@@davidkouris2832 during the entire pandemic, I learned that if I go to Best Buy online, I can pretty much get what I want. Everyone goes to B&H and Adorama. People don't think to just order it online from Best Buy. They have a relaxed return policy and you can always just take it to a local store if it doesn't work out. I would never go to them for advice or anything, but I bought my RF85, RF50, RF28-70, RF14-35 and RF135 all from them since 2020.
@@KevinDeal I totally “ Divorced” Best Buy because I had several bad experiences trying to buy Appliances from them I bought some early Canon Rebel Cameras from them years ago I never thought to buy online from them I will look into it Thanks for the tip I purchased my R6 with the 24-105 f4 from Crutchfield because I got their Credit Card with 12 months no interest I paid it off in 10 months so I used their money I was going to do it again with the RF 135 f1.8 I will check Best Buy online Thanks again for the top
@@davidkouris2832 no problem. Yes. They botched my last dryer installation. I only use them for their buying power on Canon and liberal return policy. Always happy to help.
First - great review. I just subscribed. My assessment: When I moved from the 5D Mark IV to the R5, I did sell many of my EF lenses and bought a few RF lenses as replacements (RF24-105 f/4, RF70-200 f/4, andRF 85 f/2) but I did decide that some of my EF lenses, with the adaptor, were more than good enough for my uses. One of the EF lenses I've decided to keep (for now at least) is my EF 135 f/2. It is truly an amazing lens for the price (I think I paid around $700 used and that was a six years ago). It doesn't have IS, but since my R5 does have IBIS, the lack of lens IS isn't that big of a deal. (Other EF lenses I'm keeping: EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 300mm f/4 prime, Sigma 150-600) As for Chromatic Aberration on my EF 135, I just went into Lightroom and looked at several pictures with high contrast areas (RAW files) and turned "Correct Chromatic Aberration" on and off to see if I could detect any CA. To my amazement, I honestly could not find ANY CA in this lens. If it's there, I could not detect it - and I was looking at areas of the images with high contrast where one would expect to see CA. Now, I don't now if it's just that I have an unusual copy of this EF 135 lens, but I can tell you that CA is absolutely not an issue for me with this lens. It's a keeper as far as I'm concerned. Would the RF 135 f/1.8 be "better"? Probably, but only marginally and not worth $2100 when I already have a fantastic lens for that focal length. If I were inclined to spend more money on another RF lens, it would probably be something like the 14-35 f/4 or the 15-35 f/2.8. I may eventually end up getting the RF 135, but I'm certainly not in any hurry to do so as my EF 135 is still giving me fantastic images.
The EF135 is fantastic. It was such a good deal that I kept mine, despite owning the RF. The RF is definitely sharper and has better contrast. And maybe my copy just had more CA. I appreciate the kind words and the subscription!
I always appreciate your honesty and no nonsense approach! I stumbled upon the EF 135 through a Rental Shop and tried it with my 5DmkIV I fell in love with it but it was no longer available to purchase new Fast forward to 2023, I'm shooting with my R6 and I'm waiting for it to be available from Crutchfield, Adorama or B&H...it;s still in limited production Again, I was already sold on it and you confirmed it with you awesome video For now, I will continue to enjoy my RF50 f1.2 Keep up the great videos
Thank you. I had high hopes for it, so the fact that it exceeded them is saying something. I love the EF135. It's a legend. But literally the second I put it up next to the new version in Capture One, the differences were obvious.
I opted for a used EF 135mm f2L and love it. I don't mind the extra weight of the adapter. And given its specific use case, I didn't feel like I needed the f1.8. Sure, the autofocus is a touch slower, but I'm not trying to save lives with this lens.
@@JohnScarrott yeah. It's cool but you do technically lose a stop of light. You get the depth of field, but lose a stop of light, due to the coating. I felt like the bokeh on the regular 1.2 was more than amazing, so I opted to save a little money for the extra light gathering.
Thanks! The lenses pretty much look exactly the same. Just a different focal length. If you need the reach, the 135 is better. If you don't need the reach. the 85 is fine for many. I find myself in scenarios where I need both, so I have both.
Nice comparison, and I agree the RF 85 1.2 and RF 135 lenses are basically the same image quality-wise, just different focal lengths. A bonus I've experienced with the 135 is its AF speed. It's pretty much on par with the 70-200, so it's great for indoor sports such as basketball.
