subpixel wrote in post #15312514
Sorry for not answering before, had no internet since I made the post.
Thanks for all the reply's guy's.
I still haven't made my mind yet, I've looking at the Lens Sample Photo Archive, and I find the 135 thread much more impressive than the 70-200, don't you guys agree?
BTW, meanwhile the question of it being f2.8 or f4 started to pop out, but that was never in question for me, first because my options for it are even faster lens f2 and f1.4, and because I prefer go get the newer version of the 70-200, it's not going to be outdated any time soon and will surely retain it value better than the others.
Cheers.
Sorry for not answering before, had no internet since I made the post.
Thanks for all the reply's guy's.
I still haven't made my mind yet, I've looking at the Lens Sample Photo Archive, and I find the 135 thread much more impressive than the 70-200, don't you guys agree?
BTW, meanwhile the question of it being f2.8 or f4 started to pop out, but that was never in question for me, first because my options for it are even faster lens f2 and f1.4, and because I prefer go get the newer version of the 70-200, it's not going to be outdated any time soon and will surely retain it value better than the others.
Cheers.
I think any differences you see between the 135L and the 70-200 2.8L would be best explained by the photographers skill. I've thought about going all primes before, but zooms are so dang convenient, and in my opinion there really isn't as much of a trade off in terms of image quality anymore.
