Canon 135 f2.0

EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
edited January 10, 2011 in Cameras
Hey Zggy, Or anyone
Here is a ? for you. The 135 which i use for street photos, I find the depth of DOF abit narrow, Is there a lens that i can use other then the 135 f2 for street photo, which allows me a nice focal length say 75-100 and can bring me to the subject,focally without the subject seeing me, i know there is the canon 50mm you talking about big bucks here.
E.J.W

Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu

Comments

  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited December 31, 2010
    The Canon 50 1.4 is less then $400.

    There also a Sigma 50-150 but good luck finding one - I've been trying to track down a used one for a while now without success.

    Any longer focal length lens is going to have a shallow depth of field at wide apertures. Why not just stop down a bit?
    facebook | photo site |
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited December 31, 2010
    I'm not sure I get your question... the any lens is going to have a narrow DOF at f2. You don't want to stop down? Stopping down improves sharpness and overall image quality.

    The 50 1.4 is not expensive ($300-400), but the 50 1.2 is over $1K.
  • EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
    edited December 31, 2010
    THanks Diva and TheCanonguy,

    I need something that i can get alot closer without disturbing the sugject(ppl)the 135's focal length is abit to long .(nice lens) I might have to go with the 50mm then..thanks for all the help

    Eddy
    E.J.W

    Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
  • studio1972studio1972 Registered Users Posts: 249 Major grins
    edited December 31, 2010
    Maybe the 85 1.8 or 100 2.0?
    Sarah McDonnell Wedding Photography - Wirral, Liverpool, Cheshire & Manchester
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited December 31, 2010
    Do you mean "field of vision" ie how much of a scene the lens "sees" according to its focal length, or actual depth of field ie the area of sharp focus relative to the aperture setting?

    If the former, then the 50mm is indeed wider and will take in more of the scene. It's widest aperture, however, also gives it a very shallow depth of field - if you want a lot of front-to-back sharpness you will still need to stop down somewhat.
    facebook | photo site |
  • mrcoonsmrcoons Registered Users Posts: 653 Major grins
    edited January 1, 2011
    When my 135 is too long I go to the 85mm f/1.8 and then the 50mm f/1.4 if the 85 is too long. My 3 favorite primes!
    Mark
    Smugmug site
    Blog Portfolio
    Facebook
  • EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
    edited January 6, 2011
    Thanks Studio1972,Diva and Mrcoons, its a tossup between 100 or the 85mm going forward thinking of getting both, Portrait and Macro cant beat that
    E.J.W

    Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
  • aekurthaekurth Registered Users Posts: 4 Beginner grinner
    edited January 8, 2011
    Can you post a photo and tell us what you wanted the lens to do differently? When you say that you want to get closer, do you mean that you want the subject to fill more of the frame or that you want to be closer to the subject when you take the photo?
  • EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2011
    I want to be closer to the subject without the subject knowing i have a lens pointed at him.
    E.J.W

    Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited January 8, 2011
    Then you need a longer focal length, so you can be farther away from them in real life, but the picture is closer to them. Right?
  • EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
    edited January 9, 2011
    Ok Hers goes,
    Got these lenses

    Canon 200mm 2.8 ( very good glass)
    135 f2
    Canon 50mm 1.4 new addition

    between the 2 lenses which are the 200 and 135 (long intrusive)
    and the 50mm which is good for protraits, i feel i am missing something between the 50mm to the 135 i know there is a lens out there, the size is going to dictate excatly what i want..I did a post of some pics on street photgraphy yesterday under the heading Elvis is alive..
    Eddy
    E.J.W

    Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
  • chrisjohnsonchrisjohnson Registered Users Posts: 772 Major grins
    edited January 9, 2011
    You might want to consider a 100mm Macro. It works great for general purpose and of course does Macro.

    You have some fantastic kit already but I can imagine the DOF on the 135 is limiting sometimes - it is designed for creamy bokey imo. One reason I don't own one despite being very tempted. On the other hand I suppose the DOF increases when you use higher f-stops - it does for me.

    In my FF days I loved the 85mm for portraits and would sooner have gone up a tad to 100 than down to 50.

    You are really into primes it seems, but a zoom is great for street work and a 70-200 might give you a lot of pleasure although it is conspicuous.
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited January 9, 2011
    Regarding the 50 and 135, the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are good choices.

    It's not really clear what you're trying to achieve... in real life, do you want to be closer to the subject, or farther away? In your photos, I think you want to be closer (i.e. more zoomed in) to the subject. That means using a 200mm and backing up.

    How are the 200mm and 135mm long and intrusive? They zoom in too much on the subject?
  • mikelmikel Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
    edited January 9, 2011
    135 f/2.0
    I loved the 135 f/2.0 for it yummy Bokeh but the 85mm may be just what you are looking for.

    ...mikel


    aka new guy
  • EddyEddy Registered Users Posts: 320 Major grins
    edited January 10, 2011
    ThatCanonGuy wrote: »
    Regarding the 50 and 135, the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are good choices.

    It's not really clear what you're trying to achieve... in real life, do you want to be closer to the subject, or farther away? In your photos, I think you want to be closer (i.e. more zoomed in) to the subject. That means using a 200mm and backing up.

    How are the 200mm and 135mm long and intrusive? They zoom in too much on the subject?


    More zoomed in wiht out being close (thats the Plus side) being back from looking at my pics i seem to squeeze every little detail i can from the lens which quite a bit at a distance having said that..the 85 or 100 seems to be the lens that would work...never thougth of the 85 version 2 because of the price wooow.
    E.J.W

    Great understanding is broad and unhurried, Little understanding is cramped and busy" ..... Chuang Tsu
Sign In or Register to comment.