Anyone have a Canon 135mm f/2.5?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by dylandingo, Apr 13, 2012.

  1. dylandingo

    dylandingo Mu-43 Regular

    186
    Nov 12, 2011
    La Crosse, WI
    I just found this lens on ebay for about 80 bucks plus shipping and I was wondering if any others had any luck with this lens. I have been looking for a nice telephoto about at this focal length or so to try and shoot some local animals around where I live. This lens on ebay is listed as 'Canon S.C 135mm f/2.5,' does anyone know what the S.C is for?
     
  2. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    The fact that it uses an f/2.5 aperture instead of f/2.8 denotes it as an older lens from decades back. Some of these relics can be very good, so I'll let somebody chime in with more specific experience on this model.
     
  3. chicks

    chicks Mu-43 Top Veteran

    876
    Feb 1, 2012
    The Big Valley, CA
    There's a thread on it in the adapted lens sample images with several example shots. Found mine for $4 at the Goodwill, have gotten my money's worth from it. :)

    Sent from my K1 using Tapatalk 2
     
  4. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    135mm lenses are a dime a dozen. I think that's a little high for what you're getting, unless it's great condition and from a well-known dealer. For example, Adorama, one of the photo store giants, has one for $54:
    Used Canon FD 135mm f/2.5 SC Breech Mount Telephoto Manual Focus Lens *58mm
    And from the big dog, B&H:
    Used Pentax Telephoto 135mm f/2.8 Takumar Manual Focus KM Lens
    Used Konica Minolta (Minolta) Telephoto 135mm f/2.8 Rokkor-X PF
    Used Olympus Telephoto Zuiko 135mm f/2.8 Manual Focus Lens B&H
     
  5. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US
    damn, I paid more than that for my 135/3.5 takumar I think =(
     
  6. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    SC stands for Spectral Coating, and SSC for Super Spectral Coating. Both are multi-coatings, just that SSC is their more advanced, higher end, newer coatings.

    For about $80-, it's neither fantastic nor bad, but higher than what I'd care to pay. Olde Canon users don't have much choice, but good 135/2.8's are cheap. This lens is really more for people still running film thru their FD mount bodies or collectors.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Ah, thank you! That's a confusing acronym... so then SC and SSC for Canon lenses would be like the difference between MC (Multi-Coat) and SMC (Super Multi-Coat) for Pentax lenses, I assume?
     
  8. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    Yeah, always check your local camera stores that sell used equipment (Penn Camera, I'm assuming for you) or one of the New York shops like Adorama, B&H, or Cameta. People get so caught up on Craigslist ads and ebay listings that they forget to put everything in perspective. Also, I would call KEH the "Amazon.com of used camera equipment." Always look at what you can buy there. They are very conservative in their estimates; you could buy a bargain-grade lens from them and it would like like they used a time machine to take it straight off the assembly line 30 years ago to hand deliver to you. An EX or LN grade lens could be hand-polished by Mr. Pentax or Mr. Nikon himself!

    P.S. I know that there's not an actual person named Pentax or Nikon.
     
  9. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    Yup. The Rokkor or MD name on Minolta vs Celtic is the same idea.
     
  10. pictor

    pictor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    636
    Jul 17, 2010
  11. harrysue

    harrysue Mu-43 Regular

    164
    Mar 12, 2011
    Yes I have that exact model lens. Wiki says the SC coating was the only level used on the f2.5's. Later f2.8 models have neither the SC or SSC markings, but were SSC by default.

    Yes, many 135mm f2.8's are a dime a dozen, if you're looking at Soligors, old Vivitars, and Sears, but this one is a Canon and f2.5. I'm using it when I need much faster than my 40-150 zoom, and the extra half stop over F2.8 gives more margin.

    I think mine was worth it for utility and optical quality. I paid $45 from Keh.com two years ago, and there are a couple there now at similar prices.
     
  12. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    f/2.5 is only 1/3 of a stop faster than f/2.8, not half. The lens is also noticeably larger, doesn't focus as close, and weighs 60% more. You start getting into diminishing returns at larger apertures, for 1/3 stop.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Linh

    Linh Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 14, 2009
    Maryland, US

    Actually, I did check. At the time, it seems it was just valued higher. Penn was ridiculous in pricing on anything, heh.
     
  14. harrysue

    harrysue Mu-43 Regular

    164
    Mar 12, 2011
    I've felt that way about F1.4 50mm's. Not worth the extra cost to me. However, I did want the faster 135mm. Ironically, FD 135 f2.8's tend to cost a little more, because they're SSC.

    Yes, it's heavy, but still easy to handle on a PEN (VF2 needed though) and it fits my needs.

    I think KEH prices tend to be high, but still saner than ebay, and agree with you that their grading process is very fair. I've only bought two lenses from KEH. My usual source is Goodwill.
     
  15. chicks

    chicks Mu-43 Top Veteran

    876
    Feb 1, 2012
    The Big Valley, CA
    Yes, and same here. :)

    Sent from my K1 using Tapatalk 2
     
  16. micksh

    micksh New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 18, 2012
    San Jose, CA, US
    I have this lens. I find it rather sharp for legacy lens. It is way sharper than Vivitar 135mm F2.8 that I also had, for example.
    It's usable wide open. If stopped down to F4.0 it can compete in sharpness with 45-200mm zoom wide open at 135mm.
    My lens doesn't have S.C. marking on it. I don't know if it's good or bad. I've read that Canon stopped printing S.C. on later versions of some lenses.

    It has some CA on bright background. I haven't used it much and only used it wide open.

    Recently posted bokeh test on another forum. Here is image taken with Canon 135mm F2.5 wide open. I didn't focus carefully, it was just bokeh test and this lens did well.
    6D35998C096341E0918AE737C0ADDB0E.

    I can give link to few other sample shots if anyone is interested.
     
    • Like Like x 3