cnardo said:
mackguyver said:
cnardo said:
I am curious to know why no mention of the 135 f/2L USM as a alternate lens is not referred to in this thread. Is the autofocus too slow or reach from 85 to 135 make it less attractive for wedding photographers?
I used the 135 for events (but not weddings), but generally it's too long for a lot of applications. It's good in big rooms or outdoors from a distance, but I always found the 24 & 50 to be better suited, at least for my style.
Ok... understand the reach issue indoors... I've used the 135mm indoors only in big rooms or gyms (not smaller rooms and I have never done a wedding). On a separate issue, I have not been impressed with my Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens... I have found that the pictures appear to be flat/dull...do you folks think I need to go to the L f/1.2 to get comparable quality to my 135mm ???
Yes, the 135 works well in large rooms - see shot below taken in a large warehouse-sized event/exhibition space @f/2, 1/160, ISO 3200 - but is a little long for general event use.
On the other hand, the 50L is essentially a 50 f/1.4 with a tougher build, better AF motor, weather sealing, better flare resistance, with better resolution and contrast below f/2.8. The bokeh is a bit smoother and the colors a bit punchier, but they are far more alike than different, at least above f/2. If you're unhappy with the 50 f/1.4 below f/2 and plan to shoot at f/2 or below, it's probably worth the upgrade. If you don't like the f/1.4 from f/2 to 2.8, you're probably not going to find the 50L to be much better. To answer your question - yes, the 50L is more like the 135L in terms of color and contrast.
