Which lens to go for - Canon 135mm f2 or Sigma Art 50mm F1.4?

Matholwch

Matholwch

Messages
548
Name
Andreas
Edit My Images
No
So I decided to treat myself a few weeks ago, and bought the Canon 135mm f2.0, but wasn't happy with the lens I received, so sent it back for a replacement, by which time it was out of stock. Fast forward nearly a month later, and I've had notification that it is back in stock.

However, it has made me pause and think whether the focal distance is for me. I have the Canon f1.4 already, but hear the Sigma is stellar. Both it and the 135mm are roughly the same price, and I'm worried that the 135mm might not be as sharp as I expect (I have a Sigma Art 35mm f1.4 and am extremely pleased with it). I shoot weddings, so the 50mm would prove more useful, but I've heard people rave about the 135mm for so long, I can't decide.

So I'm wondering to see if people can sway me one way or the other.
 
theres a ziess 135 f2, in a interview a zeiss employee said it was otus quality :eek:
dunno the price of it though :x
 
Andreas, I've not used either lens (I shoot Nikon), but I'm not a fan of 50mm lenses no matter how sharp they may be so I would go with the 135mm f2 as for me that would be a lens I'd get a lot of use from. But there is no point getting a lens that you are not likely to make good use of and as you say you would use a 50mm more, perhaps that is the one to get. btw imo sharpness is over rated ;)
 
I can't fault the 135L - other than at times it can be too long (indoors bridal prep in small rooms).

I pair it with a Sigma f/1.4 35.
 
Thanks guys. I'm simply saying 50mm because I didn't use my old 100mm f2.8 macro much (apart from macro photos of wedding rings) for portraiture, but wonder if this is a good time to develop my shooting style. Really do like my Sigma f/1.4 35mm ART, so no longer averse to Sigma lenses (as long as they're ART, oh and when will they bring out an ART 85mm?).
 
The 135L is stupidly sharp imo!! I think it's more of a focal length decision as I can imagine the 50A would be more than sharp enough for your needs also.....
 
If you already have the 35 and 50 focal ranges covered, I'd go with the 135. When I owned the 135, I used it alongside the 35 1.4 L and 85 1.8. Nice, even spacing. 35+50=85+50=135.
 
50 is too close to 35. 35+85+135 sounds way better. Or 35+100L? It is a great macro and amazing portrait lens; not quite as bokehlicious as 135, but it has the IS (and macro!). I like longish portrait lenses.
 
Decided to stick with the 135mm, it arrived yesterday and a few test shots indicate that its much sharper than the one I returned - haven't tested extensively yet, but already feel better about the lens, and looking forward to adapting my shooting style to accomodate it :)

Thanks for all the feedback and food for thought guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top