I bought the EF 135 F/2 in Japan in mint condition with original box and hood for ＄400. I took to into the real world with my R6 MKII at a local show and it delivered! I got great results. It’s definitely showing its age by the softness, but it has character. It was a really dim venue and was shooting at ISO 4000, but performed very well! I’m surprised by the quality for a lens that was released in 1996. In some situations the fringing can be awful in my opinion.
Thanks, Zach. One addendum: there is a considerable amount of LOCA with the EF version, while the RF is almost LOCA free (own it, great lens, can highly recommend it).
When I switched to Sony a few years ago I got a EF to E adapter. I kept two EF lenses. The 100 Macro f2.8L IS and tye EF 135mm f2L. The 135L is amazing even on a Sony A7IV and still is one of my favorite lenses. And for the price I paid (about $450usd/$600cad) to me its not even worth selling as its just such a great lens.
@@egor1g Practical means actual as opposed to theoretical in use, results, applications, etc. 135 is a specialized lens and the rf's benefits aren't particularly meaningful or sometimes even desirable for 99% of photogs.
I like 135L over 85L, because I think people look prettier on 135mm. You know, there is people who don't like how the looks on photos, but 135 is kinda fix that somehow. I had 135 F2 for years and had no problem at all, but when 135 1.8 released, I thought like wow, IS can be very helpful for photo and for video.
You can hit zoom while in compare mode and it will show you the image in 1:1. No need to select individual images for comparison. Not bad for almost 30 years old glass 😃
The RF 135 produces gorgeous results while being surgically sharp. Honestly, I don’t think it sacrifices any artful qualities for its clinical improvements.
the amazing Zeiss Milvus 135mm 1.4
EF 135 F2 to my eyes has more 3D POP and more pleasing quality. Great Comparison Thank you for the upload 👏
My EF 135 is bought and payed for and works fine on the mirrorless bodies. Don't see how the RF is going to make me more money.
I love my EF 135 and will be holding onto it for as long as I can considering the price tag and size of the RF version.
I bought the EF 135 F/2 in Japan in mint condition with original box and hood for ＄400. I took to into the real world with my R6 MKII at a local show and it delivered! I got great results. It’s definitely showing its age by the softness, but it has character. It was a really dim venue and was shooting at ISO 4000, but performed very well! I’m surprised by the quality for a lens that was released in 1996. In some situations the fringing can be awful in my opinion.
Thanks, Zach. One addendum: there is a considerable amount of LOCA with the EF version, while the RF is almost LOCA free (own it, great lens, can highly recommend it).
When I switched to Sony a few years ago I got a EF to E adapter. I kept two EF lenses. The 100 Macro f2.8L IS and tye EF 135mm f2L. The 135L is amazing even on a Sony A7IV and still is one of my favorite lenses. And for the price I paid (about $450usd/$600cad) to me its not even worth selling as its just such a great lens.
I prefer the EF 2/135mm, it has a better 3D rendering and micro-contrast. The RF 1,8/135mm is sharper but images looks flat .
100% Agreed.
I'm sure the RF is technically sharper with less CA etc but from a practical standpoint I see zero reason to buy the native rf lens
Good for you, but it is better in many ways: AF, IS, sharpness, CA, brighter, etc. So what is practical about it, I don’t get it.
@@egor1g Practical means actual as opposed to theoretical in use, results, applications, etc. 135 is a specialized lens and the rf's benefits aren't particularly meaningful or sometimes even desirable for 99% of photogs.
If anything, this kinda sells the EF version.
I like 135L over 85L, because I think people look prettier on 135mm. You know, there is people who don't like how the looks on photos, but 135 is kinda fix that somehow. I had 135 F2 for years and had no problem at all, but when 135 1.8 released, I thought like wow, IS can be very helpful for photo and for video.
You can hit zoom while in compare mode and it will show you the image in 1:1. No need to select individual images for comparison. Not bad for almost 30 years old glass 😃
nice. I have the 135 EF and I'm thinking about getting the 135 RF. Can you please share the raw files via dropbox or google drive?
The RF 135 produces gorgeous results while being surgically sharp. Honestly, I don’t think it sacrifices any artful qualities for its clinical improvements.
I would give you an extra “liked” if I could for the romantic moment at the end. Great video, imagery and lens comparison.
Microcontrast is a myth. Its either sharpness or contrast or both.