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 15 Dec 2014 (Monday) 14:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

135L - Explain this comment

 
huntersdad
Goldmember
4,612 posts
Likes: 215
Joined Nov 2008
     
Dec 15, 2014 14:53 |  #1

I'm considering, or have been, selling my 70-200II and going with the 135, a lens I've had before and really enjoyed. I've read all the previous comments and discussions and know that for the most part the support is split down the middle for either.

However, in reading through these comments, I keep seeing the following comment come up and I can't quite wrap my head around it's intention: "With the 135, you'll have to step back to fit people in the frame."

Now assuming I'm shooting closer in the 70mm range, yes, I get it, you gotta move back. However, if I already do my outdoor portraits close to 200, I really will be a tad closer when taking into account DOF considerations.

Am I thinking about this statement correctly or is there some meaning that I am overlooking?


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
1DxII x 2 / 24-70L II / 70-200L II / 85 1.4L / 300 II / AD600Pros

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,190 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 1315
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 15, 2014 15:00 |  #2

That comment is often made by people who are more comfortable working closer to their subject. If you do full body you do have to get some distance. . In following these discussions those folks often value the convenience/comfort of working close more than the perspective and DOF control the 135L provides.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,233 posts
Gallery: 1652 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10438
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 15, 2014 15:03 |  #3

huntersdad wrote in post #17334285 (external link)
Am I thinking about this statement correctly or is there some meaning that I am overlooking?

Ignore it. Pretty much has little to no meaning without context of use.

Very best,


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,724 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6391
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 4 years ago by CyberDyneSystems.
     
Dec 15, 2014 15:41 |  #4

If it was followed by "vs. an 85mm" which is the OTHER standard for portrait photogs, or "vs. 70-134mm" for the zooms, then, and only then does it have any meaning.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
huntersdad
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
4,612 posts
Likes: 215
Joined Nov 2008
     
Dec 15, 2014 18:10 |  #5

Kinda of what I figured but wanted to verify.


Facebook (external link)

http://WWW.BLENDEDLIGH​TPHOTOGRAPHY.COM (external link)
1DxII x 2 / 24-70L II / 70-200L II / 85 1.4L / 300 II / AD600Pros

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,520 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 592
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 15, 2014 19:48 as a reply to  @ huntersdad's post |  #6

For portraits, the 70-200 is well liked because it covers what amounts to a broad range of types of shots, using the wide end for full body shots and using the long end for tighter head+shoulders views, all from a reasonable shooting distance.

If you use a single prime like the 135L for this, you will find yourself working a bit too far back for comfort (for some people) when trying to shoot a full length portrait. At least I assume that is what the comments are referring to.

On one hand I agree (the 70-200 is wicked useful) but on the other I note that the more loosely I've composed a portrait the more likely I am to want a fast aperture. So I'd shoot the head+shoulders shot at f/8 with the 70-200, but shoot a full body portrait at f/1.2 using the 85L.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
Post edited over 4 years ago by CheshireCat.
     
Dec 15, 2014 23:52 |  #7

huntersdad wrote in post #17334285 (external link)
"With the 135, you'll have to step back to fit people in the frame."

Usual nonsense said by people who don't know what perspective is.
Ignore.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lenty007
Member
221 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 21
Joined May 2006
Location: Ghent, Belgium
     
Dec 16, 2014 01:02 |  #8

Depends how you look at it.
Sure with a 135 you'll need a larger studio to get the full body frame.
Outside the studio you lose the flexibility over a (quality)zoom.
You already have the zoom so I'm not convinced if the trade is worth wile.
Greetings,

Alain




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,333 posts
Gallery: 109 photos
Likes: 1198
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 16, 2014 09:28 |  #9

I'd add a 135L to your toolbox......

Running and gunning the 70-200 is hard to beat. If you have the luxury of time or your using a 2nd body during a shoot the 135L would be a great lens to use.

I prefer being closer to my subjects so I have a preference to my 85L for closer working distance. "stepping back" is one thing but due to the longer FL with a 135L that is not image stabilized leaves more concerns with faster shutter speeds to prevent motion blurr/soft images. As long as the photog is closely monitoring faster shutter speeds ....shoot away :)

The photog has the freedom to choose their tools so I think its a good idea to expand the toolbox for more versatility.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2011
     
Dec 16, 2014 09:55 |  #10

JeffreyG wrote in post #17334873 (external link)
For portraits, the 70-200 is well liked because it covers what amounts to a broad range of types of shots, using the wide end for full body shots and using the long end for tighter head+shoulders views, all from a reasonable shooting distance.

If you use a single prime like the 135L for this, you will find yourself working a bit too far back for comfort (for some people) when trying to shoot a full length portrait. At least I assume that is what the comments are referring to.

On one hand I agree (the 70-200 is wicked useful) but on the other I note that the more loosely I've composed a portrait the more likely I am to want a fast aperture. So I'd shoot the head+shoulders shot at f/8 with the 70-200, but shoot a full body portrait at f/1.2 using the 85L.

Eh, I'm often on the long end of the 70-200 when doing full body portraits. But I like that type of look. I also do like the versatility of the 70-200 where I can frame several different shots/orientations without moving much. But it's got such good quality through the whole range that you can do that.


Gear List

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

1,931 views & 0 likes for this thread
135L - Explain this comment
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 toyotatoyope
1909 guests, 274 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.