Everything that I assumed long before the appearance of this review came true. This is RF 135, sharp, yes!, but not wow, it looks like you can get a photo by shooting on RF 24-105, (in the range of 80-105mm) I don’t want to say bad, just reportage style.. I really like your photo at 17:18 RF 50 1.2, and there is magic in it, at 17:22 RF 85 1.2 there is magic. RF 135 does not have this. But surprisingly, the EF 135 2.0 has this magic.. This is just my subjective opinion nothing more. RF 85 1.2 king !!! Thank you, it was interesting. - ( "magic" - is how the lens draws)
Thanks. I personally love the old EF model but I feel like the newer model is more consistent with the newer 50 and 85. But, whatever works for you is what you should do.
Thanks for the video. Finally made the switch to mirrorless so now looking at lens. Can I ask what you used to record your EVF? Looks like some sort of capture card. I've been looking at the Atomos Ninja but not looking to add all that extra bulk.
The RF 135mm 1.8 L IS USM isn't flexible, but it's my sharpest RF lens and wonderful for resolving backgrounds. The close focusing distance of just 70 cm is also very good. It was a little easier to finance with Canon cash back and a generous voucher from the dealer.
@@unknownKnownunknowns Will do. Since I own the RF50, 85 and 135. Perhaps I will do an episode where I demonstrate how they look to R7 owners. That way Canon crop users get some love.
Thank you for the video. Finally got my RF 135/1.8L IS after waiting almost 7 months for so I’ve only had it a week and a half. Used to own the EF version which is why I willing to pre-order it site unseen. So far so good except for the huge cheap lens hood. Wish they had put more thought into that. Right now when attached to my EOS R5 it takes up the exact same space in my bag as the RF 70-200/2.8L IS so I take one or the other. When will Canon replace my adapted EF 35/1.4L mark II with an RF version? Also going to test it and compare to my Sony FE 135/1.8 GM to so how it does but I assume the stabilization will give the Canon the edge but we will see. Take care.
If you take 85 and divide it by 1.2 you get 70.83, and if you take 135 and divide it by 1.8 you get 75, therefore the bokeh is slightly better on the 135 but the separation is better on the 85
If you wanted to truly compare the 85/1.2 to the new 135/1.8 why didn't you try shooting the 85 in x1.6 crop mode on your R5? It turns the 85 into 136mm.
Because the point of the test was to shoot the 85 at 85 and the 135 at 135 so people can see how the images render at their native focal length. I don't consider using part of my sensor in a 1.6 crop vs using all of my sensor for the other lens to be a "true" comparison. I do plan to do an episode in the future on my R7 so people can see how both lenses work on a crop sensor.
@@KevinDeal Part of your presentation was to compare the bokeh of both lenses. Shooting the 85x1.6 against the 135 would demonstrate this at the same focal length. That was all I was trying to say.
@@darrellcadieux3497 Definitely a good point. Maybe a good video to do in the future. I am planning on a video to show the RF135 on an R7. Kind of making it a poor man's 200mm f/2.
Have you received your RF135 yet? Are you still waiting on yours? Do you think it's worth $2099? Tell me about it in the comments below!
I'm still waiting for mine to use with my R6. Crutchfield, Adorama & B&H state limited availability No date yet?🤒
@@davidkouris2832 during the entire pandemic, I learned that if I go to Best Buy online, I can pretty much get what I want. Everyone goes to B&H and Adorama. People don't think to just order it online from Best Buy. They have a relaxed return policy and you can always just take it to a local store if it doesn't work out.
I would never go to them for advice or anything, but I bought my RF85, RF50, RF28-70, RF14-35 and RF135 all from them since 2020.
@@KevinDeal I totally “ Divorced” Best Buy because I had several bad experiences trying to buy Appliances from them I bought some early Canon Rebel Cameras from them years ago I never thought to buy online from them I will look into it Thanks for the tip I purchased my R6 with the 24-105 f4 from Crutchfield because I got their Credit Card with 12 months no interest I paid it off in 10 months so I used their money I was going to do it again with the RF 135 f1.8 I will check Best Buy online Thanks again for the top
@@davidkouris2832 no problem. Yes. They botched my last dryer installation. I only use them for their buying power on Canon and liberal return policy.
Always happy to help.
Still waiting on mine..
Great review. Thank you for comparing the RF to the EF!
You're welcome. Thanks for watching
First - great review. I just subscribed.
