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 16 Nov 2010 (Tuesday) 23:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 135mm f2.0 L USM OR EF 85mm f1.8??

 
1life1chance
Member
Avatar
100 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Nov 16, 2010 23:56 |  #1

Hi, I am a photographer in diapers, been just 2 months since I have bought a 7D and the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 as my first and only lens. I want to purchase now my next lens, with a heavy inclination towards portraiture and/or candid people photography from close range. (Even objects from close range, however, I'm not really a flowers/insects guy). I am torn between deciding whether to buy a EF 135mm f2.0 L USM OR a EF 85mm f1.8?? Or, a 85 with a 50mm f1.4, total price being close to the 135mm. My budget is 1000, so I clould go for any of the 3 above options. I do have a tripod and a flash, if that helps in any consideration. I would really appreciate it if any of you could give me some advice on this. I know, being a novice, I might have made many critical omissions to help you streamline your answers better. If you have any questions, please holler!! :) And thanks, in advance.. :)


5D2 7D 17-40 L 35L 85 1.8 100 L 135 L 300 4L
FEEDBACK 1234
FOR SALE 7D (<1500 Act), 17-40 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sangjiny
Senior Member
Avatar
760 posts
Joined Aug 2009
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:02 |  #2

85mm f/1.8... 135L tends to be a bit long for portraits on 7D.


Leica M9
Pentax 645D
Rolleiflex 2.8FX
Mamiya 7
Zeiss ZI Ikon

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ni$mo350
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,011 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Portland, OR
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:14 |  #3

^+1 the 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 are both great choices or you can check out the new Sigma 85mm f/1.4 which has been getting a lot of praise lately and compared to the 85Lii at half the price.


-Chris-Website (external link)|| (external link)Facebook (external link)|| My Flickr (external link)|| Follow me!!! 500px (external link) || (external link) 5D mkii || 35L || 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII || My bank account hates you all :cry:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,551 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 415
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:17 |  #4

I never used the 135 but I have the 100L 85 and 50 1.4 and all are excellent lenses. The 85 1.8 is great on full frame or crop.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G15 • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 24-70L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tricky500
Senior Member
Avatar
424 posts
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Overland, MO.
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:18 |  #5

Tommydigi wrote in post #11298639 (external link)
I never used the 135 but I have the 100L 85 and 50 1.4 and all are excellent lenses. The 85 1.8 is great on full frame or crop.

The 85 1.8 is all I have but I love it :)


- Paul

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Luz
Member
198 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Houston, TX
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:21 as a reply to  @ sangjiny's post |  #6

Any reason not to consider the 100/2 or the 100/2.8 macro, which when paired with a Sigma 50/1.4 would put you under 1k? I have a 50 and 135 and think the gap is a little too big. It seems I see a lot of signatures that go 24/50/100 or 35/85/135.

That being said, I dont think I will ever get rid of my 135/2, I freaking love that lens. It is good for candids from a distance (when people are their most natural) and tight head shots. And the 50/1.4 does come in handy for the indoor shots of my kid, so I dig that lens too.

So I guess my final answer is (Sigma?) 50/1.4 and 100/2.8 (non-L) macro.


Houston Wedding PhotographerBlog (external link)
Website (external link)

Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1life1chance
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
100 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:25 |  #7

sangjiny wrote in post #11298589 (external link)
85mm f/1.8... 135L tends to be a bit long for portraits on 7D.

I'm lost in the jargon, and in these situations Google does not help!! :D what does "being long" mean?


5D2 7D 17-40 L 35L 85 1.8 100 L 135 L 300 4L
FEEDBACK 1234
FOR SALE 7D (<1500 Act), 17-40 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1life1chance
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
100 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:27 |  #8

And thanks, all of you....y'know people all over have been TELLING me to go for a 85mm f1.8 with my eyes closed. And ALL of those people own a 135, so....I'm...a little.....suspicious, LOL :D


5D2 7D 17-40 L 35L 85 1.8 100 L 135 L 300 4L
FEEDBACK 1234
FOR SALE 7D (<1500 Act), 17-40 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,551 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 415
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:37 |  #9

Luz wrote in post #11298659 (external link)
Any reason not to consider the 100/2 or the 100/2.8 macro, which when paired with a Sigma 50/1.4 would put you under 1k? I have a 50 and 135 and think the gap is a little too big. It seems I see a lot of signatures that go 24/50/100 or 35/85/135.

That being said, I dont think I will ever get rid of my 135/2, I freaking love that lens. It is good for candids from a distance (when people are their most natural) and tight head shots. And the 50/1.4 does come in handy for the indoor shots of my kid, so I dig that lens too.

So I guess my final answer is (Sigma?) 50/1.4 and 100/2.8 (non-L) macro.


