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 May 2014 (Wednesday) 19:46
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

135 f/2.. too sharp?

 
yamatama
Senior Member
Avatar
261 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2012
     
May 21, 2014 19:46 |  #1

Hey guys!

I was shooting the other day some portraits of a client and was changing between my 135 f2 and my Tamron 70-200 vc and when i sat down to edit I was a little thrown off by the shots of my 135. They were to dang sharp, I could see every single detail in the face and Im ok with the details.. but I swear i could see every pore very clearly haha. On the other hand the shots from the Tamron were a little more pleasant to watch, sharp with the right amount of detail. Have you ever had this problem with an extremely sharp lens? Here are some straight out of camera shots

135

IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5472/14240909124_cae31855a9_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nGqo​8W  (external link) test-4537 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

Tamron
IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5488/14237903021_931c6dc16b_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nG9Y​wz  (external link) test-4527 (external link) by delacruz266 (external link), on Flickr

Nikon D750, 35 1.4G, 85 1.8G, 24-70 2.8G, 70-200 2.8G
My website www.williamdelacruz.co​m (external link)
FB like page https://www.facebook.c​om/WilliamDeLaCruzPhot​o (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 18
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
May 21, 2014 19:56 |  #2

you can always remove detail with postprocessing, but you can't add it later.

and yes, the 135 is a sharp sucker :-)


Current: 5DM3, 6D, 8mm fish, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 85/1.8, 100-400/IS v1, lensbaby composer with edge 80, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 80D, 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70/2.8, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 36
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
May 21, 2014 20:10 as a reply to  @ timbop's post |  #3

The Tamron looks pretty sharp also.


Jurgen
50D~700D~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
May 21, 2014 20:12 |  #4

timbop wrote in post #16921123 (external link)
you can always remove detail with postprocessing, but you can't add it later.

and yes, the 135 is a sharp sucker :-)

This, though I hate to post process.

It is pretty close to the sharpness of my 100L when it is at f/2.8 (and then I'm nitpicking).


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 218
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
     
May 21, 2014 21:26 |  #5

Well the sharpness on my 100L that I use is not always ideal, just as you describe.
However I find it quite easy to low the 'clarity' slider in Lightroom.
On another note. Many users say the 50L is not sharp enough, but even when taking photos last week
I found myself turning down the 'clarity' on a set I took for my friends. (unpaid) even with my 50L

I agree that it is much better to 'dial it down' in post processing than to over-sharpen an image in post.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 115
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
May 21, 2014 21:32 |  #6

timbop wrote in post #16921123 (external link)
you can always remove detail with postprocessing, but you can't add it later.

and yes, the 135 is a sharp sucker :-)

Word :)


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhidbeyHiker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,890 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2668
Joined Dec 2013
     
May 21, 2014 21:42 |  #7

I would love to have that problem, nice lens.

BTW, good work with the model, I'm sure with a little PP it's going to be a beautiful image.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
19,608 posts
Likes: 1773
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
May 21, 2014 23:49 |  #8

All good glass has plenty of detail when using strobes and differences are very minor IMHO. 135mm gets more raves as it is does very well for its price but when I tested my sigma 85mm f1.4, sigma 30mm f1.4 and 35mm art they as good @f1.4 as 135mm was @f2.


5dmk3, 35L, 85L II, 300mm f2.8 IS I, 400mm f5.6
Fuji XT-1, 14mm f2.8, 23mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2, 50-140mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DJHaze596
Goldmember
Avatar
1,401 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 662
Joined May 2012
Location: Florida
     
May 22, 2014 01:07 |  #9

The Sharper the better.


Canon C200 | Canon EOS R | RF 24-105mm f4L
50mm STM | 70-200mm f2.8L II | 100-400mmL II | 400mm f2.8L IS USM
Previously Owned: 1DX Mark II | Canon 5D Mark IV | 7D Mark II | 1D Mark IV

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
May 22, 2014 02:11 |  #10

I don't see anything wrong with being "too sharp" (though its not the ziess 100 macro with extreme micro contrast :p).
I do think the tamron shot is a bit off to my eyes (I think its not directly on the eye, but I might be wrong).

But as said, its easier to have a sharp lens and blur the skin a bit than having not sharp enough and have to work "overtime" to resharp things up if you need it.


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
793 posts
Likes: 9
Joined May 2011
     
May 22, 2014 02:47 |  #11

I don't know if you took the photos in RAW or JPG and if RAW, what kind of processing (or not) you've done. Also there is some difference between sharpness and details.

I guess you had a bunch of other photos, but in these two examples the magnification of the 135mm lens photo is significantly larger so it gives more details and seems "sharper". It also looks sharper in general.

The 70-200mm lens photo looks slightly blurry, difficult to say why. Her right eye looks ok I think (hard to be sure behind the hair) but the left eye is more blurry.

The lighting is also different between the two photos.

So I think the lens itself probably contributes very little to this and anyway it's not really a problem :)


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
draculr
Member
133 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2010
     
May 22, 2014 04:40 |  #12

I'd say your lighting and exposure levels are playing a bigger part than the lens.


Photography by Peter Georges (external link) - Sydney Wedding and Portrait Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hennie
Goldmember
1,251 posts
Gallery: 25 photos
Likes: 65
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Spijkenisse, The Netherlands
     
May 22, 2014 05:06 |  #13

Also use both the 135L and tammy.
The "problem' of pictures being too sharp happens all the time and with both lenses. That is the reason I started using the Portrait professional plugin / program.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,532 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Aug 2008
     
May 22, 2014 05:21 |  #14

timbop wrote in post #16921123 (external link)
you can always remove detail with postprocessing, but you can't add it later.
and yes, the 135 is a sharp sucker :-)

This answer says it all. No more responses were needed.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Absolutely ­ Fabulous
Goldmember
1,699 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
May 22, 2014 05:53 as a reply to  @ nightcat's post |  #15

DJHaze596 wrote in post #16921667 (external link)
The Sharper the better.


Not always


I had the 135 and sold it, same issue. Not ideal for portraits. If you are shooting something else, maybe it is more suitable


http://www.belovedlove​photography.com (external link)my website (external link)

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

5,451 views & 0 likes for this thread
135 f/2.. too sharp?
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 dsk26894
975 guests, 346 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.