December 22, 2014, 07:08:57 PM

Author Topic: Which Bokeh Monster?  (Read 8273 times)

StudentOfLight

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
  • I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2014, 06:57:02 PM »
You won't regret the 6D, but don't jump into lenses immediately unless you've got the cash to splash out. If you're after bokeh full-frame is the way to go, it will breathe new life into your 100L IS macro, which is already an excellent lens.

Obviously as others would no doubt have mentioned, the 85L is the bokeh king. Like the 35L however, it doesn't have weather sealing. I guess Canon considers it to be a fashion/studio (i.e. indoor) usage lens. Anyway, to put bokeh monsters into perspective, when you consider that the 200 f/2 and 300mm f/2.8 are three times as much, then I guess the 85mm L could be considered a bargain.

Your 100L vs 135L:
The advantage of the 100L over 135L is that you can get closer to your subject or move them closer to you (i.e.  further from the background) which can give you additional blur which nullifies the f-stop difference. Also being a shorter focal length the 100L allows you to use it in smaller venues so it becomes much more versatile on full frame. The 9-blade circular aperture in your 100L is also better than the aperture of the 135L, which is not circular and starts showing it octagonal shape by f/2.8 and become very obvious by f/4. The 100L is also weather sealed. The 100L also has IS which is of benefit which can also help with decreasing your shutter speed if you need more light. Basically, while the 135L is a cracking lens wide open, it's not very versatile and if you already have the 100L I don't see the 135L adding much value to your camera bag.

For full-length (full body) portraits 50mm-55mm would be the focal length to look at. Canon's 50mm f/1.2 (which is about R3k overpriced in ZA) is not sharp corner-to-corner when shooting wide open but has nice bokeh. Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (The new kid on the block) is said to have autofocus issues so if you are happy to manually focus then it is an option.

Personally I'd wait till Photokina to see what developments are in the pipeline. Simga 85mm Art is intriguing and who really knows what Canon is brewing.
Fantasy Gear:
TS-E: 45mm f/2.8 L-II,  EF: 40mm f/0.8,  100mm f/1.4,  35-85mm f/1.8, 
EF with 1.4xInt: 100-300mm f/4 ,  500mm f/5.6 L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2014, 06:57:02 PM »

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4577
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #31 on: July 24, 2014, 11:15:49 PM »
i'm pretty sure the 100L is 8 blade

as far as i know canon don't make 9 blade lenses
some are seven which are really nice like the 16-35 f2.8L II and the EF-M 22mm
7 blades renders f16 or narrower light stars really nicely on landscape shots IMO much nicer than 8 or 9

another thing to consider since budget is an issue in the OP

I bought the Sigma 35 ART, Sigma 85 1.4 and the canon 135L for the same price as a canon 85L II

i also have the 100L and personally i use the 135 alot more the extra stop is massive when you need high shutter speeds in lower light no IS on such a long length is a bit of a pain sometimes though but its bokeh is amazing and i don't think i ever stop it down
APS-H Fanboy

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1541
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2014, 12:49:31 AM »
You won't regret the 6D, but don't jump into lenses immediately unless you've got the cash to splash out. If you're after bokeh full-frame is the way to go, it will breathe new life into your 100L IS macro, which is already an excellent lens.

Obviously as others would no doubt have mentioned, the 85L is the bokeh king. Like the 35L however, it doesn't have weather sealing. I guess Canon considers it to be a fashion/studio (i.e. indoor) usage lens. Anyway, to put bokeh monsters into perspective, when you consider that the 200 f/2 and 300mm f/2.8 are three times as much, then I guess the 85mm L could be considered a bargain.

Your 100L vs 135L:
The advantage of the 100L over 135L is that you can get closer to your subject or move them closer to you (i.e.  further from the background) which can give you additional blur which nullifies the f-stop difference. Also being a shorter focal length the 100L allows you to use it in smaller venues so it becomes much more versatile on full frame. The 9-blade circular aperture in your 100L is also better than the aperture of the 135L, which is not circular and starts showing it octagonal shape by f/2.8 and become very obvious by f/4. The 100L is also weather sealed. The 100L also has IS which is of benefit which can also help with decreasing your shutter speed if you need more light. Basically, while the 135L is a cracking lens wide open, it's not very versatile and if you already have the 100L I don't see the 135L adding much value to your camera bag.

