December 19, 2014, 04:06:11 PM

Author Topic: 85L or 135L?  (Read 27831 times)

kennephoto

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #75 on: October 06, 2013, 10:17:18 PM »
Thanks Surapon, I was most curious about the 1D as I thought it was an old 1D. Makes me think I should use my 1D classic more!
Canon 5d Mark II Canon 1D classic EOSM 20-35 2.8L 50 1.2L 135 2.0L 80-200 2.8L 40 Pancake and a bunch of old film cameras

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #75 on: October 06, 2013, 10:17:18 PM »

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #76 on: October 07, 2013, 11:36:07 AM »
Alright everyone, I shoot portraits and weddings and here are my current lenses which I use on my 5DM3:

24-105 (great kit lens, but I might sell it)
24-70 f2.8 MK2
50 f1.4
(Sigma) 12-24 - some people don't like this, but I think I got a good copy
70-200 f2.8 MK2

I'm trying to find a reason to buy either the 85mm or 135mm.  Which should I buy?  I know I have that length covered, but they're such celebrated primes that I'd just learn to zoom with my feet more and I know my results would be good.

So, here's my question.  Both are very well-loved in the photog world, especially with portrait shooters.  Which should I get?  Or, should I be considering another prime altogether?

Thanks in advance!

Dear Sir, Mr. beckstoy.
For the Best Wedding/ portrait  Lenses, Both of Them 85 1.2 II and 135  L 2.0 are great ---and Best of the Best Too. But So many Lenses that need to consider for perfected Photos, where the  space between the model and the photographer are limited, and the Photographers do not have the choice ---Yes that why the Difference Lenses  are force to use for the best of that situation.
Here are my Wedding / Portrait Lenses that I use as " One man army" past 5 years, and Its works for me.
Good luck for your selection of the great Lenses.
Surapon

A= Canon TS-E 24 MM. F 3.5 L MK II for my group Portrait up to 200 People. Yes, I use Horizontal Shift function.
B = EF 24-70 F/ 2.8 L for General Photos, at the Party
C= EF 135 MM F/ 2.0 L, For great Portrait in the long range.
D=EF 70-200 mm F/ 2.8 L IS USM. Shoot far away on the Balcony of the Church, When we can not go to shoot at Altar----Ha, Ha, Ha---Not try to let the FATHER/ Preacher  get angry.
E= EF 100 mm F./ 2.8 L IS Macro USM. for the Great Portrait Photos with Some Great Bokeh. Plus the Detail of the Rings, Flowers and The Bride's Beautiful Shoes.
F = Sigma 50 MM F/ 1.4, For Tight Space and Very Blur Background.
G= EF 85 MM. F/ 1.2 L MK II for total Blur of busy back ground, and let the Bride& Groom as the Movie Stars. Plus this Lens is to separate Us/ The Real  Pay Photographers and Uncle Bob or aunt Jane who use 41 MP. Nokia Lumia Cell Phone Camera, which  can get the  better  Pictures than Me----Ha, Ha, Ha

NO, NO, NO, I never use any lens that wider than 24 MM. Yes, I have learn from the Hard way, I use 11-17 and  17-40 mm at F = 11 and F = 17 for Group Photos, And  I lost my best beautiful Client, who stand at the far Left and Far right of the Group Photos= Yes The Super Wide Angle lens  is create the subjects at the far edge of photo so distortion = Her Face form as the Beauty and The Beast = The Beast ( Not the Beauty)----Ha, Ha, Ha


LEGENDARY SETUP

Thank you, Sir, Dear Mr. JonB8305.
That are great equipment that make me very easy to operate = One man show. and get the job done , Right too.
Have a great week day, Sir.
Surapon

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #77 on: October 07, 2013, 11:54:14 AM »
surapon love it :-) but i am 32 and carrying 2 body's 1dx and 5d3 with 70-200 and 24-70 2.8  you must be one fit man loaded up like that lol

Ha, Ha, Ha---Dear , Sir, Mr Bornshooter.
You still very young man , just 32 , You can carry 48 Pounds Back pack too + 3 more bodies and Big Lenses. Yes, I am   65 Years  young ( At heart), and still carry 48 Pounds of Camera Back Pack around the world---Yes, 50 Pounds are the Limits of Carry-On on Airplane.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Surapon.
PS " at a wedding all day i  have sore legs and back "-----My Tricks = Use " Tiger Balm" to massarge my Legs and my shoulders in the night time after the wedding photography----Ha, Ha, Ha.

http://www.amazon.com/TIGER-BALM-NECK-SHOULDER-1-76/dp/B00266PFHE

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #78 on: October 07, 2013, 11:59:07 AM »
surapon love it :-) but i am 32 and carrying 2 body's 1dx and 5d3 with 70-200 and 24-70 2.8 at a wedding all day i  have sore legs and back you must be one fit man loaded up like that lol

Hell yeah.  That one goes out to those who complain about the weight of a 70-200 2.8 IS II.  You're freakin' awesome surapon!

