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 21 Sep 2015 (Monday) 10:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

135L: I am struggling

 
Myboostedgst
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,896 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 628
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
     
Oct 10, 2015 14:23 |  #151

BigAl007 wrote in post #17740235 (external link)
I have recently discovered a great new shooting technique to deal with slow shutter speeds. Now I'm a wheelchair user I just slump down in the chair a bit, so that I can rest my elbows on the arm rests :). I can get down to about 1/5s with a normalish focal length this way. Who would have thought a wheelchair could have advantages. Big disadvantage is trying to get the driver (usually my daughter) to position me as accurately as I would like while on rough (for the chair) ground, where I cannot adjust my own position. Trying to tell a non photographer that being positioned exactly to the inch is really important seems to fall on deaf ears.

Otherwise I have always prefered the arms in tight against the chest with left hand under the lens, as my shooting position. I use the very similar position when shooting standing rifle competitions.

Alan

I admire your dedication. I love shooting, but I don't know that I could honestly say I would still be shooting in your position.


Andrew | Facebook (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
D750, 24-70, 50 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 70-200 VRII, 300 F2.8 AF
Founder of www.midwestautomotive.​net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 10, 2015 17:10 |  #152

Jamesino wrote in post #17740137 (external link)
Sorry to be off topic, but do you think Canon is going to release an updated Mk2 version to this lens anytime soon?

It's right around the corner, according to the rumor. That rumor is only 10 years old. Don't hold your breath.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,973 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1600
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Oct 10, 2015 17:16 |  #153

Myboostedgst wrote in post #17740243 (external link)
I admire your dedication. I love shooting, but I don't know that I could honestly say I would still be shooting in your position.

Well as hobbies go photography is something that you can keep doing provided you can see to compose the shot. I'm actually quite lucky as I can still stand and walk a little bit at the moment, although my symptoms from my back injury are getting progressively worse as time goes by. I still even manage to shoot both rifle and shotguns from the chair, again both sports that are good for allowing integrated participation. Actually smallbore target rifle shooting in the UK has been fully integrated for disabled shooters since the late 1940's as far as domestic competition is concerned. As well as my physical issues I also have ME, and that is much worse as it has slowed my mind as well, and that is the really hard thing to deal with. But doing what one can is really important if you want to not go completely La La.

Alan


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,059 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 307
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
     
Oct 10, 2015 18:09 as a reply to  @ gonzogolf's post |  #154

Canon didnt put IS in the 35L 1.4 II, but it's in the newer 24, 28 and 35 non-Ls. My bet would be no IS in any new 135L, or 85L, but probably in the 85 and 100 non-Ls.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 85L, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NBEast
Goldmember
Avatar
1,699 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 67
Joined Aug 2005
Location: So Cal
     
Oct 11, 2015 23:33 |  #155

I think they owe us IS on any new lens since they don't provide in-body IS.

That said, I'm not sure what technical sacrifice IS might bring to the table so maybe it's best to just trust that they'd do best. I'm not sure what can be improved on the 135L. For just $1K you get a lens that's arguably one of the top 5 best at what it does.

It seems like, even if it's just for hype's sake, IS would be a salable improvement so why wouldn't they?


Gear List / Photos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 11, 2015 23:48 |  #156

NBEast wrote in post #17741925 (external link)
I think they owe us IS on any new lens since they don't provide in-body IS.

That said, I'm not sure what technical sacrifice IS might bring to the table so maybe it's best to just trust that they'd do best. I'm not sure what can be improved on the 135L. For just $1K you get a lens that's arguably one of the top 5 best at what it does.

It seems like, even if it's just for hype's sake, IS would be a salable improvement so why wouldn't they?

Owe? They don't owe us anything. Buy it or don't but they have zero obligation to us. The only obligation they have is to their stockholders to make as much as they responsibly can.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,059 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 307
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
     
Oct 12, 2015 03:38 as a reply to  @ NBEast's post |  #157

L primes haven't been getting IS. decently fast, and now f4, L zooms do. I carry my 200 2.8 when I want a lighter/smaller alt to my 70-200Ii, also 2.8. if I want IS, there's a big white heavy price to pay. I also have many tripods.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 85L, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magik306
Member
111 posts
Joined Mar 2006
Location: N.Bellmore, NY
     
Oct 27, 2015 18:05 as a reply to  @ post 17715848 |  #158

Thats a really beautiful image! I'm seriously considering this Lens. I shoot mostly all of my portraits with the 70-200 2.8L IS II and I'm very pleased with the results. But this lens really has a strong hold on me!


Canon 5D MKII/5D Classic
EF 70-200 2.8L IS USM, EF 24-70 2.8L IS USM, EF 100 2.8L IS Macro
EF 85 1.8 USM, 16-35 2.8L II USM, EF 50 1.4 USM.
www.billycestaro.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 829
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
     
Oct 30, 2015 20:51 |  #159

I had the 135 for a short period of time but had similar struggles. My misses were too frequent, and I've got a pretty steady hand. F2 is a mighty thin DOF at 135, and it demands precision - especially with the "back and forward" sway factor of your body. I splurged on the 70-200 2.8 IS II and haven't looked back. It's remarkably easy to be accurate with this lens, even at lower shutter speeds. The IS is powerful and accurate. Part of me felt like a failure for not being able to make the 135 work for me; however, the 70-200 just delivers on every level. So I haven't felt the need to revisit the 135.

The OPP mentioned the 100 F2 in an earlier post. I owned this lens for a while and loved it. I'd like it back. The relatively wider angle is more forgiving at F2 and gives you lots of blur. It's like a more intense 85 1.8.