For full-length (full body) portraits 50mm-55mm would be the focal length to look at. Canon's 50mm f/1.2 (which is about R3k overpriced in ZA) is not sharp corner-to-corner when shooting wide open but has nice bokeh. Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art (The new kid on the block) is said to have autofocus issues so if you are happy to manually focus then it is an option.

Personally I'd wait till Photokina to see what developments are in the pipeline. Simga 85mm Art is intriguing and who really knows what Canon is brewing.



Depends on your definition of versatile, and entirely depends on the needs of the user.

In my case, for example- the 135L produces beautiful head and head and shoulder shots, and a great portrait lens if not as good as the 85, if you have space, and is great for kids especially if running around; it acts as a nice short tele when I am traveling, great for distant landscapes, zoos; it is a great lens for indoor sports where you need the FL and the f/2; it is also great for events. I just shot an acapela concert and a show, both in piss-poor light, with fantastic results even when cropped heavily.

It takes 1.4x extender with no noticeable loss of IQ to give a great 190/2.8, and takes 2x in a pinch to provide a perfectly acceptable 270/4.

So, for those need the wider FL or the macro capability, the 135L is more versatile. In fact, now that I have the 135L, I am considering picking up the 100 non-L for any occasional macro work I might want to do. I tried the 100L and I didn't like the bokeh- so I wouldn't pick it as a portrait lens.






EOS 5DIII, EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

YuengLinger

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2014, 03:24:22 AM »
 ::)  Note that AFTER writing this post, I went back and saw in your signature that you have the f/4 version of the 70-200mm.  That complicates the decision, a little, I suppose!  Enjoy whatever you get!

=====================================================================

Lets talk practical for a moment.  The 85 1.2L produces beautiful bokeh, but it is a specialty lens.  Not every shot in a session or a portfolio should have razor thin depth of field, so, for very versatile portrait work, as a tool, the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II offers much, much more, and costs pretty close to the same as the 85.  True, its MFD is about 10" further than the 85, but, beyond that, it is useful in so many, many more situations, not just for formal portraits, but events, sports, nature, and landscape.

The 70-200mm produces DoF shallow enough to be impractical at times, meaning, just like with a faster but shorter lens, you have to be mindful of details that you might want sharp but can start melting into dreamy bokeh.  Neuro could give you all the math, I'm sure, about focal length and aperture producing OOF areas in a photo.

Not everybody has the right head for 85mm.  There are certain shapes of skulls and faces that benefit from the compression of a longer focal length.

Few working pros, if faced with a budget that allows only one lens, would go for the 85 over the 70-200mm.

Don't forget--the 70-200 has lightning AF--and IS!

Would I ever give up my 85mm 1.2L II?  Only if, heaven forbid, forced to choose between that and my 70-200mm.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 03:30:24 AM by YuengLinger »

StudentOfLight

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
  • I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2014, 04:33:16 AM »
i'm pretty sure the 100L is 8 blade

as far as i know canon don't make 9 blade lenses
some are seven which are really nice like the 16-35 f2.8L II and the EF-M 22mm
7 blades renders f16 or narrower light stars really nicely on landscape shots IMO much nicer than 8 or 9

another thing to consider since budget is an issue in the OP

I bought the Sigma 35 ART, Sigma 85 1.4 and the canon 135L for the same price as a canon 85L II

i also have the 100L and personally i use the 135 alot more the extra stop is massive when you need high shutter speeds in lower light no IS on such a long length is a bit of a pain sometimes though but its bokeh is amazing and i don't think i ever stop it down
The  100(non-L) macro has eight blades, the 100L has nine blades. You can shoot OoF highlights at f/8 to see the lenses show their octagon/nonagon shapes.

In South Africa pricing is different:
(Sigma 35A + Sigma 85 1.4 + 135L) = (Canon 85L  II + 2x(600EX RT))
Fantasy Gear:
TS-E: 45mm f/2.8 L-II,  EF: 40mm f/0.8,  100mm f/1.4,  35-85mm f/1.8, 
EF with 1.4xInt: 100-300mm f/4 ,  500mm f/5.6 L

StudentOfLight

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
  • I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #35 on: July 25, 2014, 05:14:01 AM »
Depends on your definition of versatile, and entirely depends on the needs of the user.