Ha, Ha, Ha----Thousand thanks, Dear Mr. AudioGlenn.
Yes, I am a crazy Old man , Just 65 Year young this year.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Surapon

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #79 on: October 07, 2013, 12:03:17 PM »
Alright everyone, I shoot portraits and weddings and here are my current lenses which I use on my 5DM3:

24-105 (great kit lens, but I might sell it)
24-70 f2.8 MK2
50 f1.4
(Sigma) 12-24 - some people don't like this, but I think I got a good copy
70-200 f2.8 MK2

I'm trying to find a reason to buy either the 85mm or 135mm.  Which should I buy?  I know I have that length covered, but they're such celebrated primes that I'd just learn to zoom with my feet more and I know my results would be good.

So, here's my question.  Both are very well-loved in the photog world, especially with portrait shooters.  Which should I get?  Or, should I be considering another prime altogether?

Thanks in advance!

Dear Sir, Mr. beckstoy.
For the Best Wedding/ portrait  Lenses, Both of Them 85 1.2 II and 135  L 2.0 are great ---and Best of the Best Too. But So many Lenses that need to consider for perfected Photos, where the  space between the model and the photographer are limited, and the Photographers do not have the choice ---Yes that why the Difference Lenses  are force to use for the best of that situation.
Here are my Wedding / Portrait Lenses that I use as " One man army" past 5 years, and Its works for me.
Good luck for your selection of the great Lenses.
Surapon

A= Canon TS-E 24 MM. F 3.5 L MK II for my group Portrait up to 200 People. Yes, I use Horizontal Shift function.
B = EF 24-70 F/ 2.8 L for General Photos, at the Party
C= EF 135 MM F/ 2.0 L, For great Portrait in the long range.
D=EF 70-200 mm F/ 2.8 L IS USM. Shoot far away on the Balcony of the Church, When we can not go to shoot at Altar----Ha, Ha, Ha---Not try to let the FATHER/ Preacher  get angry.
E= EF 100 mm F./ 2.8 L IS Macro USM. for the Great Portrait Photos with Some Great Bokeh. Plus the Detail of the Rings, Flowers and The Bride's Beautiful Shoes.
F = Sigma 50 MM F/ 1.4, For Tight Space and Very Blur Background.
G= EF 85 MM. F/ 1.2 L MK II for total Blur of busy back ground, and let the Bride& Groom as the Movie Stars. Plus this Lens is to separate Us/ The Real  Pay Photographers and Uncle Bob or aunt Jane who use 41 MP. Nokia Lumia Cell Phone Camera, which  can get the  better  Pictures than Me----Ha, Ha, Ha

NO, NO, NO, I never use any lens that wider than 24 MM. Yes, I have learn from the Hard way, I use 11-17 and  17-40 mm at F = 11 and F = 17 for Group Photos, And  I lost my best beautiful Client, who stand at the far Left and Far right of the Group Photos= Yes The Super Wide Angle lens  is create the subjects at the far edge of photo so distortion = Her Face form as the Beauty and The Beast = The Beast ( Not the Beauty)----Ha, Ha, Ha

@ surapon, I'm in late 30ish. Seing all the gear you carry make my back feels :-[ :-[ :-[

Dear Dylan777.
You still very young age as the Super strong Young Horse----Long way to go , not Like Me, Senior citizen 65 Years Young at heart ( Only).
Nice to talk to you., Sir.
Surapon

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #80 on: October 07, 2013, 12:04:29 PM »
Get both :D

Yes, Sir, Dear Mr. Me     + 1 for me too

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #81 on: October 07, 2013, 12:11:11 PM »
Thanks Surapon, I was most curious about the 1D as I thought it was an old 1D. Makes me think I should use my 1D classic more!


Yes, Sir----, Mr. Kennephoto, Canon 1DS MK I, and Canon 1D MK I are one of the best for long/ Long Time-----Just My IDEA, for Hooby shooting, any camera that have more than 8 MP are great for me ( for Facebook Photos), And I still use my First DSLR, Canon 20D up to date for shoot with Canon EF 180 MM F/ 3.5 L Macro for shoot the Insects and the flowers.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Surapon
« Last Edit: October 07, 2013, 12:50:26 PM by surapon »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #81 on: October 07, 2013, 12:11:11 PM »

vscd

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
  • 5DC
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #82 on: October 08, 2013, 09:25:06 AM »
The Canon 85 1.2L II is a bit slow on Af, but don't get this lense wrong. Normally you're supposed to shoot models or persons acting in about 50 cm difference from for-/backwards. The lense has no problem to focus in an appropriate time in such short distances, it's just pumping if you loose the focuspoint and it starts to slide to infinity.

