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

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 08 Apr 2012 (Sunday) 21:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

70-200 f2.8 IS verson I or 135 f2?

 
h4ppydaze
Goldmember
1,329 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
     
Apr 08, 2012 21:10 |  #1

Simple question. Leaning towards the fast prime, but also the versatility of the 70-200 is much greater... Don't have the cash for the IS II or it'd be no question at this point which I'd get.

Lens gurus, give me your advice. Can I get some real world benefits of both lenses?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Cypther
Member
147 posts
Joined Feb 2011
     
Apr 09, 2012 06:09 |  #2

I had to make the same choice last year with the 70-200 MK II and the 135F/2. I picked the 135F/2 because it was lighter to bring with me. Versatility doesn't really matter if you have to camera bodies with you. At weddings I'll have my 35F/1.4 on one body and 135F/2 on another.


Lakyla.com (external link)
5D Mark II | EF 16-35 II f/2.8 L | EF 35 f/1.4 L | EF 85 f/1.2 II L | EF 135 f/2.0 L | 2x 600EX-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 09, 2012 09:23 as a reply to  @ Cypther's post |  #3

It depends on what you like/prefer. Looking at some of your flikr page and what you seem to shoot, I could see you with either lens.

Sharpness at 2.8 for my copy of the 135mm is better than the zoom, but my zoom is still really really good. Stopped down there is not much difference. So both are sharp, so to me the benefits of each are below.

135 is a f2.0, black, smaller (much lighter than the zoom). Can have sweet OOF elements at f/2.0.

70-200, is obvious it, has the focal length from 70 through 200. It also has IS. You know the range, you have the f4 non IS. (Over your f4.0 there is the benefit of f2.8 - not an advantage against the 135.

If you had the f4.0 IS my suggestion for you would be easy - go the 135. The extra stop on the 2.8 IS plus the IS could be a winner for you. Depending on how much you use your zoom, this could be a difference for you. Then again 2 stops on the 135 would be nice too.

Both are very nice lenses you will probably like either of them.

(FYI) The zoom is heavy but not bad for me, I use it more than my 135.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h4ppydaze
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,329 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
     
Apr 09, 2012 11:33 |  #4

jimewall wrote in post #14234886 (external link)
It depends on what you like/prefer. Looking at some of your flikr page and what you seem to shoot, I could see you with either lens.

Sharpness at 2.8 for my copy of the 135mm is better than the zoom, but my zoom is still really really good. Stopped down there is not much difference. So both are sharp, so to me the benefits of each are below.

135 is a f2.0, black, smaller (much lighter than the zoom). Can have sweet OOF elements at f/2.0.

70-200, is obvious it, has the focal length from 70 through 200. It also has IS. You know the range, you have the f4 non IS. (Over your f4.0 there is the benefit of f2.8 - not an advantage against the 135.

If you had the f4.0 IS my suggestion for you would be easy - go the 135. The extra stop on the 2.8 IS plus the IS could be a winner for you. Depending on how much you use your zoom, this could be a difference for you. Then again 2 stops on the 135 would be nice too.

Both are very nice lenses you will probably like either of them.

(FYI) The zoom is heavy but not bad for me, I use it more than my 135.

Thanks for the reply, Jim.

FYI I will be selling the f4 here shortly to fund this switch. So it makes the dilemma a little bit harder for me... I suppose it will just have to come down to the first good deal I can snag... whether it's 135 f2 or 70-200 f 2.8. I do like how low-key the 135 is but I really did love the versatility of the 70-200, it was just too bad I could hardly use it as I'm often shooting in very dim conditions.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daan37
Senior Member
Avatar
414 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Netherlands
     
Apr 09, 2012 12:30 |  #5

Being limited to a 28, 50 and 135 would make me feel uncomfortable.


Canon + Elinchrom | www.daanbarnhoorn.nl (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 09, 2012 13:37 as a reply to  @ Daan37's post |  #6

Knowing that you are going to sell your zoom sort of changes things a little. If you are selling to upgrade, I would be even more inclined to the zoom.

I agree with Daan37, (though uncomfortable is not the correct word for me) I would feel somewhat limited. Now if you decided to go with an 85mm f1.8 along with the 135 then (if it were me) I would feel less limited. There is a 135mm f2.5 SF. The 85mm & 135mm SF together would cost less than either the f2 or the zoom. I never had the SF, but people regard it well - but I doubt it has the "magic" of either of the Ls. But I don't know.

Remember I already said I use my zoom more than the 135, but that is me. Plus each is a different tool, for a sometimes similar job.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RustyHammer
Senior Member
Avatar
685 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: New Orleans / New York
     
Apr 09, 2012 13:44 |  #7

... different tools for different people. The type of shooting and your style of photography has a lot to do with your choice. Only you can answer that question. Good luck!