In my case, for example- the 135L produces beautiful head and head and shoulder shots, and a great portrait lens if not as good as the 85, if you have space, and is great for kids especially if running around; it acts as a nice short tele when I am traveling, great for distant landscapes, zoos; it is a great lens for indoor sports where you need the FL and the f/2; it is also great for events. I just shot an acapela concert and a show, both in piss-poor light, with fantastic results even when cropped heavily.

It takes 1.4x extender with no noticeable loss of IQ to give a great 190/2.8, and takes 2x in a pinch to provide a perfectly acceptable 270/4.

So, for those need the wider FL or the macro capability, the 135L is more versatile. In fact, now that I have the 135L, I am considering picking up the 100 non-L for any occasional macro work I might want to do. I tried the 100L and I didn't like the bokeh- so I wouldn't pick it as a portrait lens.
I agree the user needs are most important. I suggest the OP looks in the gallery section of the forum to see what actual results are like with various lenses that are suggested. Bokeh quality is really up to the OP.

I have the 135L and love it. The OP already has a similar focal length L-lens and has not yet delved into the world of full frame so the 100L+6D might suffice for the moment. Consider that there is at least one lens (Sigma 85A) on the horizon which will be worth checking out before committing to 135L or 85L. Also consider that the 2nd-hand market in South Africa is small so the OP would need to sell the 135L at a loss if they decided to upgrade in the next few months.
Fantasy Gear:
TS-E: 45mm f/2.8 L-II,  EF: 40mm f/0.8,  100mm f/1.4,  35-85mm f/1.8, 
EF with 1.4xInt: 100-300mm f/4 ,  500mm f/5.6 L

Sabaki

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 315
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #36 on: July 25, 2014, 08:33:15 AM »
I would like to say a big thank you to everybody for their advise and insights. I'm closer to making a decision on which lenses will end up in my kit.

I should've mentioned from the get-go that my next three purchases will be a 6D, 7Dii and the TS-E24mm. The 70-200 f/2.8 L IS mkii and successor to the 16-35 f/2.8 somewhere on the horizon.

So once I start doing more paid gigs, my upgrade path, including a bokeh monster, should take maybe 24 months.

Once again, thanks folks. If it weren't for the forum members here, this would be just another photography page, you guys rock
Canon EOS 500D | Canon EOS 7D mk II |  100mmL f/2.8 IS Macro | 24-70mmL f/2.8 mk II | 70-200mmL f/4.0 IS | 400mmL f/5.6 | 50mm f/1.8 | EF-S 10-22mm | Canon 600 RT |

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #36 on: July 25, 2014, 08:33:15 AM »

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4577
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #37 on: July 26, 2014, 06:53:09 AM »

The  100(non-L) macro has eight blades, the 100L has nine blades. You can shoot OoF highlights at f/8 to see the lenses show their octagon/nonagon shapes.


so it does , I stand corrected :)
APS-H Fanboy

bholliman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 801
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #38 on: July 26, 2014, 09:39:16 AM »
I currently own the following primes for use on my 6D (and occasionally EOS-M):  35mm IS f/2, 85mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2.8L Macro and 135mm f/2.  When funds allow, I plan to replace the 85mm 1.8 with the 85mm f/1.2 II assuming something better doesn't come along by then.  I also like the 50mm focal lenght, and might consider one of the new Sigma Art lenses down the road.  If I had to chose a bokeh monster from available primes it would be the 85mm f/1.2 II first and 135L second.


Your 100L vs 135L:
The advantage of the 100L over 135L is that you can get closer to your subject or move them closer to you (i.e.  further from the background) which can give you additional blur which nullifies the f-stop difference. Also being a shorter focal length the 100L allows you to use it in smaller venues so it becomes much more versatile on full frame. The 9-blade circular aperture in your 100L is also better than the aperture of the 135L, which is not circular and starts showing it octagonal shape by f/2.8 and become very obvious by f/4. The 100L is also weather sealed. The 100L also has IS which is of benefit which can also help with decreasing your shutter speed if you need more light. Basically, while the 135L is a cracking lens wide open, it's not very versatile and if you already have the 100L I don't see the 135L adding much value to your camera bag.

Depends on your definition of versatile, and entirely depends on the needs of the user.

