Debating 135L?

Got some spare money from selling my 24-70 and a couple more things, wondering should I pickup the 135L. Still not sure at the moment, coz I got the 70-200 f/4 IS and a 100mm f/2.8 macro.

It is a great lens. But if your not sure, then you don't need it! IMHO

What makes you think you need it? That might help!

Just doing some indoor with my newborn daughter at home. For example: With the 70-200 f/4 IS, ISO is at 3200 f/4, I still remain a 1/30 shutter for that particular set of photos. Maybe the 135L will handle this better, will the f/2 offset the IS?

If I remember correctly, IS gives about 4 stops of stabilization whereas the f/2 is only 2 stops difference from f/4. If your making your decision based on shutter speed hand held, I would say no.

That being said, the 135 is an amazing lens. Bokeh is great and it has a fast auto focus. I think if you ever do outdoor portraits, I don't think you would be disappointed

luongb wrote in post #14848430
If I remember correctly, IS gives about 4 stops of stabilization whereas the f/2 is only 2 stops difference from f/4. If your making your decision based on shutter speed hand held, I would say no.

That being said, the 135 is an amazing lens. Bokeh is great and it has a fast auto focus. I think if you ever do outdoor portraits, I don't think you would be disappointed

I usually do lots of outdoor portraits but since I have to give my 110% to my newborn, I stop taking jobs at least for the upcoming few months, everything will be indoor for now.

Why is your 50L not working for you?

bob_r wrote in post #14848511
Why is your 50L not working for you?

My 50L is working perfect for me. But I love tighter head shots for baby, the 50L maybe a little too wide for the job, not to mention I don't wanna stick the lens up close to the baby face. Once you wake a baby up from her sleep, My God is a disaster~!

I got the 100l shortly after my daughter was born. I recently sold it in favor of the 135l due to the slower AF of the 100 not being able to beep up with her now that she's 14 months and running around... I think they are similar in terms of low light use so for now the 100 should do you well but later on the 135 will be more usefull

I don't think you'll be disappointed by getting a 135L. You might consider the 85 f/1.8 too.

135 too long for most indoors, especially in a house.

thestone11 wrote in post #14848412
Just doing some indoor with my newborn daughter at home. For example: With the 70-200 f/4 IS, ISO is at 3200 f/4, I still remain a 1/30 shutter for that particular set of photos. Maybe the 135L will handle this better, will the f/2 offset the IS?

First off I wouldn't recommend 1/30" for any living subject, it's too slow and you risk subject motion. With the 135/2 on your 5d2, you are going to want 1/160" minimum to ensure no camera shake, unless you have real steady hands and then 1/120" down to maybe 1/100".

Going from f4 to f2 would increase your shutter from 1/30" to 1/120" which is on the edge of giving camera shake. It would definitely help with subject motion though. The 135/2 will not help with lowering your relatively high 3200 ISO in that situation. A flash really might be the best tool in that lighting. Bounce it off a white ceiling or diffuse it by using a shoot through umbrella and the little one will not even realize you are using flash.

Based on what you've said, I don't think you need it at this time. For static subjects the F/2 does not match the f/4 IS, for movement it will help some. I would probably prefer the 135L to the 70-200 for portraits though, but theoretically that could wait until you are doing portraits. Plus your 50L, 100L, 24-70L, and even the 70-200 are still great for portraits.

If it were me I would probably just use what you have. Using your 50L and 24-70L when appropriate (as to not wake the baby) as well as the suggest of off camera diffused flash.

On the other hand if you really just want the 135L, then get it. You will find uses for it. And yes, you will love the 135L if you get it.

You already have f4 IS and macro. Use them. If f4 needs higher ISOs use some bounce flash.

85mm f1.8

form wrote in post #14848597
135 too long for most indoors, especially in a house.

For a baby? I thought folks had bigger houses in vegas? I am in small townhouse in silicon valley and no problem using 70-200mm at 200mm end.

Cute kid Bobby!