My assessment: When I moved from the 5D Mark IV to the R5, I did sell many of my EF lenses and bought a few RF lenses as replacements (RF24-105 f/4, RF70-200 f/4, andRF 85 f/2) but I did decide that some of my EF lenses, with the adaptor, were more than good enough for my uses. One of the EF lenses I've decided to keep (for now at least) is my EF 135 f/2. It is truly an amazing lens for the price (I think I paid around $700 used and that was a six years ago). It doesn't have IS, but since my R5 does have IBIS, the lack of lens IS isn't that big of a deal. (Other EF lenses I'm keeping: EF 50mm f/1.4, EF 300mm f/4 prime, Sigma 150-600)
As for Chromatic Aberration on my EF 135, I just went into Lightroom and looked at several pictures with high contrast areas (RAW files) and turned "Correct Chromatic Aberration" on and off to see if I could detect any CA. To my amazement, I honestly could not find ANY CA in this lens. If it's there, I could not detect it - and I was looking at areas of the images with high contrast where one would expect to see CA. Now, I don't now if it's just that I have an unusual copy of this EF 135 lens, but I can tell you that CA is absolutely not an issue for me with this lens. It's a keeper as far as I'm concerned. Would the RF 135 f/1.8 be "better"? Probably, but only marginally and not worth $2100 when I already have a fantastic lens for that focal length. If I were inclined to spend more money on another RF lens, it would probably be something like the 14-35 f/4 or the 15-35 f/2.8.
I may eventually end up getting the RF 135, but I'm certainly not in any hurry to do so as my EF 135 is still giving me fantastic images.
The EF135 is fantastic. It was such a good deal that I kept mine, despite owning the RF. The RF is definitely sharper and has better contrast. And maybe my copy just had more CA.
I appreciate the kind words and the subscription!
I always appreciate your honesty and no nonsense approach! I stumbled upon the EF 135 through a Rental Shop and tried it with my 5DmkIV I fell in love with it but it was no longer available to purchase new
Fast forward to 2023, I'm shooting with my R6 and I'm waiting for it to be available from Crutchfield, Adorama or B&H...it;s still in limited production
Again, I was already sold on it and you confirmed it with you awesome video For now, I will continue to enjoy my RF50 f1.2 Keep up the great videos
Thank you.
I had high hopes for it, so the fact that it exceeded them is saying something.
I love the EF135. It's a legend. But literally the second I put it up next to the new version in Capture One, the differences were obvious.
I opted for a used EF 135mm f2L and love it. I don't mind the extra weight of the adapter. And given its specific use case, I didn't feel like I needed the f1.8. Sure, the autofocus is a touch slower, but I'm not trying to save lives with this lens.
Makes sense. That's the point I made in the video. If it's one of your core focal lengths, get the new one. If it's not, save the money.
Thanks for the in-depth, practical, and thoughtful review!
Glad it was helpful! My pleasure!
I received one and brought it to shoot flowers.
Really amazing lens.
Anyone who loves 85mm should take a try on 135mm as well. They're both good lens.
Completely agree. They compliment each other very well.
Interesting review. Not on my list right now but plenty to consider if I find myself in the market for a 135. Thanks Kevin!
Yes. It is definitely a specialty lens. If you need it, it's the best. If you don't need it, $2000 is a lot to spend on a lens you don't use a lot.
@@KevinDeal have you tried the RF 85mm F1.2L USM DS Lens? People really pop out like 3D with that defocus smoothing. Really expensive though.
@@JohnScarrott yeah. It's cool but you do technically lose a stop of light. You get the depth of field, but lose a stop of light, due to the coating.
I felt like the bokeh on the regular 1.2 was more than amazing, so I opted to save a little money for the extra light gathering.
@@KevinDeal good point! 👍
Nice review! I was very curious about the 135. At least base on your review, I’m good for now with the 85 1.2.
Thanks!
The lenses pretty much look exactly the same. Just a different focal length. If you need the reach, the 135 is better. If you don't need the reach. the 85 is fine for many. I find myself in scenarios where I need both, so I have both.
both lenses are excellent, but the bokeh is not equal, the 135mm is much smoother because the background is more stretched than in the 85
Thanks a lot for the comparison, I will be really glad if you can share the raw files of the man in the boat of both lenses at minute 14.44
I went looking for the files and unfortunately, I deleted them. But I need to start doing that moving forward.
Nice comparison, and I agree the RF 85 1.2 and RF 135 lenses are basically the same image quality-wise, just different focal lengths. A bonus I've experienced with the 135 is its AF speed. It's pretty much on par with the 70-200, so it's great for indoor sports such as basketball.
Definitely noticed a faster AF speed on the new lens. It really is a pleasure to shoot.
Thanks for the kind words!
Everything that I assumed long before the appearance of this review came true. This is RF 135, sharp, yes!, but not wow, it looks like you can get a photo by shooting on RF 24-105, (in the range of 80-105mm) I don’t want to say bad, just reportage style.. I really like your photo at 17:18 RF 50 1.2, and there is magic in it, at 17:22 RF 85 1.2 there is magic. RF 135 does not have this. But surprisingly, the EF 135 2.0 has this magic.. This is just my subjective opinion nothing more. RF 85 1.2 king !!! Thank you, it was interesting. - ( "magic" - is how the lens draws)
Thanks. I personally love the old EF model but I feel like the newer model is more consistent with the newer 50 and 85. But, whatever works for you is what you should do.