In my case, for example- the 135L produces beautiful head and head and shoulder shots, and a great portrait lens if not as good as the 85, if you have space, and is great for kids especially if running around; it acts as a nice short tele when I am traveling, great for distant landscapes, zoos; it is a great lens for indoor sports where you need the FL and the f/2; it is also great for events. I just shot an acapela concert and a show, both in piss-poor light, with fantastic results even when cropped heavily.

So, for those need the wider FL or the macro capability, the 135L is more versatile. In fact, now that I have the 135L, I am considering picking up the 100 non-L for any occasional macro work I might want to do. I tried the 100L and I didn't like the bokeh- so I wouldn't pick it as a portrait lens.

+1  I own a 100L and 135L and use the 135L quite a bit more and find it more versatile for my purposes.  I love the 100L for macro work, but it's bokeh is too "busy" to my eye, I prefer the bokeh of the 135.  The extra stop of light is also a huge advantage to the 135, generally lack of IS is not much of an issue for me as I almost always shoot wide open, so can keep a fast shutter speed in all but the worst light.  Non-circular aperture blades also not an issue as I'm shooting at f/2 or 2.2 99% of the time.

It takes 1.4x extender with no noticeable loss of IQ to give a great 190/2.8, and takes 2x in a pinch to provide a perfectly acceptable 270/4.

As much as I love my 135L, I have not had good success with extenders on it. I've used it with both 1.4x III and 2.0x III extenders and feel the results are soft with lots of CA.  The same extenders work fantastically with my 70-200 2.8 II.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2014, 11:25:35 AM by bholliman »
Bodies:  6D, EOS-M
EF Lenses: 35mm f/2.0 IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 135mm f/2.0L, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II; EF-M Lenses: 22 f/2, 18-55
Speedlites: ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT (x3)

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4372
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #39 on: July 26, 2014, 12:36:50 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

 
Bodies: 1DX -- 5D III
Zooms: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Primes: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1541
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #40 on: July 26, 2014, 03:39:42 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4372
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #41 on: July 26, 2014, 05:42:58 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2014, 05:48:18 PM by Dylan777 »
Bodies: 1DX -- 5D III
Zooms: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Primes: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1541
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #42 on: July 26, 2014, 05:57:00 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)
EOS 5DIII, EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #42 on: July 26, 2014, 05:57:00 PM »

Menace

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1372
  • New Zealand
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #43 on: July 26, 2014, 09:58:45 PM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

+1.

Re 200 2.0 - You know you want one Dylan777 ;)
1Dx | 5D III
85 1.2L II | 100 2.8 | 400 2.8L IS II 
24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4372
    • View Profile
Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #44 on: July 27, 2014, 01:03:37 AM »
85L II + 135L are both wonderful lenses. If money is not an issue, 85L II is the way to go for portrait. The 85L II has earned the title "King of Portrait".

Photo below was taken with 85L II @ f1.2.

As someone who loves bokeh (and to whom money might not be a huge issue), you should definitely try out the 200/2 IS. I did when I visited B&H recently, and I was blown away.
I took some very uninspiring photos within the camera shop, but reviewing them in my computer I was just awestruck- in spite of having ogled at online galleries of the lens. So try it out if you can. Kids playing outdoors- will give you plenty of room, AF is lightning fast for action too, and IS helps with indoor concerts and school plays etc.; plus you can relive having your 300/2.8 with a 1.4x TC III.

Bad idea, my G.A.S is bad as many CR members here ;D

About this: 24-70 II + 135L + 200 f2 + 300 f2.8 IS II + rumor 100-400 or Tammy 150-600 for outdoor :P

I agree with you 100%, the 200 f2 is simply awesome. As of right now, I LOVE what I have. Shooting with 2 bodies, missing shots is almost impossible.

It's not G.A.S. if you use it. You have plenty of room to use a 200/2. ;)
And we will get to see pics ;)

+1.

Re 200 2.0 - You know you want one Dylan777 ;)
I'm officially broke after 400mm + 1dx. I've declared that I'm done for 2014  ;D
« Last Edit: July 27, 2014, 01:17:59 AM by Dylan777 »
Bodies: 1DX -- 5D III
Zooms: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Primes: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Which Bokeh Monster?
« Reply #44 on: July 27, 2014, 01:03:37 AM »