Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 end

Archive 2017 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

DTFagus
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Hey Folks,

I need some insights and opinions from you more experienced photographers.

Quick introduction about me/my situation:
No working/paid professional. But I think about doing paid work in the future - therefor anything I buy should also add value to a professional kit. I currently shoot family lifestyle (kids, newborn) and a few events. My current gear:

a7rii
Sony 50 1.4 (LOVE IT! my main lens)
Sony 24 70 gm (nice for family stuff, but pictures dont have the WOW effect of the 50 1.4)

I plan to add a 16-35 f4 for landscape/holiday stuff. I shoot so few landscapes that I do not think the gm version would be necessary.

But I want a little more reach and I am a total sucker for blurred backgrounds and good bokeh. I want the wow effect I had with my 50 1.4.

I rented the 70 200gm - Too heavy and obtrusive.
I rented the 85 1.4 - Ditched it after 15 minutes because of the super slow AF.

So I currently plan to add the 135 Batis.
BUT: It is only 2.8 ... I would love the sigma. But if I am not happy with the 85 gm AF I don't think I would be with the adapted sigma.

I see currently two options:
1) Get the Batis 135. And just leave a hole between 70 and 135. For 135 2.8 is shallow enough. With the "slow" AF of the a7rii I think I would be able to have more keepers with 2.8 than with 1.8 at 135mm for moving subjects.
2) Get the FE 85 1.8 now and crop (if necessary) to 135. Aside from the compression the result should be similar, right? plus it is better for low light. Than get the 135 gm once it is released and I still feel I need more reach/blur.

Which road would you go?

Thank you very much in advance

Daniel

Nov 06, 2017 at 04:27 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Honestly I love my Batis 135 and at 2.8 it’s sharp as a tack. It focuses very fast and tracks well. You could squeeze in the Sony 85 1.8 at 600 dollars it’s a great little lens and I have a golden copy of it. Not sure you would need the 16-35 since you have the GM 24-70 which is great from 24-50 the16-35 may not beat that from 24-35. Maybe grab a Batis 18 or Loxia 21 instead

Nov 06, 2017 at 04:54 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Btw forget the speed of the Batis 135 it really is fast enough. Worst case 1 extra stop in the ISO if you need it. It’s not a big deal as it’s made out to be and you don’t have to stop this lens down at all except for DOF

Nov 06, 2017 at 04:56 AM

DTFagus
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Thanks for the quick response! Was hoping to get some insights from you as I came across your posts often during research of the Batis.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:01 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

The Batis 135 is really nice lens. It’s really as big as a FE 35 1.4 so you can hike with it. The Sigma 135 1.8 is also great and I love it too but it’s not a small lens either plus MC 11chasing kids could be a challenge. I had trouble with it and my A9 so I had to sell it. Bought the Batis and have not looked back. Now the Sigma could be fixed now on the A9 but given the length here the native lens should win the day in the Batis. I think you can get them now st a reduced rate from the original price of 2 grand. Got to look around on that. I heard 1600 from some members. It and the CV 65 apo are my sharpest tools in the shed.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:11 AM

DTFagus
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

I am a bit concerned with the focal gap. I am expecting my second child in the next days. So money is a bit tighter (or at least in discussions with my wife...). I think I can justify only one new lens without getting kicked out of the house in the next 12 months

135: Would add something with far more reach to my kit (can be cropped to about 200mm). So I think I would not hesitate to switch lens with the 2470gm since the focal length is so different. But it leaves a gap from 70 to 135 (or 105 to 135 with cropping).

85: cheaper, ligther, brighter aperture. More versatile indoors. But I would probably be too lazy to switch from 2470 just for 15mm extra reach. And with the 50 1.4 I could just move a few steps forwards or crop.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:19 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

If it’s only one than I’d go 50 to 135. Filling in that gap is really not that hard. If your shooting the 42mpx sensor putting that 50 in crop mode at 18mpx is really no loss of quality. 18 mpx is still damn good for people work. The Batis 85 is good too buts double the price of the Sony and they are pretty equal so you save there and get that later. Take the bigger hit now since your getting the blessing for it. Trust me been married 28 years you take the hall pass when you can get it. lol 😂

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:33 AM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

DTFagus wrote:
I am a bit concerned with the focal gap. I am expecting my second child in the next days. So money is a bit tighter (or at least in discussions with my wife...). I think I can justify only one new lens without getting kicked out of the house in the next 12 months

