Lt.Deadeye wrote:
Thank you. I'm struggling with whether or not to return my 200 f/2.0 in exchange for the 135. The autofocus accuracy may keep me in the 200mm camp.
I have the 135 on order, and own the 200. The one thing that I will miss on the 135 is IS. I am not sure why they left that out. The 200 is testing as a better overall lens, but 135 is more portable and easier to shoot with in less space (also easier to interact with the subject...assuming portraiture).
j4nu wrote:
Some of those 135/1.4 shots are unfortunately ruined (as in hard to tell how nice the bokeh is) by efcs bokeh .
Focal length aside, I don’t think bokeh quality will be an issue. From the reviews I’ve seen, it might even have a slight edge over the 200 f/2, as some noted outlining with the 200 2 in certain situations. It’s also a bit softer than the 200 f/2, which makes it more flattering for portraits. Personally, I’d find it far more enjoyable to use for longer sessions compared to the old 105 f/1.4 or the 200 f/2. If they manage to address the AF issue, I could see myself picking it up down the line; the MSRP is extremely tempting in my opinion.
hiepphotog wrote:
Got to try out the new Sigma 135mm f/1.4 and 35mm f/1.2. Despite having dual linear motors, the 135mm occasionally lost focus during my shots, something the Sigma 200mm f/2 or any of the latest Sony lenses would have easily held. That said, the lighter weight of the 135mm made it far more enjoyable to mane
So it's just a matter of knowing how the lens behaves and determining if the tradeoffs are worth the benefits in other areas. Like any other lens. What would you choose in this range instead of the Sigma 135/1.4 if they can't fix the AF issues you experienced?
rscheffler wrote:
So it's just a matter of knowing how the lens behaves and determining if the tradeoffs are worth the benefits in other areas. Like any other lens. What would you choose in this range instead of the Sigma 135/1.4 if they can't fix the AF issues you experienced?
I do have the GM 135, so my criteria may differ quite a bit. To be fair, the misfocus only showed up when I was shooting in bursts at 10–15 fps; in a normal portrait setting, I don’t imagine it would be an issue.
Being the longest focal length at f/1.4 gives it a clear unique selling point, and I personally find the bokeh, pricing and handholdability excellent. That said, for a modern lens equipped with two sets of linear motors, the performance is somewhat disappointing (especially considering the 200 f/2 only has one). I’m not sure whether that’s an intentional compromise or not.
hiepphotog wrote:
I do have the GM 135, so my criteria may differ quite a bit. To be fair, the misfocus only showed up when I was shooting in bursts at 10–15 fps; in a normal portrait setting, I don’t imagine it would be an issue.
Being the longest focal length at f/1.4 gives it a clear unique selling point, and I personally find the bokeh, pricing and handholdability excellent. That said, for a modern lens equipped with two sets of linear motors, the performance is somewhat disappointing (especially considering the 200 f/2 only has one). I’m not sure whether that’s an intentional compromise or not....Show more →
Yeah, I'm just wondering if the difference vs 135GM is visible enough to warrant extra space on the shelf ...
j4nu wrote:
Yeah, I'm just wondering if the difference vs 135GM is visible enough to warrant extra space on the shelf ...
The Sigma 135/1.4 seems to have that 'painterly' quality in the bokeh at f/1.4, that the Sony doesn't have at f/1.8. If that's important to you or something you enjoy it can add something, but no way it's worth keeping both lenses. My Canon 135/2 has the same 'painterly' quality, and for a lot less
It's a crowded space out there for 135's, but the new Sigma does seem to add something.
Alan Parker wrote:
The Sigma 135/1.4 seems to have that 'painterly' quality in the bokeh at f/1.4, that the Sony doesn't have at f/1.8. If that's important to you or something you enjoy it can add something, but no way it's worth keeping both lenses. My Canon 135/2 has the same 'painterly' quality, and for a lot less
It's a crowded space out there for 135's, but the new Sigma does seem to add something.
Yeah, you're right. I'm afraid I'd have to shoot them side by side to make a decision (and they don't seem to be mutually exclusive given the reports of less-than-stellar AF on the Sigma).
The thing about fast 135s is that I usually get so much blur, that I'm not really bothered by its imperfections (e.g. 135GM). Unlike fast 35s ...
The more I watch reviews the more shocked I am with how many Youtubers with BIG channels, keep making the same basic mistakes pointing out the benefits of the 13 blades when they are actually shooting wide open!!! Is like seriously...its wide open...the blades are doing NOTHING at that point.
Of course, stopped down is good to see so you dont end up with stuff like the Canon EF 200mm 1.8 stopped down to f/2.0
rscheffler wrote:
So it's just a matter of knowing how the lens behaves and determining if the tradeoffs are worth the benefits in other areas. Like any other lens.
Lens can be seen hunting in this video as well; especially on the Leica SL3.
Sep 11, 2025 at 08:52 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
tsdevine wrote:
Boy, Sony really needs to add a setting to automatically bump out of EFCS when a certain shutter speed is reached.
Yes, that would be good, but this is something easy to avoid to as a photographer. If I am shooting handheld, which is fine with the shutter speeds that cause problems then I shoot in full manual shutter or electronic shutter on a stacked sensor camera. There is really no reason to be using EFCS when you are handholding the camera and especially anywhere near the shutter speeds that cause problems.
EFCS is for shooting on a tripod at slower shutter speeds. We all mess up settings from time to time, but this isn't a hard one to avoid at all.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, that would be good, but this is something easy to avoid to as a photographer. If I am shooting handheld, which is fine with the shutter speeds that cause problems then I shoot in full manual shutter or electronic shutter on a stacked sensor camera. There is really no reason to be using EFCS when you are handholding the camera and especially anywhere near the shutter speeds that cause problems.
EFCS is for shooting on a tripod at slower shutter speeds. We all mess up settings from time to time, but this isn't a hard one to avoid at all....Show more →
Well, maybe it's easy to avoid but it happens often even on this forum, so it's either not easy enough or people are still afraid of shutter shock ...
tsdevine wrote:
Boy, Sony really needs to add a setting to automatically bump out of EFCS when a certain shutter speed is reached.
I have been hoping for this feature for the last two or three releases of their cameras. It seems absolutely crazy that they have not implemented this seemingly simple software programming... particularly, since they are releasing so many fast bokeh lenses.
.
...
...