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Myboostedgst
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,896 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 628
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
     
Oct 30, 2015 23:56 |  #160

ChrisNL wrote in post #17766395 (external link)
Part of me felt like a failure for not being able to make the 135 work for me; however, the 70-200 just delivers on every level. So I haven't felt the need to revisit the 135.

I hate to admit it, but I am starting to believe this statement is the same for me; and I was too afraid to admit it. I am going over shots between he 70-200 and the 135L that I took over this past weekend. I am having difficulty identifying which was at 200/2.8 and 135/2. I honestly do believe that the 135 "pops" a slight bit more, but after post processing I get an almost identical result. The zoom is much more practical, but I am honestly starting to feel like a failure because I can't tell the difference between the two lenses.


Andrew | Facebook (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
D750, 24-70, 50 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 70-200 VRII, 300 F2.8 AF
Founder of www.midwestautomotive.​net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 829
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by ChrisNL.
     
Oct 31, 2015 05:45 |  #161

Myboostedgst wrote in post #17766513 (external link)
I hate to admit it, but I am starting to believe this statement is the same for me; and I was too afraid to admit it. I am going over shots between he 70-200 and the 135L that I took over this past weekend. I am having difficulty identifying which was at 200/2.8 and 135/2. I honestly do believe that the 135 "pops" a slight bit more, but after post processing I get an almost identical result. The zoom is much more practical, but I am honestly starting to feel like a failure because I can't tell the difference between the two lenses.


Well even though there is a difference of two stops, at longer focal lengths the DOF is still so thin that you're getting pleasing portrait blur anyway. And of course at 200 2.8 the IS is saving you from motion blur. On top of that, just the quality of the 70-200 glass alone makes the portrait pop in a pleasing way that makes you less conscious of the slight increase in DOF. I do believe that those two stops between 2 and 2.8 give you that little bit of leeway to catch that focus on the subject. Only my thoughts. I've seen some impressive 135L work here shot wide open, but I do notice many times that the shot looks even better when the exif shows a little stop down, like 2.8. If I were trying to avoid a big purchase like the 70-200 2.8 IS, I'd get the 135, glue it to 2.8, and horse the shutter speed to the limits of regular shutter sync (or incorporate HSS, which has been discussed here). Or I'd just get the 100F2 and sacrifice the focal length for accuracy of focus and less motion blur.


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 829
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by ChrisNL. (3 edits in all)
     
Oct 31, 2015 07:29 |  #162

I'm not sure how much this contributes to the topic here, but for what it's worth here is a comparison between the 100F2 (wide open) and the 135F2 (at 2.8). I alternated between both lenses for this shoot because I wasn't confident in my abilities with the 135 and wanted to save my ass. This was over a year ago, and I'm not thrilled with the shots per se. But it at least gives a comparison between lenses with the same subject at the same time. Don't ask why I'm at ISO 800 yet ridiculously high shutter speeds. I must have been in AV to help balance out midday light and forgot to drop the ISO.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,086 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1205
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
     
Oct 31, 2015 08:09 |  #163

ChrisNL wrote in post #17766673 (external link)
I'm not sure how much this contributes to the topic here, but for what it's worth here is a comparison between the 100F2 (wide open) and the 135F2 (at 2.8). I alternated between both lenses for this shoot because I wasn't confident in my abilities with the 135 and wanted to save my ass. This was over a year ago, and I'm not thrilled with the shots per se. But it at least gives a comparison between lenses with the same subject at the same time. Don't ask why I'm at ISO 800 yet ridiculously high shutter speeds. I must have been in AV to help balance out midday light and forgot to drop the ISO.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by ChrisNL in
./showthread.php?p=177​66673&i=i244062122
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by ChrisNL in
./showthread.php?p=177​66673&i=i153242835
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


These are interesting to compare as either the 100F2 is sharper, you slightly missed focus on the 135, there is a processing difference or an uploading difference because on my screen his face is definitely sharper on the 100. Am I seeing things?


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisNL
Senior Member
Avatar
574 posts
Gallery: 74 photos
Likes: 829
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Post edited over 3 years ago by ChrisNL. (3 edits in all)
     
Oct 31, 2015 08:17 as a reply to  @ wallstreetoneil's post |  #164

No you're right. There's no difference in processing. The 100 always came out sharper for me. It was a darn good lens. I sold both of these to buy the 70-200 but should have kept the 100. The 135 had an inherent softness of focus. Motion blur was unlikely, due to the 1/4000 shutter speed. It had to be missed focus, which reconfirms my belief that the extra focal length, even at 2.8, makes the 135 a challenging lens to use. Once again I'm not blaming the lens, just highlighting the increased challenges at 135 without IS.


Two Canon 6D's w/ Canon 70-200L 2.8 II (w/ 2x extender), Sigma 35 Art, Sigma 24-35 ART, Sigma 50 ART, Canon 580/430 flashes.
www.chrisledrewphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.facebook.com/chris​ledrewphotography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,086 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1205
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
     
Oct 31, 2015 08:24 |  #165

ChrisNL wrote in post #17766698 (external link)
No you're right. There's no difference in processing. The 100 always came out sharper for me. It was a darn good lens. I sold both of these to buy the 70-200 but should have kept the 100. The 135 had an inherent softness of focus...or maybe it was me. :)

At that SS, the 135 should be tack sharp - you must have had a poor copy or that 100 is off the charts and you should try and re-buy it.


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

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

21,659 views & 16 likes for this thread
135L: I am struggling
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 KenJerrard
996 guests, 240 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.