Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera
Thread started 25 Aug 2017 (Friday) 07:54
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

would 135L f2 on Canon 7D still have beautiful effect as full frame??

 
anitaw2
Member
anitaw2's Avatar
210 posts
Joined Jun 2015
Canada
Aug 25, 2017 07:54 |  #1

I am just yearning for the 135 L after seeing all the beautiful pics that photographers produce with this lens. Is it worth it on a 7D or should I look at anther lens to have the same effect as full frame?


Anita W.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
MalVeauX's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
Florida
Aug 25, 2017 08:52 |  #2

anitaw2 wrote in post #18436549 (external link)
I am just yearning for the 135 L after seeing all the beautiful pics that photographers produce with this lens. Is it worth it on a 7D or should I look at anther lens to have the same effect as full frame?

It will not look the same due to field of view changes and depth of field changes for the same composition and frame up.

If you want the look of the 135L on a full frame sensor via an APS-C, an 85mm F1.4 will basically do that on APS-C.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Wilt's Avatar
39,150 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Aug 2005
Belmont, CA
Post has been last edited 2 months ago by Wilt. 5 edits done in total.
Aug 25, 2017 08:56 |  #3

Generally, if you see 'desireable' the following, they are seen as well on APS-C as FF

  • quality of blur



What you have in APS-C more of (than seen in FF)
  • Depth of Field zone is deeper in APS-C by 1.6x
  • freedom from pincushion/barrel distortion... even less of that distortion is visible in the smaller frame size of APS-C


What you have in APS-C less of (than seen in FF)
  • quantity of blur in the bacground...less blurry in APS-C than in FF

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support http://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

LOG IN TO REPLY
aladyforty
Goldmember
aladyforty's Avatar
Joined Dec 2005
Albany: Western Australia
Aug 25, 2017 09:05 |  #4

I dont think its quite as nice on APSC as full frame but I like it on my 7DII

IMAGE: https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7018/26980925040_5ba30858ee_b.jpg

5DIII 7DII Fuji X100 Fuji X10 17-40L 135L 70-200F4ISL Tamron 150-600
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com​/photos/25426422@N00/ (external link)
Birding page (archives cant add to them, lost password) https://www.flickr.com​/photos/59111660@N08/ (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
anitaw2
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
anitaw2's Avatar
210 posts
Joined Jun 2015
Canada
Aug 25, 2017 09:08 |  #5

aladyforty wrote in post #18436592 (external link)
I dont think its quite as nice on APSC as full frame but I like it on my 7DII

QUOTED IMAGE

Nothing wrong with that picture! I love it


Anita W.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
13,701 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Aug 25, 2017 10:48 |  #6

in short, nope, score a cheap 5Dc if you really want to see that effect.


Sony A7rii x2 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 35/2.8 - CV 35/1.7 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,225 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Post has been last edited 2 months ago by TeamSpeed. 2 edits done in total.
Aug 25, 2017 20:19 |  #7

MalVeauX wrote in post #18436585 (external link)
It will not look the same due to field of view changes and depth of field changes for the same composition and frame up.

If you want the look of the 135L on a full frame sensor via an APS-C, an 85mm F1.4 will basically do that on APS-C.

Very best,

As stated, 85mm at f1.4 on a crop body yields very similar DOF and background blur/OOF drop off as a 135 f2 on a FF. Sigma makes a great 85 1.4.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Joined Dec 2010
Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
Aug 26, 2017 11:43 |  #8

Actually you would need to go to the 85mm f/1.2 to get an almost perfect match to the 135 f/2. The FoV and DoF conversions come out to 136mm at f/1.92. Still I think the slower AF performance, and the fact that you really are unlikely to see a third of a stop difference in the DoF in real world applications would make the Sigma f1.4, or even the Canon f/1.8 version better choices for a lot of applications where AF speed matters. The 135 still seems to be a very good option on APS-C for those times when you would be using a 200mm lens on 35mm. Personally I could find uses for both 85mm and 135mm primes on APS-C bodies.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
13,701 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Aug 26, 2017 12:04 |  #9

