«

What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the time to
get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the great
primes are dissapearing.

>From: "Mike"

>What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the time to
>get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the great
>primes are dissapearing.

Sigma is killing them off I guess. Bummer

"Mike" <> wrote in message
news:c0je1s$17kj1d$...
> What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the time
to
> get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the
great
> primes are dissapearing.

I wonder if this is related to DSLRs with crop factors...
....This makes 135mm sort of in an obscure focal length that fewer people
gravitate toward.

That gives about 210mm or less depending on which body.

While I like that focal length, I've got it well covered with my 70-200 2.8
IS L, as many other typical/potential buyers do who might otherwise consider
the 135 2.0L.

When I had a 135 it was the lens most likely to be left at home. I think 135
no longer cuts it as a "real" telephoto lens. The ear of the 135 was back
when a 200 was far too expensive for the average amateur.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"Mike" <> wrote in message
news:c0je1s$17kj1d$...
> What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the time
to
> get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the
great
> primes are dissapearing.
>
>

I don't know about that. The 135/2 had a reputation as one of the finest
indoor sports lenses available, and one I was thinking of getting after
upgrading my body (and no I don't mean in the gym!!) in the next few years.
The 135mm focal length, with either a 1.3 or 1.6 crop (175 or 215mm equiv),
with the ability to suck in twice as much light as the 70-200/2.8 is great
for that type of shooting.

Hmm, so there goes the 135/2, and the 200/1.8. Wonder where Canon goes from
here...


"Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
news2hXb.7586$ m...
> When I had a 135 it was the lens most likely to be left at home. I think
135
> no longer cuts it as a "real" telephoto lens. The ear of the 135 was back
> when a 200 was far too expensive for the average amateur.
>
> --
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
> home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
> The Improved Links Pages are at
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
> A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
> "Mike" <> wrote in message
> news:c0je1s$17kj1d$...
> > What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the
time
> to
> > get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the
> great
> > primes are dissapearing.
> >
> >
>
>

I've not seen anyone use a 135 for sport shooting in decades.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"PlaneGuy" <> wrote in message
news:c0mrak$19qmh0$...
> I don't know about that. The 135/2 had a reputation as one of the finest
> indoor sports lenses available, and one I was thinking of getting after
> upgrading my body (and no I don't mean in the gym!!) in the next few
years.
> The 135mm focal length, with either a 1.3 or 1.6 crop (175 or 215mm
equiv),
> with the ability to suck in twice as much light as the 70-200/2.8 is great
> for that type of shooting.
>
> Hmm, so there goes the 135/2, and the 200/1.8. Wonder where Canon goes
from
> here...
>
>
> "Tony Spadaro" <> wrote in message
> news2hXb.7586$ m...
> > When I had a 135 it was the lens most likely to be left at home. I think
> 135
> > no longer cuts it as a "real" telephoto lens. The ear of the 135 was
back
> > when a 200 was far too expensive for the average amateur.
> >
> > --
> > http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
> > home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
> > The Improved Links Pages are at
> > http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
> > A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
> > http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
> > "Mike" <> wrote in message
> > news:c0je1s$17kj1d$...
> > > What a bummer I called CPS and I was told if I need a 135mm 2.0L the
> time
> > to
> > > get it is now since the stopped production of this lens. How sad, the
> > great
> > > primes are dissapearing.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>