L alone. And it doesn't have that nasty "steal me" light color either. :D

    ziggy53
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,703 moderator
    edited July 9, 2006
    Yup - the black 135 f2 and the 200 f2.8 are nice black lenses that look no bigger or more intimidating than a 24-70 or a 16-35. Kinda stealth like:):
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • luckyrweluckyrwe Registered Users Posts: 952 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    Since I have decided to shun zoom lenses and go prime, my kit will soon consist of 24/1.4, 35/1.5, 85/1.2, 135/2, 200/1.8. I am debating the 300mm or 500mm for the ultra-tele. And I wish there was a fast 18mm out there!
  • Red BullRed Bull Registered Users Posts: 719 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    From what I hear the 135 f2 is one of the sharpest lenses. I would definately go for it! I would love to own it sometime.
    -Steven

    http://redbull.smugmug.com

    "Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D

    Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.
  • PezpixPezpix Registered Users Posts: 391 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    Red Bull wrote:
    From what I hear the 135 f2 is one of the sharpest lenses. I would definately go for it! I would love to own it sometime.

    Yup, its safe to say, that if I had to choose some of the best of the best that Canon makes, I'd say the 135 f/2 is right at the top of the class. I'd even put its sharpness right in line with the holy grail of telephoto goodness the 300 f/2.8L and the amazing 85 f/1.2.

    Ziggy, maybe we could start a donation cup and see if anyone is willing to chip in to us long-suffering 135f/2L enthusiasts :):

    By the way, I'd love to start a thread of the best and worst of Canon glass but, what forum would be appropriate here? Is there just a general discussion thread that would be appropriate? If not, maybe we could start one just for random general photo discussions? Cuz I'm just sayin...
    Professional Ancient Smugmug Shutter Geek
    Master Of Sushi Noms
    Amateur CSS Dork
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    wrt to shooting indoor sports, it depends upon your vantage point and the sport.

    For sidelines on a basketball court, an effective length of 200 is probably too much lens. So you might want to also bring something wider, if you find yourelf close to the action.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • gtcgtc Registered Users Posts: 916 Major grins
    edited July 9, 2006
    nice focal length
    it is a nice length on the 20d-i have been using the 135/3.5 super- takumar for street shooting and outdoor portratits but am now after the 135/2.5 smc takumar-hope you can pick up a nice Canon for not toomuch
    Latitude: 37° 52'South
    Longitude: 145° 08'East

    Canon 20d,EFS-60mm Macro,Canon 85mm/1.8. Pentax Spotmatic SP,Pentax Super Takumars 50/1.4 &135/3.5,Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumars 200/4 ,300/4,400/5.6,Sigma 600/8.
  • gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited July 10, 2006
    I do get the tommy tits with the 135 at times...like yesterday at the zoo with the family. I only wanted snap shots thus a 24-105 L f/4 is under some serious consideration...that would mean the 135 goes up for sales though :cry Im in 2 worlds about it all really. I'd be happy with f4.
Sign In or Register to comment.