The 100mm macro either L or non L are simply amazing lenses. I sold my original 100macro and I really wish I just kept my money as its just as good as the L.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G15 • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 24-70L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Staszek
Goldmember
Avatar
3,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:40 |  #10

The 135L is amazing for portraits if you have the space. There is no denying that you will need a mile between you and your subject for full length portraits, but 3/4 is very doable (~20').

This is f/2.2:

IMAGE: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1220/5142597316_e83cba4181_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​142597316/  (external link)


The 135L is not a good lens for close up work as the MFD is 35.4" with a .19x magnification. The 50 f/1.4 is a good lens, but I think the 85 f/1.8 is better for your intended purpose (plus there's no overlap).

SOSKIphoto (external link) | Blog (external link) | Facebook (external link)| Instagram (external link)
Shooting with big noisy cameras and a bag of primes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ni$mo350
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,011 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Portland, OR
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:45 |  #11

1life1chance wrote in post #11298699 (external link)
And thanks, all of you....y'know people all over have been TELLING me to go for a 85mm f1.8 with my eyes closed. And ALL of those people own a 135, so....I'm...a little.....suspicious, LOL :D

The only reason I said the 85 is because it's on a crop. If you were full frame I'd say 135L all day long. Combined with FF, you cannot go wrong. The bokeh is insane and the AF is spot on. You can tell just by my test shots and 100% crops that it's super sharp wide open with amazing color. But again, for a crop, I wouldn't suggest it. That would make it a 216mm which is long for anything indoors other than a mall or a big gym :)

My test shots are mid page
https://photography-on-the.net …ead.php?t=10581​8&page=359


-Chris-Website (external link)|| (external link)Facebook (external link)|| My Flickr (external link)|| Follow me!!! 500px (external link) || (external link) 5D mkii || 35L || 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII || My bank account hates you all :cry:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Staszek
Goldmember
Avatar
3,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 17, 2010 00:46 |  #12

1life1chance wrote in post #11298699 (external link)
And thanks, all of you....y'know people all over have been TELLING me to go for a 85mm f1.8 with my eyes closed. And ALL of those people own a 135, so....I'm...a little.....suspicious, LOL :D

The 135L is like special ops. They only come when you know you need them, but when they show up its like BOOM! Amazing. My 135L is used mostly for events (photojournalism) and indoor sports.

f/2.5:

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5157127046_812c93fd54_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/s_olszewski/5​157127046/  (external link)

SOSKIphoto (external link) | Blog (external link) | Facebook (external link)| Instagram (external link)
Shooting with big noisy cameras and a bag of primes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stickshift
Senior Member
533 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Missouri
     
Nov 17, 2010 01:47 |  #13

ni$mo350 wrote in post #11298774 (external link)
The only reason I said the 85 is because it's on a crop. If you were full frame I'd say 135L all day long. Combined with FF, you cannot go wrong. The bokeh is insane and the AF is spot on. You can tell just by my test shots and 100% crops that it's super sharp wide open with amazing color. But again, for a crop, I wouldn't suggest it. That would make it a 216mm which is long for anything indoors other than a mall or a big gym :)

The 135L is amazing on both FF and crop. I don't find it long on the 7D. Just take a few steps back if needed.


7D, 5D mark II
17-40, 24-70 II, 70-200 f/4 IS, Zeiss 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 400/5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rai33
Goldmember
Avatar
1,838 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Sydney
     
Nov 17, 2010 03:26 |  #14

Love the 135 on the crop... and the 85 1.2 aint too shabby either. Admittedly 85mm on a crop is probably more practical for portraits especially indoors since you don't need to step back as much in confined surrounds. IMO the 85 on a crop is even better than full-frame for tight headshots in terms of you being able to be further back from your subjects to achieve better compression of facial protrusions (ie. noses!).

Having said that if it was between the 135L and 85 1.8 (non-L) ...the L snob in me says 135 for sure.


Portfolio - Fashion/Beauty (external link)
Portfolio - Kids (external link)
Model Mayhem (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nightcat
Goldmember
4,511 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Aug 2008
     
Nov 17, 2010 05:37 |  #15

Why wouldn't you consider the 100mm 2.0? Its fits right between the 2 you are considering. Its a great portrait lens with beautiful bokeh and is very sharp at 2.0. It has less CA than the 85mm 1.8 as well. The photozone summary of this lens is as follows...

The Canon EF 100mm f/2 USM is one of the "can't lose" offers in the Canon lens lineup. It performed almost flawlessly in all tested categories. It's interesting that the figures are marginally better compared to its more popular sister lens (EF 85mm f/1.8 USM). So if you can't or don't want to invest into Canon L glass the EF 100mm f/2 USM is a pretty obvious solution providing similar qualities at a much lower price. Highly recommended!




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

13,150 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF 135mm f2.0 L USM OR EF 85mm f1.8??
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 sandertristan
738 guests, 381 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.