70-200 II - one of the best ever portrait lenses?

If I am going to show you pictures, you will not be able to tell which lens was used.

umphotography wrote in post #17255472
^^^^ This^^^^

Ill take the 135L and 200L look over a 70-200 any day of the week and three times on Sundays

I agree that it is one of the best zooms ever made, and the generally accepted ideal focal length for portraits falls within it's range.

Mine is with me constantly.

You will, however get disagreements from some who are too cheap to buy it or too weak to carry it.

I had the 85L, 70-200 II and the 200 f/2L, all of which got stolen

I have only replaced the 85L and the 200 f/2L. I prefer the two of these over the 70-200 II

Having said that, that says alot about the power of the 70-200 II in that it takes two premier lenses to replace it.

Nonetheless:
- The 85L II is better at short range portraiture blur / shallow DOF and is much faster (aperture)
- The 200L has 2-3 stops superior bokeh compared to the 70-200 II

For short range portraiture, the 85L's dof advantage is unsurpassed. These are all 85L from my weekend photoshoot - this was inside a cramped 28m^2 hotel room - the 70-200 is far too long for these conditions (it can zoom out to <85 but in doing so loses the background blur power of 85-200mm):

sadly....too late......))))

light_pilgrim,

I own a lot of lenses and for me, my 85L is my favorite portrait lens. However, with that being said, you certainly have done some amazing work with your 70-200! Very nice indeed.

Bryan

Alex,

With your talent for portraits you simply can't afford not to run the 135L through an extensive test in person!

bps wrote in post #17255991
light_pilgrim,

I own a lot of lenses and for me, my 85L is my favorite portrait lens. However, with that being said, you certainly have done some amazing work with your 70-200! Very nice indeed.

Bryan

Bryan, thank you for your words. I spent some time with 85L and I do like it....I really do like it and I know it has a "personality", but my character is a strange own - I tried to avoid owning many things I always try to simplify.....and so 70-200 II matches my personality completely - it is one lens that can satisfy so many needs. I do not have to swap lenses.

But seriously, this is just my approach....if there is a choice to have less, I will always go with less So I have to one, but best thing possible

agedbriar wrote in post #17256147
Alex,

With your talent for portraits you simply can't afford not to run the 135L through an extensive test in person!

Thank you very much....it is very kind of you. I tried it and it is nice indeed

umphotography wrote in post #17255472
^^^^ This^^^^

Ill take the 135L and 200L look over a 70-200 any day of the week and three times on Sundays

Agree. For portraits, I'll grab a 135L, 200/2 or 200/1.8 before the 70-200 anyday, everyday.

But then the 70-200 is my #2 portrait lens

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17256402
Agree. For portraits, I'll grab a 135L, 200/2 or 200/1.8 before the 70-200 anyday, everyday.

But then the 70-200 is my #2 portrait lens

Between 135mm and 200mm are an infinite number of variations, and thus an infinite number of compositions and looks. Why just stick with 2?

Yes those two lenses make pictures look pretty. But pretty looks are worthless if the overall photo is boring. And his pics clearly show that you don't need a $5000 lens to make excellent photographs. $2k will do

Also, I have a copy of Helmut Newton's Sumo on my coffee table. Hundreds of photographs from one of the most famous people photographers ever to have lived. I think I count absolutely 0 --ZERO-- pictures shot at an aperture bigger than f2.8, if even that. Almost all of them have a background or setting that is interesting, and thus in focus. If there are any that do have thin DOF, then clearly those weren't his best because I don't remember any like that.

I also have books of various other famous people photographers... same deal, almost none are shot at large apertures. DOF should not be a band-aid for lackluster technique and composition.

I have a challenge for you: can you find any world famous or iconic portrait that has thin DOF?

Technically... it is (for a zoom). See below starting at 8:00 mark.

http://petapixel.com …as-on-the-canikon-debate/

The 70-200 II is a very good portrait lens, but I prefer the primes. The 135 L is my favorite for portraits.

umphotography wrote in post #17255472
^^^^ This^^^^

Ill take the 135L and 200L look over a 70-200 any day of the week and three times on Sundays

I was Checking out your website and I though you were in MN but your site lists Gig Harbor. Did you move? Small world because I grew up in MN and my wife's Parents live in GH.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17256425
Between 135mm and 200mm are an infinite number of variations, and thus an infinite number of compositions and looks. Why just stick with 2?

I have a challenge for you: can you find any world famous or iconic portrait that has thin DOF?

You have made two very good points. Most iconic portraits have been made with the equivalent of a 50, 85, 90, 105, or 180mm focal length on a 35mm camera at f2.8 or smaller aperture. Bokeh is very overrated, except for modernistic wedding photography. Seeing and having something to say are more important.

smorter wrote in post #17255660
I had the 85L, 70-200 II and the 200 f/2L, all of which got stolen

I have only replaced the 85L and the 200 f/2L. I prefer the two of these over the 70-200 II

Having said that, that says alot about the power of the 70-200 II in that it takes two premier lenses to replace it.

Nonetheless:
- The 85L II is better at short range portraiture blur / shallow DOF and is much faster (aperture)
- The 200L has 2-3 stops superior bokeh compared to the 70-200 II

For short range portraiture, the 85L's dof advantage is unsurpassed. These are all 85L from my weekend photoshoot - this was inside a cramped 28m^2 hotel room - the 70-200 is far too long for these conditions (it can zoom out to <85 but in doing so loses the background blur power of 85-200mm):

HTTP response: NOT FOUND

Beautiful portraits !