Up to this point I've held the 85 1.2 as the ultimate portrait lens (at least for Canon); but I've been hearing great things about this classic choice.
Besides the 85 I've had great results from the Canon 100 L 2.8 macro and even better with the 50 1.8.
Up to this point I've held the 85 1.2 as the ultimate portrait lens (at least for Canon); but I've been hearing great things about this classic choice.
Besides the 85 I've had great results from the Canon 100 L 2.8 macro and even better with the 50 1.8.
Your opinion on the 135 is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Daniel
What body? How much room do you have to shoot in if you have a crop? What are you looking to get from this that you can't get from one of the other lenses? On a full frame, it's absolutely gorgeous. On a crop sensor........it's still gorgeous, but it's tight. If you have the room, you can't go wrong. But, if you already have the 100mm macro, why bother with the 135? I'm not real sure you are going to get anything from the 135 that the 100mm can't deliver. Now, 135mm f2.8 Soft Focus, maybe....
For my taste on 5D M2 I much prefer the 100mm, but I like really sharp stuff. However it will also give you the option to shoot macro or as close as you like vs 3 feet. I find the BOKEH on 100mm L glass just as good for my taste with the option of IS. Some people will tell you that it's as sharp as they get, but it's very noticeably softer at 2.0. In my opinion it has no signature that I can recognize. However 85 F/1.2 is an unmistakable lens, yes at twice the cost of 135.
I have both.. I prefer the 85 1.2 but the 135 is very nice and the price is right. I prefer the bokeh of the 85 but prefer the length of the 135 for headshots. The 85 has a very unique quality when shot wide open. Both have razor thin DOF. 135 is probably sharper. 85 better for low light. 135 faster AF. The 85 is magical.
What body? How much room do you have to shoot in if you have a crop? What are you looking to get from this that you can't get from one of the other lenses? On a full frame, it's absolutely gorgeous. On a crop sensor........it's still gorgeous, but it's tight. If you have the room, you can't go wrong. But, if you already have the 100mm macro, why bother with the 135? I'm not real sure you are going to get anything from the 135 that the 100mm can't deliver. Now, 135mm f2.8 Soft Focus, maybe....
Using a T4i so it's a 1.6 crop factor (making it a 216)
Don't have the 100, just experienced on a rental basis.
BlueMoonPics wrote: I took this with the 135L f2.0...
I believe I was about as close as I could get with the focus.
I love the lens but I do have to step back a bit.
Moon Pix Photography wrote: I have both.. I prefer the 85 1.2 but the 135 is very nice and the price is right. I prefer the bokeh of the 85 but prefer the length of the 135 for headshots. The 85 has a very unique quality when shot wide open. Both have razor thin DOF. 135 is probably sharper. 85 better for low light. 135 faster AF. The 85 is magical.
Exactly the depth of info. I was hoping for.
Thanks for taking the time to answer. Really does mean a lot.
| 
| 
| edu