Bokeh! What are your favorite lenses for pretty, pretty bokeh?

I'm just a backyard hobbyist, and I didn't even know what bokeh was until I bought the 40mm pancake lens. Now I'm addicted to it. What favorite lenses do you have in regard to bokeh?

135L, best bokeh in its prce range. 85L, and the king of all is the 200f2 but its not for mere mortals.

Gotta be the 50mm f/1.2 but it's out of my range. Got to play with one a few times though.

85 1.2L is the best bokeh machine in my bag

Ouch! Some of these lenses are way out of my budget, lol. I didn't specify a $$ limit though...and it's good to see the comparisons. What little I've been able to look up on the 135L though, is stunning. And it's within my range. So, let me refine my question a bit...I'm planning on adding lenses to my kit this year, and I want to get a macro (I'm 99.9% sold on the Canon 100mm L macro). I also want something wider than my 40mm that I can use in deep, dark forests. I live within a few miles of both Jefferson National Forest and George Washington National Forest - a halfway decent hike finds me in some very cool, dark, claustrophobic woods. I'd like something f2.8 or better. Prime, probably - but I need to research that. And with great bokeh. I'm probably limited to $800 - $1000 for a solid used lens. Is that reasonable? Can I get more suggestions? I feel rather strongly that the 135L will be bought this spring too - what I saw so far is yummy. Thanks!
~ Cindy ~

Buy a 50 f/1.8 STM to satisfy your bokeh fever and won't break the bank.

Keeping in mind that blur and bokeh are different things. Bokeh is the quality of the blur. Inexpensive primes will give you blur, but the quality may not be as satisfying. The 85 1.8 is aa nice lens with decent bokeh, but its just not even close to the creamy blur of the 135L. You might consider the 35L.

gonzogolf wrote in post #17929725
135L, best bokeh in its prce range. 85L, and the king of all is the 200f2 but its not for mere mortals.

This

what do you currently have now? that'll help with suggestions...i feel like bokeh, and deep dark forests don't really go along together...

Agree 1000%v with Gonz

NOTHING touches a 200L

135L is the next best thing

That shot that Pekka posted is an 85L very close to subject and you see immediate fall off from point of focus. It falls off so fast that from the temple back is OOF with Bokeh.

This is fine is you want this look but if you want fall off from the back of head then you have to stand further back and crop into the image or you have to close it down to F/2.0.......both will result in noticeably less Bokeh than is shown here.

Only the 135L and a 200 F/2.0L will get this creamy fall off and because of distance factors to get a 1/2 body shot, when using these lens, that is primarily why the bokeh is so pleasing and the subjects tend to pop off the page. If you get too close with a 135L, you will get what Pekka has shown. If you have enough room to use a 135L and a 200L, nothing touches the look of the bokeh.

I sold my 85L. Just doesn't do as well as a 135L for this look. I have an 85 1.8 that is glued to a body and 1.8 works great on his lens.

When I mention deep, dark forests, I'm thinking of picking out a fairly tight focal point, like a wildflower or fungus, etc. and having the out of focus forest in a wide pan behind - hence the bokeh issue. Am I making sense? I think it's clear to you all what a newbie I am! I've been happy with my 40mm, but I was wondering what I should be looking for in alternative lenses.

I'm rather embarrassed to admit what gear I have since there are so many pro/semi pro/advanced photographers here, but that was the appeal of the site for me - to learn. I'm finally getting to where I can buy better lenses every few months. I'm a generic Walmart associate, so that's where the $$ constraints stem from, and it's taken me so long to get to the point of buying better equipment. I c can afford lenses faster than I can afford bodies.

So this is what I have; 50D and 60D bodies, EF 40mm1:2.8 STM, EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5 - 5.6 IS (came with the 50D), and a EF 70-300mm 1;4-5.6 IS USM, which I bought when I bought the 50D seven years ago. I keep the 70-300 on the 50D in case I see deer or turkeys out in the fields, I use the 60D with the 40mm 90% of the time.

Right now I'm leaning towards the Canon macro Lens EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM, and the 135L mentioned so often above. As much as I love the 40mm, I'd like to add a lens that's a bit wider for landscapes. Thanks for helping me out!

You guys have totally sold me on the 135L.

coatfetish wrote in post #17929929
You guys have totally sold me on the 135L.

I'm perhaps the worlds biggest cheerleader for the 135L. But for someone on a budget having both it and the 100L macro is a waste of resources. They overlap in function to the degree that you dont really need both. The 135L isnt a macro but does great for flowers. If you need a macro though you can do most of the things the 135L does but perhaps not quitemas stylishly. Here is a flower shot with the 135L.

IMAGE LINK: https://kevin-jones.smugmug.com …x/0/O/Tulips.jp​g&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: https://kevin-jones.smugmug.com …gbv/0/O/Iris.jp​g&lb=1&s=A

if you're wanting a macro lens, i'd probably just stick with the 100L, and skip the 135L...135mm is pretty long on a crop body, you can set your 70-300mm to 135mm, and leave it there for a bit and see how you fare...there are good cheaper fast lenses that may not have the amazing bokeh like those listed above...but they're also a lot cheaper, and certainly capable of providing some good background blur...right now your fastest lens is f2.8, if you were to get something like a 50mm f1.4, or 85mm f1.8 you'd see some good blur, and still have some money left over

coatfetish wrote in post #17929927
I'm rather embarrassed to admit what gear I have since there are so many pro/semi pro/advanced photographers here, but that was the appeal of the site for me - to learn. I'm finally getting to where I can buy better lenses every few months.

don't be...i'd guess 90% of the people around here started out with camera and a kit lens...but be careful, if you hang around here a lot people will gladly offer up ways to spend your money

coatfetish wrote in post #17929929
You guys have totally sold me on the 135L.

The 35IS and 135L are my favorite 'people' lenses. Certainly work on acquiring the 135L. In your shoes, I'd take a serious look at moving to full frame. Good, used 5Dc bodies can be had for about $350-400. There is one on the sale boards right now for $335. The BG-blur/bokeh from full frame is in a completely different league. You are going to be spending large on full-frame compatible glass. Get the most out of it on a full frame body.