The EF 135mm f2 L was released in April 1996, 27 years ago, not in 1992.
Hey there. You're right. And I corrected that in my description already.
Thanks for the video. Finally made the switch to mirrorless so now looking at lens.
Can I ask what you used to record your EVF? Looks like some sort of capture card. I've been looking at the Atomos Ninja but not looking to add all that extra bulk.
I use an Accsoon SeeMo. Here is a link to my video on it. Thanks for the kind words!
ua-cam.com/video/aqDmhE5nNgM/v-deo.htmlsi=zOkkRbM_JJL2nlwI
@@KevinDeal thanks for the info. It looks different from what I saw in your video for the RF135, but I'll check it out.
The RF 135mm 1.8 L IS USM isn't flexible, but it's my sharpest RF lens and wonderful for resolving backgrounds. The close focusing distance of just 70 cm is also very good. It was a little easier to finance with Canon cash back and a generous voucher from the dealer.
It is razor sharp.
Feeling this would be amazing on the R7 for indoor sports: effectively a prime 218mm/2.9
Yes. I own an R7. I should do a dedicated video to using it with the RF135.
@@KevinDeal great idea. I would watch that one and give it a like!
@@unknownKnownunknowns Will do.
Since I own the RF50, 85 and 135. Perhaps I will do an episode where I demonstrate how they look to R7 owners. That way Canon crop users get some love.
Thank you for the video. Finally got my RF 135/1.8L IS after waiting almost 7 months for so I’ve only had it a week and a half. Used to own the EF version which is why I willing to pre-order it site unseen. So far so good except for the huge cheap lens hood. Wish they had put more thought into that. Right now when attached to my EOS R5 it takes up the exact same space in my bag as the RF 70-200/2.8L IS so I take one or the other. When will Canon replace my adapted EF 35/1.4L mark II with an RF version? Also going to test it and compare to my Sony FE 135/1.8 GM to so how it does but I assume the stabilization will give the Canon the edge but we will see. Take care.
Glad you finally got it. Waiting on a 35mm replacement as well. Thanks for the watch.
@5:00 what is the thing on the top of the camera?
It’s a Rode GO II Wireless receiver for my lav mic
I ordered a copy on November 16th and have not yet received it. 😕
I hope you get it soon.
If you take 85 and divide it by 1.2 you get 70.83, and if you take 135 and divide it by 1.8 you get 75, therefore the bokeh is slightly better on the 135 but the separation is better on the 85
Better is subjective. Diaphragm blades, onion rings and other factors contribute to the look of bokeh too. They’re both amazing to me.
DXO claims that the EF 135 was released 1996, not 1992, not a big deal though :)
Thank you for pointing that out.
If you wanted to truly compare the 85/1.2 to the new 135/1.8 why didn't you try shooting the 85 in x1.6 crop mode on your R5? It turns the 85 into 136mm.
Because the point of the test was to shoot the 85 at 85 and the 135 at 135 so people can see how the images render at their native focal length. I don't consider using part of my sensor in a 1.6 crop vs using all of my sensor for the other lens to be a "true" comparison.
I do plan to do an episode in the future on my R7 so people can see how both lenses work on a crop sensor.
@@KevinDeal Part of your presentation was to compare the bokeh of both lenses. Shooting the 85x1.6 against the 135 would demonstrate this at the same focal length. That was all I was trying to say.
@@darrellcadieux3497 Definitely a good point. Maybe a good video to do in the future. I am planning on a video to show the RF135 on an R7. Kind of making it a poor man's 200mm f/2.
@@KevinDeal Kevin. I recently sold my EF 200/1.8. Used it for portrait and CRAZY bokeh landscapes.
@@darrellcadieux3497 It's a classic lens, for sure. Insane bokeh.
$2,099 I wish. In Germany it retails at 2,699€, which is $2,899
That is quite expensive.
In India costs equivalent to $2,392(US)
Und das 85 1.2 ist noch teuerer 😅 Verrückte Preise. Ich bleibe bei meinem EF 135mm.
I think I’ll keep my old 135 Ef cause I can sharpen on post especially with now days Lightroom AI no need for RF lenses
Whatever works for you
135mm still cost a pretty penny....
They had some pretty insane prices on their refurbished ones for Black Friday.
My unicorn ant find one any place
Best Buy was where I found mine (online)
Sounded a little bias...Just my opinion...
Which part? The part where I compare the two lenses I own?