I never got any problems with the speed except of those minutes I tried to catch my small girl while running through the picture. But that's not a problem of the lense, it's a problem of me, chosing the wrong one ;) Getting the 100L 2.8 IS on the cam and the problem is solved (switched to 1.8m-infinity, only).

If you like to know why the 85mm 1.2L is slow you can see the chunk of glass right here:

http://tinyurl.com/p7hr94v

[...] The inner lens is mounted on a ball bearing with 72 balls to keep it under its own weight[...]    ;D
« Last Edit: October 08, 2013, 09:26:56 AM by vscd »
5DC, 24-85, 85 1.2L II, 80-200 2.8L, 100 2.8L IS, 14 2.8, 35 1.4, 75-300 IS, 40STM

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2472
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #83 on: October 08, 2013, 01:56:35 PM »
The Canon 85 1.2L II is a bit slow on Af, but don't get this lense wrong. Normally you're supposed to shoot models or persons acting in about 50 cm difference from for-/backwards. The lense has no problem to focus in an appropriate time in such short distances, it's just pumping if you loose the focuspoint and it starts to slide to infinity.

I never got any problems with the speed except of those minutes I tried to catch my small girl while running through the picture. But that's not a problem of the lense, it's a problem of me, chosing the wrong one ;) Getting the 100L 2.8 IS on the cam and the problem is solved (switched to 1.8m-infinity, only).

If you like to know why the 85mm 1.2L is slow you can see the chunk of glass right here:

http://tinyurl.com/p7hr94v

[...] The inner lens is mounted on a ball bearing with 72 balls to keep it under its own weight[...]    ;D


Wow, Wow, Wow
Thank you, Sir. Mr. vscd
For your great Words, and Plus great Link too---That are the awesome inside Photos of the Monster Lens EF 85 1.2 L II.
Wow, That Man must to be a Great Engineer to Reverse Engineer of this Lens.
Surapon

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1761
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #84 on: October 08, 2013, 04:20:40 PM »
Now I understand why it is heavy, slow and expensive ;)
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1761
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #85 on: October 11, 2013, 02:38:28 PM »
The 85 1.2L II is heavy and slow, but it is just soooo good. Here´s an example (BTW, this is straight out of the camera, raw to jpg through Lightroom);
By the way, there is one fault (that I know of) in this image. What is it?
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 3048
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #86 on: October 11, 2013, 02:44:46 PM »
The 85 1.2L II is heavy and slow, but it is just soooo good. Here´s an example (BTW, this is straight out of the camera, raw to jpg through Lightroom);
By the way, there is one fault (that I know of) in this image. What is it?
The tag is showing :)  On my crappy uncalibrated monitor at work, it also looks like her right shoulder disappears into the background, but that wouldn't be a mistake.  How does PS content area fill handle the tag ;)?

And yes, it's an amazing lens - I wish I hadn't waited so long to buy it.

dexstrose

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #87 on: October 11, 2013, 02:48:23 PM »
By the way, there is one fault (that I know of) in this image. What is it?

Hiding the tag.

I would say its not that slow, unless focusing from 12' to 3'. Then it's super slow, but if you plan ahead of time it's not bad at all.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #87 on: October 11, 2013, 02:48:23 PM »

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1761
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #88 on: October 11, 2013, 02:48:46 PM »
The 85 1.2L II is heavy and slow, but it is just soooo good. Here´s an example (BTW, this is straight out of the camera, raw to jpg through Lightroom);
By the way, there is one fault (that I know of) in this image. What is it?
The tag is showing :)  On my crappy uncalibrated monitor at work, it also looks like her right shoulder disappears into the background, but that wouldn't be a mistake.  How does PS content area fill handle the tag ;)?

And yes, it's an amazing lens - I wish I hadn't waited so long to buy it.
You got it. I bit my fingers when I saw it  :'(
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

mackguyver

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 3048
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Personal Work
Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #89 on: October 11, 2013, 02:57:37 PM »
The 85 1.2L II is heavy and slow, but it is just soooo good. Here´s an example (BTW, this is straight out of the camera, raw to jpg through Lightroom);
By the way, there is one fault (that I know of) in this image. What is it?
The tag is showing :)  On my crappy uncalibrated monitor at work, it also looks like her right shoulder disappears into the background, but that wouldn't be a mistake.  How does PS content area fill handle the tag ;)?

And yes, it's an amazing lens - I wish I hadn't waited so long to buy it.
You got it. I bit my fingers when I saw it  :'(
I know the feeling.  So obvious after the fact, but never during the shot.  It's no wonder pros keep stylists on hand as an extra pair of eyes.  I've made similar mistakes that aren't so fixable in PS.  A crooked bowtie was one of the toughest to fix, but bra straps under mesh sweaters, and wrinkles, or loose threads on any kind of finely patterned clothes.

And that's in the studio. I have had beautiful wildlife portraits ruined by twigs that were really hard to see through the VF at f/2.8.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 85L or 135L?
« Reply #89 on: October 11, 2013, 02:57:37 PM »