BigAl007 wrote in post #18437503 (external link)
Actually you would need to go to the 85mm f/1.2 to get an almost perfect match to the 135 f/2. The FoV and DoF conversions come out to 136mm at f/1.92. Still I think the slower AF performance, and the fact that you really are unlikely to see a third of a stop difference in the DoF in real world applications would make the Sigma f1.4, or even the Canon f/1.8 version better choices for a lot of applications where AF speed matters. The 135 still seems to be a very good option on APS-C for those times when you would be using a 200mm lens on 35mm. Personally I could find uses for both 85mm and 135mm primes on APS-C bodies.

Alan

The 85 1.2 isnt even as sharp as the 135, and magnified via pixel density, it only gets worse. On top of that, CA is bad and gets worse.


Sony A7rii x2 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 35/2.8 - CV 35/1.7 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

LOG IN TO REPLY
BTNorris
Member
BTNorris's Avatar
212 posts
Joined May 2005
Los Angeles, CA
Aug 27, 2017 21:20 |  #10

I'd be willing to bet at least some of the photos you've liked were taken with a crop body. There's more to this (or any) lens that it's comparison of crop/full frame. It's a great lens, and I like it on my 7d. A couple years ago I picked up a nice used copy - thinking I'd just resell it if it didn't work out and not be out much. I still have it. It also turned into my kid recital lens, as it is a convenient length for the auditoriums I'm in (alongside the 50).


7D, 17-55, 50 1.4, 70-200, 10-22, Kenko Tubes, OPTIX xr, Einstein

LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
kf095's Avatar
Joined Dec 2009
Canada, Ontario, Milton
Post has been edited 2 months ago by kf095.
Aug 28, 2017 14:55 |  #11

135 isn't different from any other lens originated from 135 film photography. 28, 35, 50 and 135 are natural on FF (based from my own experience with crop and FF.)
135 will also create some communications problems if on crop. :-)

Basically, with native 135 format lens on FF, you are getting closer with narrower DoF and different perspective behind the object in focus.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,710 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Aug 28, 2017 15:30 |  #12

Trying to decide if you NEED FF to enjoy a 135mm f/2L?

Regardless, you have to get a 135 first,. so I say just do it.

I used the 135mm for a decade without owning a full frame DSLR. I still loved and raved about that lens. compared to my f/2.8 zooms it was evident in every photo that the 135 was sharper, and had a better look.

So get the 135mm and shoot it on your 7D. Worst case scenario you find yourself backing up too much and wanting MORE, then you can go ahead and delve into a used 5D.

The key point to remember, whether you use it on your 7D or a new shiny FF body, you have to get the 135mm in either case :)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Goldmember
2,856 posts
Joined Apr 2007
Atlanta, GA
Sep 01, 2017 22:59 |  #13

I'm old school, and first learned about photography with manual SLR 35mm film. Back then, your kit lens was a 50mm, and portrait was considered 100-135mm. So when I got my first DSLR, I got the 5D and a 50mm and 135mm. Even though the 135 L is an old lens, it's still fast and has creamy bokeh. I got a 7D2 for times I want extended focal length (mainly wildlife). I think the main issue, which hasn't been brought up, is what is your intended use? For indoor portraits, a 135mm FL might be too long (you might be backing up too much). In that case, the 85mm 1.8 might be a better option (or the 100mm 2L macro is very sharp). If you're familiar with what FLs are best for your applications, then the 135 L is still an awesomet lens (always amazed by how fast the AF is on it...and the big front elements make it look sexy to boot).


Canon 5D mk III , 7D mk II
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,018 views & 12 likes for this thread
would 135L f2 on Canon 7D still have beautiful effect as full frame??
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00521 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is Redski
914 guests, 410 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016