135mm f2 - WOW!!!

Canon Bob said:
That's just about right IMHO.

Bob
Click to expand...

Cheers :)

Weird thing is that there is no consistent rule.
Here's a much closer subject shot at f2, yet the background spectators are really obvious without taking away from the look of pure aggression on the girls face.
For the record, it was Girls v Boys in two age groups, this is the older age group. The boys are going to get so much grief when they get back to school as the girls won both matches.
i-sBRh6wK-M.jpg
 
Les McLean said:
Where it would excel is in indoor sports with a crop camera, 200mm, F2 & lightning fast focus.
Click to expand...

Here's an example taking full advantage of f2 for low light.
This image is on the stage under the best available lighting. I hadn't touched the ISO set to emergency mode at ISO 12800, hence the hence the sensible shutter speed.
Elsewhere in the marquee shutter speeds dropped dramatically, it was our Jubilee Celebration and I took more images of the locals enjoying themselves than I did of the band.
The lighting was halogen orange halogen floodlights, the white balance correction has coped remarkably well.
ISO 12800, 135mm, f2, 1/400s
i-HKLw7R2-M.jpg


Away from the stage the light was so bad I was more shooting in the hope I might get anything usable, rather than expecting the shots would work.
Hence my lowest 'keepers' from the evening are:
3 at 1/40s
1 at 1/50s
4 at 1/60s
7 at 1/100s
48 at 1/125
I'm quite pleased considering that's hand held using a non-stabilised lens :)
 
Just a few piccies from the Beacon Lighting last night.
The low light capability and flare handling of this lens were really put to test.
Three of these six images are 1/60s or slower!

1) View towards Glastonbury Tor. From where we stood, their beacon looked amazing; they placed a spiral of lights around the whole Tor. I'm sure you will see images in the national press over the next few days.
i-vChxHHn-M.jpg


2) Sunset - only 50 mins before the beacon was lit.
i-xXDvQkW-M.jpg


3) Lighting the beacon
i-Brch44v-M.jpg


4) Two minutes later - they certainly know how to get a bonfire going!
i-mkjsdXw-M.jpg


5) Some big fireworks being let off on the Somerset levels. We are 800ft up and they are close to sea level; the tops of those fireworks are above us!
i-zNVSjDP-M.jpg


6) The full moon rose shortly after the beacon was lit. Got to hand it to our village for doing the beacon in style; there was hot food and a bar set up on the tailgate of a pick up truck. A big friendly crowd turned out to see the many other beacons that were visible including as far away as Exmoor.
i-BXRtf9X-M.jpg


Concluding my first weekend with the 135mm f2...
I'm loving the images - we are going to get on fine! :D
 
i love the 135 f/2.

i'm other other way around still in the 85/135 preference. i stuck my 85 on this weekend and i felt that the longer working distance more natural for my style of working.

i also prefer the bokeh from the 135 over the 85. i think that because the spectacular highlights are larger with longer lenses the blur is less fussy, i dream of the 200/f2 which from what i've seen is even more amazing still.

this is one of favourite shots from the weekend, i think it illustrates the wonderful way the lens blurs out the background. you know where you are, but the blur gently takes away all the distractions and renders them soft and dreamy. i like the slight swirly in the bokeh you get too.

7156212917_0770efccab_c.jpg
 
What a stunning lens!! Now, wheres my daughters piggy bank!? lol
 
cuthbert said:
i love the 135 f/2.

i'm other other way around still in the 85/135 preference. i stuck my 85 on this weekend and i felt that the longer working distance more natural for my style of working.

i also prefer the bokeh from the 135 over the 85. i think that because the spectacular highlights are larger with longer lenses the blur is less fussy, i dream of the 200/f2 which from what i've seen is even more amazing still.

this is one of favourite shots from the weekend, i think it illustrates the wonderful way the lens blurs out the background. you know where you are, but the blur gently takes away all the distractions and renders them soft and dreamy. i like the slight swirly in the bokeh you get too.

7156212917_0770efccab_c.jpg
Click to expand...

That is one cracking shot. So dreamy. :thumbs:
 
it's a stunning lens in the right hands clearly, thanks for sharing.

Better start saving for a full frame now.
 
Yes, works fine but the field of view will be quite narrow forcing you to be far away from your subjects if trying to frame something like the above shot of the child. Also you won't be able to pull off as thin depth of field as with full frame cameras.

And if anyone starts the DoF vs sensor size discussion I will come and stab your camera in the sensor... grr :bang:
 
It's been said before, and I mentioned it in the reference thread, and worth repeating, one of the difficulties in using this lens is that it's sometimes too sharp, consequently particularly in head & shoulders shots, extra work is needed in tidying up skin, it picks up every pimple, blemish, crease and blackhead

Here's a 100 % crop from a shot, the nose area isn't so flattering to the subject, most lenses would not have picked up this kind of detail, and if I was taking this commercially rather than just fun, I would have needed to spend an inordinate amount of time cleaning this up.

1DSL1381adjust.jpg
 
Les McLean said:
It's been said before, and I mentioned it in the reference thread, and worth repeating, one of the difficulties in using this lens is that it's sometimes too sharp, consequently particularly in head & shoulders shots, extra work is needed in tidying up skin, it picks up every pimple, blemish, crease and blackhead

Here's a 100 % crop from a shot, the nose area isn't so flattering to the subject, most lenses would not have picked up this kind of detail, and if I was taking this commercially rather than just fun, I would have needed to spend an inordinate amount of time cleaning this up.

