DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Canon 135mm f2 usable on crop body for portraits?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 13 of 13, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/17/2011 12:49:19 AM · #1
I've heard this lens is tack sharp. But is it useable on a 7D for portraiture or is it too long?
04/17/2011 01:06:05 AM · #2
Personally I think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent equivalent on the 7D and it's less than 1/2 the cost.
04/17/2011 01:27:57 AM · #3
Originally posted by Nusbaum:

Personally I think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent equivalent on the 7D and it's less than 1/2 the cost.


Already going to get that. But sometimes I'm wondering if I'll ever need a little more length and I don't wnt to lug around the 70-200 I've decided.

Perhaps the 100mm f2? Would I notice much of a focal length difference between 85 and 100?
04/17/2011 01:45:16 AM · #4
Originally posted by kgeary:

Originally posted by Nusbaum:

Personally I think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent equivalent on the 7D and it's less than 1/2 the cost.


Already going to get that. But sometimes I'm wondering if I'll ever need a little more length and I don't wnt to lug around the 70-200 I've decided.

Perhaps the 100mm f2? Would I notice much of a focal length difference between 85 and 100?


No... They are relatively close. The 135 is a better complement to the 85...

R.
04/17/2011 04:38:02 AM · #5
Originally posted by kgeary:

I've heard this lens is tack sharp. But is it useable on a 7D for portraiture or is it too long?


Too long? Heh, not at all, I've gotten some pretty good portraits @ 400mm on my 1.6 crop - my guess is that the 135 should be just great, actually this is on my short list along with the 200 f/2.8 (another lens I think you should consider).
04/17/2011 07:22:59 AM · #6
Buy it, send it my way, I'll let you know lol...

I've got the 100mm 2.8 and it works very well for portraits. On a crop my camera that's close to 135 (130...on yours it would be 160). As long as you can move around, there should be no issues IMO.
04/17/2011 10:54:11 AM · #7
It's not too long, if you have room to use it. Actually, it'd be a great lens to use if you had a subject with an exceptionally large nose.
04/17/2011 01:42:30 PM · #8
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by kgeary:

Originally posted by Nusbaum:

Personally I think the 85mm f/1.8 is an excellent equivalent on the 7D and it's less than 1/2 the cost.


Already going to get that. But sometimes I'm wondering if I'll ever need a little more length and I don't wnt to lug around the 70-200 I've decided.

Perhaps the 100mm f2? Would I notice much of a focal length difference between 85 and 100?


No... They are relatively close. The 135 is a better complement to the 85...

R.


Ok...I shoot some sports stuff SOMETIMES so I think the 135 might be useful even if I find it to be a little too long for portraits.
04/17/2011 04:00:45 PM · #9
The 135 is an awesome lens. And I hear the newer version has an anti-blown highlight feature built into it! :D

I wish Nikon had a great lens in that length.
04/17/2011 04:07:17 PM · #10
I'll second the quality of this lens, I have an 85mm f/1.2L MkII as well but I often use this instead. It's amazingly good at focusing quickly and accurately and I have no worries at all about focus at f/2 in fact I would say that over 95% of my shots from that lens are taken at f/2.

It's a great wedding candid lens as it doesn't stand out as much as a 70-200 f/2.8L IS but it's faster and the quality of the contrast, sharpness, colours are excellent.

I wouldn't ever get rid of mine.... But I use a 5d MkII so full frame
04/17/2011 04:09:46 PM · #11
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

It's not too long, if you have room to use it. Actually, it'd be a great lens to use if you had a subject with an exceptionally large nose.


HEY, I resemble that remark, LOL!
I agree with Leroy, it's certainly not too long, but you do have to have the room to use it. The cool thing on a crop body is that it gives a very 200mm-like FoV (well, 216mm-like, but who's counting) so you have the equivalent of a 200/2.0 in a compact and (relatively) inexpensive package.
04/17/2011 04:12:54 PM · #12
Originally posted by kirbic:

so you have the equivalent of a 200/2.0 in a compact and (relatively) inexpensive package.


Sorry but the 200F2.0 has no equivalent. :D
04/17/2011 06:26:17 PM · #13
Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by kirbic:

so you have the equivalent of a 200/2.0 in a compact and (relatively) inexpensive package.


Sorry but the 200F2.0 has no equivalent. :D


The old 200 1.8 maybe? :P
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 09:11:43 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 09:11:43 AM EDT.