| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/04/2012 08:55:56 AM · #1 |
I'm thinking about picking up a 35mmL, 85mmL or a 135mmL lens. I would love to take all of them out for some play time before making a purchase. The wedding photographers I know keep saying "You can't go wrong with the 85mm" It's also the most expensive of the lot. The reason for have a 35mm is that 1.4 aperture (17-40 is a f4 lens). And the 135 f2 has been peaking my interest as well for portraits...and it's at the cheapest end of the list.
A a perfect world I would get all these lenses and more, but I have to slowly collect my lenses. Any recommendations? I want to do more wedding work, it's just hard to get into the business in Japan. I get side jobs, the lenses I have are fine for that...but barely. I need a 24-70mm and would love my 70-200 to be a f2.8 lens. Hmmm... |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 08:56:14 PM · #2 |
I've only heard glowing words for that 135, and the images I've seen are pretty remarkable.
Having said that... decide if you're wanting to push into portraits more or weddings more.
While it is certainly possible to shoot weddings purely on primes, it takes a very very different approach and mindset. So, to me, you need to decide if you are okay with shooting weddings (which you seem to want to do for money) with primes, because if you aren't, then your making a circuitous route to what you need in order to pursue what you want (shooting weddings). If you are okay with shooting weddings with primes, then I'd lean towards the 135 and the 35, since your 100 isn't going to be hugely different from the 85. Some, sure, but not hugely. If you don't like the idea of shooting weddings with primes, save for a 24-70 or upgrade your 70-200 to 2.8. |
|
|
|
04/04/2012 10:28:11 PM · #3 |
Let me summarise what I think and see if it helps you....
- The 135f2 just has this amazing something BUT it's not an easy lens to shoehorn into use, although I do a lot :-) It really needs IS but in the right deal nothing can come close IMO.
- The 85 is by all accounts well.. decent :) BUT it's little brother is such great value you would need to really use that extra bit to justify the price - or at least I would. I went with the f1.8 and shoehorn the 135 when I can.
- The 35 - well, it's next on my wish list if that helps any.
The other one in here that I was very tempted with over the 135 is the 100L.... It's seems to have great IS and most people say it's a great lens (you asked about 3 lense... I add 1 to your list... my job here is done :-0) ). |
|
|
|
04/05/2012 12:21:49 AM · #4 |
I'd like to do more wedding work, but I don't know that it's possible short-term. Short-term, doing portraits is possible. I hear wonderful things about the 135 which is why it's on my list.
That said, a good fast zoom is something I couldn't live without if I did more and more weddings. I'll probably get the 135 for now and if weddings start to come my way a little more I'll invest in a 24-70. Actually, if I get plenty more weddings I'll be investing in plenty more glass. |
|
|
|
04/10/2012 08:37:53 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by heavyj:
I'm thinking about picking up a 35mmL, 85mmL or a 135mmL lens. |
Although I shoot Nikon, I just added the Nikkor 85mm f/1.4. A marvelous lense. I specifically added it for portrait work. I had been using my 50mm 1.4 and still really like its versatility and clean crisp image detail and outstanding depth of focus control.
If you opted against the 85mm for now - you could get both the 135mm and a 50mm 1.4. But an 85mm f/1.4 is a marvelous lense to have in one's stable. Having pro grade glass makes picture taking easier in my view. |
|
|
|
04/10/2012 10:45:56 AM · #6 |
Let's take it one option at a time:
35/1.4 L - This actually might make great sense. It would give you very close to a traditional 50mm perspective on the APS-H sensor, and 35mm is also a classic focal length on the 35mm frame if you eventually go there. One thing to think about with this one is whether it will soon be updated. The "II" version of the 24/1.4 was released last year, so the 35/1.4 II might not be far behind.
85/1.2L - This is truly a hunk of glass to lust over, LOL. It's a great portrait focal length, whether on APS-H or 35mm. The question is, will you really use the range between f/1.2 and f/1.8 enough to justify the drastic price difference? I know that for myself, the answer is "no." In fact, I don't own a Canon lens in this focal length. I have the Canon 50/1.4, the Canon 100/2.8 Macro (non-L version) and in between a Zeiss 75/1.5 Biotar. I usually shoot the Zeiss at f/2 or so. If I were to opt for a Canon lens in this range, I'd select the 85/1.8.
135/2L - Well, what can be said? This is still among the very best values in the L lens range. It's pretty long on APS-H, about 175mm equivalent, but this is very flattering for portraits, and the IQ is just stunning.
Given what you already own, the question is what will give you the most bang for the buck? I'd say that between the 50/1.4 and the 100/2.8L Macro, you have the 85mm focal length bracketed with very good glass, and in your situation I'd not consider the 85mm FL as your next move. You don't have a fast WA lens, so the 35/1.4 might be a good place to go... or perhaps even the 24/1.4L II? The 135/2 also seems to be something you could use, since your 70-200 is f/4, this will give you two additional stops at 135mm, albeit without IS. All things considered, I think I'd go with the wider focal length, and fill in the 135 at a later date.
|
|
|
|
04/10/2012 09:52:38 PM · #7 |
| I recently purchased a 14mm L a 85mm L and the 135mm L and between the 3, I just love the 85mm L. Of course, I'm not a wedding photographer but I found myself using this lens more then the other two. The pictures are super sharp on all three but hands down, the 85mm L is my current favorite. |
|
|
|
04/11/2012 02:20:55 AM · #8 |
85 1.8
Super fast, definitely good for indoor sports (i guess you could count a wedding as one bahahah). Use it as 2.8 and smaller for best results. Will (atleast for me) have to correct some color fringing in high color contrast so be prepared for that. Also about 400$ so, not awful. Big con that affects me, can't get too close to subject.
Spend change on glass of choice.
Ideally, for a wedding you want that 24-70L (you don't need the II so don't stare at it!)
Message edited by author 2012-04-11 02:23:41. |
|
|
|
04/11/2012 03:50:26 AM · #9 |
| I would suggest getting the 24-105 or 24-70 before investing in any high dollar primes IF you are shooting weddings. Shooting a whole wedding with a prime, in my experience, presents more challenges than the extra few stops of light are worth. That being said, if you're dead set on a prime, my vote is 85mm all the way. |
|
|
|
04/11/2012 05:40:45 AM · #10 |
| What a hard choice with all the toys I'd like to have compared to what I actually need...I'm still messing around with all the options. Thanks all for the input. |
|
|
|
04/14/2012 11:27:57 AM · #11 |
compare good price at link
|
|
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: 04/18/2024 05:26:42 PM EDT.
