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 07 Apr 2013 (Sunday) 18:45
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

135/2 seems okay but need improve on ca

 
dalplex
Member
73 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Apr 07, 2013 18:45 |  #1

I tried this 135/2 on 7D with some heavy ca.

I am not sure whether this is normal as out of focus/DOF?

IMAGE: http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/931/012kms.jpg


IMAGE: http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/3341/0120e.jpg

30D, 7D, 5D III. D200, D700, D800E.
AF-S 14-24 /2.8G, 200/2G VR2. 16-35 /2.8 L II, 50 /1.4, MP-E 65/2.8, 85 /1.2 L II, 100 /2.8 L, 135 /2 L, 180 /3.5 L, 70-200 /2.8 L IS II, 1.4x III. 430 EX II, YN 568EX, 161MK2B, WH 200 II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,087 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Apr 07, 2013 19:16 |  #2

How dare you doubt the IQ of the infamous 135...

Burn you must!


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AbPho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,165 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Planet Earth
     
Apr 07, 2013 19:18 |  #3

Talley wrote in post #15801436 (external link)
How dare you doubt the IQ of the infamous 135...

Burn you must!

You don't even have one. :lol:

dalplex wrote in post #15801353 (external link)
I tried this 135/2 on 7D with some heavy ca.

I am not sure whether this is normal as out of focus/DOF?

That looks about right for f/2. CA not that bad. Honestly, don't worry about it. If you let it get to you, you might as well put the camera away now.

Looks like the dude in the pick-up truck is about to litter.


I'm in Canada. Isn't that weird!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dalplex
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
73 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Apr 07, 2013 19:58 |  #4

I feel CA is very bad around the spoke of wheel and bumper. Actually 100/2.8L macro is not that good neither, but almost corrected by DLO from DPP.

However, this 135/2 and another 180/3.5 is not in the list, which really annoying me.


30D, 7D, 5D III. D200, D700, D800E.
AF-S 14-24 /2.8G, 200/2G VR2. 16-35 /2.8 L II, 50 /1.4, MP-E 65/2.8, 85 /1.2 L II, 100 /2.8 L, 135 /2 L, 180 /3.5 L, 70-200 /2.8 L IS II, 1.4x III. 430 EX II, YN 568EX, 161MK2B, WH 200 II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AbPho
Goldmember
Avatar
3,165 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 106
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Planet Earth
     
Apr 07, 2013 22:34 |  #5

AbPho wrote in post #15801440 (external link)
...don't worry about it. If you let it get to you, you might as well put the camera away now...

Like I said....


Come back when you've seen real CA.


I'm in Canada. Isn't that weird!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,806 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 865
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Apr 07, 2013 23:04 as a reply to  @ AbPho's post |  #6

Fast prime = longCA wide open. You only see it on OOF chrome on black? Terrible, I'd throw the lens away.

BTW don't by a 50L, 85L, 85 1.8 or sig versions. Not sure about the wider fast primes, but I bet you won't like the 24 1.4 or 35 1.4's. I would bet your 50 1.4 is worse at 1.4.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bespoke
Senior Member
Avatar
710 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Toronto
     
Apr 07, 2013 23:08 |  #7

i dont see anything at all. try an 85 1.2 at 1.2 and then we're talkin


Toronto Fashion Photographer (external link)
5D3 & 5D2s | 24 TS-E II, 24-70 II, 85L II, 100L, 70-200L II, 35 & 85 Zeiss ZE, Samyang 14, Sigma 50
Hasselblads + Leaf Aptus MFDB, Fuji X100, Epson 3880/9890

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bps
Cream of the Crop
7,607 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Mar 2007
Location: California
     
Apr 07, 2013 23:24 |  #8

Doesn't seem that bad to me.

Bryan


My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
iLvision
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,766 posts
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Western pot hole city, Massachusetts
     
Apr 07, 2013 23:28 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

ejenner wrote in post #15802165 (external link)
Fast prime = longCA wide open. You only see it on OOF chrome on black? Terrible, I'd throw the lens away.

BTW don't by a 50L, 85L, 85 1.8 or sig versions. Not sure about the wider fast primes, but I bet you won't like the 24 1.4 or 35 1.4's. I would bet your 50 1.4 is worse at 1.4.

bw!

Meh. Too many people complain. There will be CA on wide open primes!!


Ilya | Gear | flickr (external link) D800| 14-300mm f/1.4GL ED VR III USWM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_d
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,349 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 590
Joined Aug 2009
     
Apr 07, 2013 23:49 |  #10

Use it to photograph people, not chrome wheels across the street. Problem solved.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris1le
Senior Member
Avatar
891 posts
Joined Aug 2003
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
     
Apr 08, 2013 00:12 as a reply to  @ mike_d's post |  #11

Really?


My Pictures (external link) : My Gear (external link)
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own - Adam Savage

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdang
Senior Member
263 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2011
     
Apr 08, 2013 23:07 |  #12

If you want minimum to no CA, that 200 F2 is calling your name !




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gtrag94
Senior Member
273 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
     
Apr 08, 2013 23:20 |  #13

interesting that the top picture looks like a kit lens, BUT then when you see what a tiny part of the actual picture it is, then it looks pretty darn good! 135L is an amazing lens (I only use it for people though, and I agree, my/the 85LII is much worse).


Fort Wayne, IN Portrait & Wedding Photographer
http://www.craigagapie​photography.com (external link)
http://www.facebook.co​m/CraigAgapiePhotograp​hy (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Apr 08, 2013 23:21 |  #14

Looks normal to me. I have seen this level of CA with the 135L's I have owned. Never really ruined any image though and easily corrected in LR.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,806 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 865
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Apr 08, 2013 23:22 |  #15

cdang wrote in post #15806272 (external link)
If you want minimum to no CA, that 200 F2 is calling your name !

I was wondering about that one when I was listing the primes I know are worse. In that case I'm going to show my wife the CA on my 135 and see if she agrees I need the 200 f2 to get acceptable shots.

Not quite a 'stick it in your pocket' lens like the 135 though.

iLvision wrote in post #15802227 (external link)
Meh. Too many people complain. There will be CA on wide open primes!!

Well, I have to admit that with my 85 there are situations that I know it will not produce good results because of the CA, but with PP now you can still get away with a lot. No lens is perfect, there are always trade-offs (even the 200 f2 which is heavy and expensive).


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

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

2,048 views & 0 likes for this thread
135/2 seems okay but need improve on ca
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 ChrisZP
1009 guests, 313 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.