1DSL1381adjust.jpg
Click to expand...

I don't think you can go 'too sharp'
You can always soften blemishes, soften images no problem, it's much harder trying to make a soft image look sharp when you need it to.
There's some great software on the market that could tidy up the image you posted in just a couple of clicks.

I love the look of this 135 f2 lens, i'll be getting one very soon.
 
Ginsters said:
I don't think you can go 'too sharp'
You can always soften blemishes, soften images no problem, it's much harder trying to make a soft image look sharp when you need it to.
There's some great software on the market that could tidy up the image you posted in just a couple of clicks.

I love the look of this 135 f2 lens, i'll be getting one very soon.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, but it usually means compromising the skin tones, far too much smoothing for my taste, consequently they end up looking like waxworks dolls. No , if this image was a commercial image rather than just for fun, I'd do the job properly and spend a bit of time tidying this area up.

But I do see where you are coming from :)
 
Canon Bob said:
I find it to be an excellent lens for diffusing a fussy background. I shot cyclocross last winter and OOF trees and branches can be distracting with the 70-200 but the 135L declutters the shot much better.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately according the EXIF your sample image is shot with the 70-200 :lol:
 
Danzaroonie said:
I would assume for us crop sensors owners we would look at the 85mm to achieve similar results?
Click to expand...

You need the f1.2 version of the 85mm if you want to get the same DOF as the 135mm at f2 on a FF which isn't cheap, you could get the 135mm f2 and a used 5D2 for the same price!!!
 
The 135mm F2 also doubles up very well taking relatively near action shots.

Some from this morning while walking the dogs by the river.

All with Canon 7D, 135mm F2+1.4TC, giving a respectable 189mm f2.8 lens, which is still lightning fast to focus, and can effectively track moving objects.

1#
IMG_2870.jpg


2#
IMG_2945.jpg


3#
IMG_2656.jpg
 
Les McLean said:
The 135mm F2 also doubles up very well taking relatively near action shots.

Some from this morning while walking the dogs by the river.

All with Canon 7D, 135mm F2+1.4TC, giving a respectable 189mm f2.8 lens, which is still lightning fast to focus, and can effectively track moving objects.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to trying shots like that myself.

I have 1.4x and 2x teleconverters and did a quick test.
As expected, the 1.4x is superb.
Also, the 2x works very well; I get significantly better IQ than using the same 2xTC on my 70-200 f4 IS L.

I also tried stacking both TCs, but that was much more mixed.
The meta data thought I still had just the 2xTC, hence wrong aperture and focal length was recorded.
Which may explain why auto focus hunted and when it finally locked on was less than accurate.
However, focusing with live view gave quite acceptable results apart from some visible CA when pixel peeping.
These quick tests were hand held; I'm planning to do some proper testing to see if the IQ of the combination is worth using in anger.
 
Les McLean said:
The 135mm F2 also doubles up very well taking relatively near action shots.

Some from this morning while walking the dogs by the river.

All with Canon 7D, 135mm F2+1.4TC, giving a respectable 189mm f2.8 lens, which is still lightning fast to focus, and can effectively track moving objects.

1#
IMG_2870.jpg


2#
IMG_2945.jpg


3#
IMG_2656.jpg
Click to expand...

Shot no 2 really well caught :)
 
My next lens is going to be the Carl Zeiss Sonnar T 135mm 1.8 hopefully at some point.Should go nicely with my Siggy 85mm....then I just need a nice 35mm and I'm happy with my setup.:)
 
Les McLean said:
Yes I know, but it usually means compromising the skin tones, far too much smoothing for my taste, consequently they end up looking like waxworks dolls. No , if this image was a commercial image rather than just for fun, I'd do the job properly and spend a bit of time tidying this area up.

But I do see where you are coming from :)
Click to expand...

Have you tried Portraiture by imagenomic?
Does a great job of removing blemishes but keeping the skin texture and tones intact
 
Ginsters said:
Have you tried Portraiture by imagenomic?
Does a great job of removing blemishes but keeping the skin texture and tones intact
Click to expand...

Apart from being an eye-watering $199, I downloaded a 15 day trial version, but it's not for me, I can see it appealing to some togs, I tried using the default (normal) preset, which states it only has a light touch, skin smoothing is 'automatic' compared to more aggressive presets (which I ran a mile from)

This is the result

Untitled-1.jpg


I also tried the software to remove , with limited success, the skin flaking mentioned previously

Untitled-2.jpg


To be fair, it was only a 20 minute play, using their 'presets' instead of fine tuning.

If I was a glamour photographer (which I'm not), I could see some possible benefits, but call me old fashioned, I much prefer a more natural look to skin tones.
 
I tried the software on an image of one of the slightly younger 'gals', and using just minimal adjustments, the result is a lot more sympathetic (IMO)

Untitled-3.jpg
 
Les McLean, the Pigeon is a stunning shot, I like the flower too. Great work.
 
jpw said:
Great shot but no way was that taken with a 135 :lol:
Click to expand...

KIPAX said:
true...nifty fifty is my guess :)

aaaargh

ADDYONBIT
... 50mm f1.4 :)
Click to expand...

Whoops!!!!!!
50mm f1.4 :bonk:

The set it was picked from only used the 135mm f2 and 50mm f1.4 and without much of a background it can be quite hard to tell which is which.
I'm normally more thorough that this! :bang:
I've removed it from the set.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top