Still Shopping what lens next????

[AliasPros]

please review my signature and the equipment I got so far. I am starting to get tight on budget but I am looking at picking up another lens this month.

The reviews on this one is solid 5 stars and many good things said about it for portrait work (main gig) also like that its a true the 2.8, I think this can supplement my 70-200mm f/2.8L nicely. I think that the soft focus feature would be something cool to have in my bag, something different... and without that feature activated I hear it's also tack sharp and almost as fast and good as a USM... Anyone own one of these specialty lenses???

My other option is an 85mm, fits right between my 50mm USM and my 100mm USM however it seems like I got this range covered between all my lenses including my 70-200mm f/2.8L is an 85 seems redundant or could it be the sweet spot that I don't have??? What do you all think? Quality wise I know that the USM is always on point so that's no issue... What do you all think? Is there anything else out there that would be a great addition to my line up?

Between the 85mm and the 135mm (soft focus) what do you all recommend for a nice prime portrait lens?

 

[AliasPros]

Hmmm... what to do what to do, was hoping to submit my order through B&H tonight any advice on my post????

 

[Derrel]

I own the 138/2.8 anon Soft Focus....what's nice about it is it is old-school-small! it's about the size and weight of a 1980's 135mm f/2.8 manual focusing lens, so it is much smaller and lighter than the 135/2-L which I also own. I actually "like" 135mm lenses on FF quite a bit,and I got simply too good of a deal to pass up on the soft focus model. It is quite sharp, and although it has two levels of soft focus, the higher,more-defocused level is,well, too soft for my taste. I have used it on the 20D and the 5D, and on those two bodies, the autofocusing is quite good--fast and sure, which comes from 1) a single focal length so there's no compromise as with a zoom and 2) a reasonably high magnification and a shallow depth of field at f/2.8, so the phase detection system has a pretty easy "in" or "out" decision to make--unlike say a 20mm f/2.8 where doggone near anything beyond 10 feet is pretty close to being in-focus.

I payed $189 for mine used a few years back, in almost-mint condition. I used it mainly in 2005,and have not used it much since then, but then I have other 135mm lenses that I like more; Canon's 85/1.8 OTOH, is one of the Canon primes I use the most. It's a nice lens, in terms of focal length and usablity indoors and outdoors in social situations. if the field of view of one or the other is better for you, then that would be the length to choose. Tuna fish on toasted wheat bread, or ham on rye? Which is better???????

 

[AliasPros]

I own the 138/2.8 anon Soft Focus....what's nice about it is it is old-school-small! it's about the size and weight of a 1980's 135mm f/2.8 manual focusing lens, so it is much smaller and lighter than the 135/2-L which I also own. I actually "like" 135mm lenses on FF quite a bit,and I got simply too good of a deal to pass up on the soft focus model. It is quite sharp, and although it has two levels of soft focus, the higher,more-defocused level is,well, too soft for my taste. I have used it on the 20D and the 5D, and on those two bodies, the autofocusing is quite good--fast and sure, which comes from 1) a single focal length so there's no compromise as with a zoom and 2) a reasonably high magnification and a shallow depth of field at f/2.8, so the phase detection system has a pretty easy "in" or "out" decision to make--unlike say a 20mm f/2.8 where doggone near anything beyond 10 feet is pretty close to being in-focus.

I payed $189 for mine used a few years back, in almost-mint condition. I used it mainly in 2005,and have not used it much since then, but then I have other 135mm lenses that I like more; Canon's 85/1.8 OTOH, is one of the Canon primes I use the most. It's a nice lens, in terms of focal length and usablity indoors and outdoors in social situations. if the field of view of one or the other is better for you, then that would be the length to choose. Tuna fish on toasted wheat bread, or ham on rye? Which is better???????

Thank you!,
Hmmm, food for though no pun intended... I was planning on using it for indoor basket ball which I read a review on there with someone using it for that and saying it was working suitably. I also wanted to use it for the portrait aspect. At this point it seems like a cool lens to pic up... considering my line up what do you think? Do I have a hole in the 85mm area? or can my 70-200L pic up the slack? I keep that lens on my body quite a bit...

ANYONE ELSE PLEASE COMMENT AS WELL, where you all at???

 

[Derrel]

Well, for indoor basketball, there's always the decision to shoot either ambient lighting, or to use remote triggers and flash, and seeing as your fastest-focusing body is a 1D Mark II, I would go for the 85mm 1.8 EF lens instead of the 135/2.8 for indoor basketball on the near end of the court.

The 135/2 would be okay for the farther end of the court, especially if you were shooting it with one, or two balcony-mounted speedlights. The 70-200 would work well for that too, but I think the 85/1.8 EF focuses just a small amount faster than the 70-200/2.8 IS model...not much, but just a little bit faster. I do not think a 70-200 2.8 "replaces" any prime lens, and vice-versa; the 85 is a dream to shoot: it is small,light, and easy to hand-hold and it does what it does superbly well.

If you need to shoot ambient light at say f/2 or f/2.2, the 70-200 just cannot do that, and you can get a full stop more shutter speed at f/2 w/ the 85 than at f/2.8 with the zoom. The 85/1.8 is a really good lens, which is easy and lightweight to hand-hold for the entire length of a volleyball match or basketball game or an entire wrestling match---the 70-200 gets heavy after a while--how long that 'while' is depends on your arms and back and age and condition. On a smaller body, the 85 balances great, whereas the 70-200 makes a smaller body kind of a nose-dive special. On like your Rebels, the 85 would be a great balancing combo for easy use, hand-held. And you know what the 70-200 feels like on a Rebel body; it's actually EASIER to use a 70-200 on a heavy pro-weight body,due to better balance. A camera that nose-dives and torques your wrists every second you hold it is more fatiguing than a heavier setup, but one where the weight seems perfectly balanced between the body and a big lens.