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Daniel ­ Browning
Goldmember
1,199 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, WA
     
Apr 09, 2012 13:56 |  #8

Do you want to live fast and dangerous? Get just a small handful of unique and excellent shots? Go for the prime. You'll miss a lot of good shots because you don't have 70mm and 200mm at your fingertips, but the ones you do get will have the unique effect of an f/2 DOF.

Or do you want to be safe? Get tons of good and typical shots? Get the zoom. You wont get that oomph from f/2, but you'll be able to get a ton of other shots at 70mm and 200mm.

Personally, I shoot all primes.


Daniel

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
patliean1
Senior Member
Avatar
381 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Chicagoland, IL
     
Apr 09, 2012 14:03 |  #9

I had the same situation as well about 6 months ago as I moved more into weddings. Ultimately I sold my 135L in favor of the 70-200L II for the following reasons:

1. The 70-200 is just as sharp as the 135L when stopped down. For portraits, I shoot with strobes and typically around f/8. After PP and such I could not tell the difference between the two lenses.

2. Versatility of zoom. For weddings, zoom is great because you can instantly get a variety of various framed shots in a matter of seconds.

3. Image-Stability. You lose a stop of light with f/2.8 BUT the IS is good up to 4-stops so (theoretically) you gain 3-stops as far as being able to shoot at lower shutter speeds.

As mentioned you just have to factor in your budget and narrow down what you shoot the most. There is a reason the 70-200 cost 2.5 more than the 135L


...BECAUSE SEEKING VALIDATION FROM ANOTHER PHOTOGRAPHER IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OPINIONS OF PAID CLIENTS.
www.patrolind.com (external link)
www.vimeo.com/25753524 (external link) <------Behind the scenes video of my photoshoots! (Featured on FStoppers)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 09, 2012 17:10 as a reply to  @ patliean1's post |  #10

Read the original post. 70-200 MK1, he can't afford the MK2.

I agree if he can afford it, go MK2. I even think the MK1 might be better for him the 135.

BTW tons of lenses are just as sharp stopped down, including the f4 zoom he has. He wants faster.

But looking at the OP's pictures, either might work for some of what he does. He will need to decide if IS is worth more than the f2.0. The MK1 does not have 4 theoretical stops, only 3 theoretical stops.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h4ppydaze
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,329 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
     
Apr 09, 2012 17:24 |  #11

Still a tough call for me. I found a 135 f2 for 900, UW date code. Very clean. For 500 or so less than the 70-200 IS I might spring for it... I can always sell the 135. I'm sure it's not hard to get rid of one of those.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
patliean1
Senior Member
Avatar
381 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Chicagoland, IL
     
Apr 09, 2012 17:30 |  #12

jimewall wrote in post #14237294 (external link)
Read the original post. 70-200 MK1, he can't afford the MK2.

I agree if he can afford it, go MK2. I even think the MK1 might be better for him the 135.

BTW tons of lenses are just as sharp stopped down, including the f4 zoom he has. He wants faster.

But looking at the OP's pictures, either might work for some of what he does. He will need to decide if IS is worth more than the f2.0. The MK1 does not have 4 theoretical stops, only 3 theoretical stops.

I failed.....I made no attempt to fully read the OP. I skimmed through it :(


...BECAUSE SEEKING VALIDATION FROM ANOTHER PHOTOGRAPHER IS WAY MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OPINIONS OF PAID CLIENTS.
www.patrolind.com (external link)
www.vimeo.com/25753524 (external link) <------Behind the scenes video of my photoshoots! (Featured on FStoppers)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,533 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
Apr 09, 2012 18:41 |  #13

If image quality is a primary concern, I'd go with the 135mm f2.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h4ppydaze
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,329 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
     
Apr 09, 2012 19:06 |  #14

Is 900 for 135 f2 + hood a reasonable price? UW date code




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 09, 2012 19:16 as a reply to  @ nightcat's post |  #15

Patiean1 you had no failure, you just didn't read the close enough. If money was no object for the OP, I think your suggestion would be spot on. I would go with the zoom first too (either IS 2.8 version). But some (quite a bit) of what the OP seems to shoot, the 135 looks like it might fit in well with.

H4ppydaze $900 is not a bad price (not great) so if you didn't like it you could probably get your money back (or close). I think you will like it, the question is will it be enough to meet your needs? If you think it might be enough for you, then the next step is to give it a try. Let us know what you choose, and then how you like your choice.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

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

2,694 views & 0 likes for this thread
70-200 f2.8 IS verson I or 135 f2?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is senoreddie
728 guests, 267 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.