 

[AliasPros]

Well, for indoor basketball, there's always the decision to shoot either ambient lighting, or to use remote triggers and flash, and seeing as your fastest-focusing body is a 1D Mark II, I would go for the 85mm 1.8 EF lens instead of the 135/2.8 for indoor basketball on the near end of the court.

The 135/2 would be okay for the farther end of the court, especially if you were shooting it with one, or two balcony-mounted speedlights. The 70-200 would work well for that too, but I think the 85/1.8 EF focuses just a small amount faster than the 70-200/2.8 IS model...not much, but just a little bit faster. I do not think a 70-200 2.8 "replaces" any prime lens, and vice-versa; the 85 is a dream to shoot: it is small,light, and easy to hand-hold and it does what it does superbly well.

If you need to shoot ambient light at say f/2 or f/2.2, the 70-200 just cannot do that, and you can get a full stop more shutter speed at f/2 w/ the 85 than at f/2.8 with the zoom. The 85/1.8 is a really good lens, which is easy and lightweight to hand-hold for the entire length of a volleyball match or basketball game or an entire wrestling match---the 70-200 gets heavy after a while--how long that 'while' is depends on your arms and back and age and condition. On a smaller body, the 85 balances great, whereas the 70-200 makes a smaller body kind of a nose-dive special. On like your Rebels, the 85 would be a great balancing combo for easy use, hand-held. And you know what the 70-200 feels like on a Rebel body; it's actually EASIER to use a 70-200 on a heavy pro-weight body,due to better balance. A camera that nose-dives and torques your wrists every second you hold it is more fatiguing than a heavier setup, but one where the weight seems perfectly balanced between the body and a big lens.

Good Points made bother!!! Hmmm... I might have to just pony up for the both of them!!! Damn it! LOL WAS AFRAID OF THAT! So is the soft focus more of a novelty, or would it come in handy shooting woman in they gracefully aged years? I heard it's good for that... and if it doubles as a decent sports lens it seems like a bargain... THOUGHTS anyone???:er:

 

[Sachphotography]

ANYONE ELSE PLEASE COMMENT AS WELL, where you all at???

Good luck... LOL

 

[fokker]

From a less knowledgeable, but possibly more objective point of view, it seems that you would be better off with the 85mm 1.8 if you had to choose just one - the 70-200 can do everything the 135mm can do as well or better in terms of shooting sports, and the soft focus feature I would hazard a guess could be replicated in pp (someone confirm/deny this?). The 85mm 1.8 on the other hand has that extra stop and a bit of light and USM so better for basketball than the 135, plus it should be about ideal for portraits.

 

[AliasPros]

From a less knowledgeable, but possibly more objective point of view, it seems that you would be better off with the 85mm 1.8 if you had to choose just one - the 70-200 can do everything the 135mm can do as well or better in terms of shooting sports, and the soft focus feature I would hazard a guess could be replicated in pp (someone confirm/deny this?). The 85mm 1.8 on the other hand has that extra stop and a bit of light and USM so better for basketball than the 135, plus it should be about ideal for portraits.

Good Call Fokker! :thumbup:

 

[AliasPros]

I know it would cost more (not an i$$ue) but how would the sigma 150mm fair for indoor sports? It has a solid 5 star rating at B&H (Anyone here own it?) please advise I'm a big time noob especially for indoor shooting... I just want my basketball games to be sharp and crisp no flash allowed! They pay me for it so I gotta deliver ya know?! Im editing a video right now from my stills and I am extremely upset with the quality I know I can do much better... I think I am taking the 135mm out of my shopping cart... What you all think about this puppy?

Sigma Telephoto 150mm f/2.8 EX APO Macro EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS

 

[wiredhernandez]

I am not sure why you are still shopping. 70-200 2.8L (IS?) should do most anything you want (sports). I think you already have a much larger collection of lenses than most on board. I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone buying the best when being new .. especially when you have a fair budget.. But why not slow down and use what you have? I am somewhat in the same boat but a little reservation can save you alot of cash in the long term. Don't mean to rain on your parade or anything just my 2 cents.. Sound a little like a kid in a candy store with too much cash.. Good luck on your venture.

 

[AliasPros]

I am not sure why you are still shopping. 70-200 2.8L (IS?) should do most anything you want (sports). I think you already have a much larger collection of lenses than most on board. I don't think there is anything wrong with anyone buying the best when being new .. especially when you have a fair budget.. But why not slow down and use what you have? I am somewhat in the same boat but a little reservation can save you alot of cash in the long term. Don't mean to rain on your parade or anything just my 2 cents.. Sound a little like a kid in a candy store with too much cash.. Good luck on your venture.

No when I bought it, I didn't have the money go with the IS copy but I love the 70-200 I find it hard to take off of my body! As for buying all of these lenses you all have to remember I am a wedding videography too so these mount to my HD FX1 so really I am sharing lenses with 2 camera rigs at once so in a way its like I am paying half for the lens on my photo0graphy budget and half out of my video budget... I think of how it will work on both applications not how most people shop I guess...

 

[sinjans]

Sorry for taking so long to reply here but i'm on page 2 of your gear list and page 3 of this months "to purchase" list. You have my head spinning my friend. :thumbup:

 

[AliasPros]

Sorry for taking so long to reply here but i'm on page 2 of your gear list and page 3 of this months "to purchase" list. You have my head spinning my friend. :thumbup:

NO PROB brotha LOL, what you think about picking up that sigma 150mm 2.8 HSM suggested? or any other lens around 6-8 hundred??? what would you grab?

 

[gsgary]

Sorry but i think your a bit crazy buying all this gear, we have hardly seen any shots yet