135: Would add something with far more reach to my kit (can be cropped to about 200mm). So I think I would not hesitate to switch lens with the 2470gm since the focal length is so different. But it leaves a gap from 70 to...Show more →

If you're concerned with the focal range gap, why not consider something in between... the 100 STF is an incredible lens with unique properties. The ONLY reason I wouldn't consider it is if you plan to shoot indoors with it somewhat often. IMO, it's best as shot outdoors (or in studio with plenty of light) because of the t-stop max at f/5.6. In terms of bokeh and blur, there's nothing prettier. Here are a few full-size images (so feel free to pixel peep) from a recent wedding I shot (2nd shooter) where I was using the 100 STF wide open. There's a close up shot (to show you can obliterate the background), a medium range shot (to show that the background can be semi-recognizable), and a pulled back shot to show where the 100 STF really excels and that's capturing a scene but smoothing out the background like no other lens can.
Also, the 100 STF has a close up mode which will allow for 1:4 reproduction which isn't macro, but it's enough to fit (roughly) a 4"x6" card in the frame which for most people is plenty close enough.

DSC01548 by Jonathan Brady, on Flickr

DSC01562 by Jonathan Brady, on Flickr

DSC01612 by Jonathan Brady, on Flickr

The detail this lens is capable of is downright SCARY

That said, I also have the Batis 85 and Batis 135 and love them both. The 85 gets the most use of any of my telephoto lenses (the 35/1.4 gets the most overall) just because it's such a convenient focal length. But if I had the 24-70 GM, I doubt I'd buy the Batis 85 except for the size/weight savings vs the zoom.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:58 AM

roofdweller49
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

People who complain about the 2.8 being too slow are complaining that the amp doesn't go to 11... 135 2.8 is plenty shallow in the dof department, and playing with one at photo plus, it put out beautiful skin

Nov 06, 2017 at 03:15 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Personally before shelling out nearly $2,000 for the 135, I'd get the Sony 85 1.8 and give it a spin to see if it meets your needs. It's much cheaper than the 135 and if it falls short of what you want, just sell it for a $100 loss and get the Batis...or wait for the rumored Sony 135 1.8.

Nov 06, 2017 at 03:29 PM

joelRichards
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

I see you're in Germany, but for those in the US, Zeiss told me at Photo plus that they'll be discounting (don't know how much) the 135mm for Black Friday.

As a side note, happened to stop by their booth at Photo Plus during a lull and got to talk with the head of the E-mount division for about ten minutes. Great guy, very approachable and very interested in user feedback. He said they had a 135mm 2.8 AND 2.0 on the drawing board but he green-lit the 2.8 design because the 2.0 was too big and would require a different filter size. Personally, I put in a plug for a 100mm f/2.0. That would be my ideal short/mid telephoto!

Nov 06, 2017 at 03:57 PM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

It's a crowded field, JR, centered around 85-100mm. Ex-Canon users port their 85-100 lenses over on adapters. Sony has equivalent models - we have no fewer than *four native mount 85mm lenses*. Compare that with C/N, their field looks like a desert of golden oldies (plus a new CA-prone 85/1.4 from Canon). And Zeiss have both 85 and 135 in AF lenses, plus a fine 85/2.4, and the old Classic line (incl 100/2) on a cheap adapter. Pretty good coverage.

The hole for them is hiding in plain sight. It's the missing huge middle of the FL sales normal distribution bell curve - they need to make 35-50mm modern lenses of high performance, and they really need both f1.4 and f2 at both FLs. These are stock in trade for any lens range worthy of the name, and all can be easily kept inside Zeiss's own weight/size envelope - around/under 600 grams, the f2 designs much less.

BTW, one reason they made the f2.8 and f2.4 short telephotos is they knew they could get them out the door (at the required quality) more quickly than the more difficult work needed for faster aberration-stricken lenses, and yes, to escape the giant sizes of the f2 lenses at 135mm. We'll see what is next, maybe early 2018.

Nov 06, 2017 at 04:15 PM

davewolfs
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

The 135 seems like a pretty specialized FL. You can get nice compression with the 85 and also use it indoors. If you are shooting family you’re not going to have an issue having to get closer.

I’d start with an 85. The FE is good value over the Batis 85 if you don’t need total perfection.

The 70-200 will be a lot more versatile but also a lot heavier.

Nov 06, 2017 at 04:27 PM

Charlie N
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

I've used the Canon 50L and 135L for years on the canon system, however these days, it's quite big and heavy.

50 + 85 is too close IMO, even though I own the FE 85, I typically wont use it if 50 is my main lens. Even 35/85 spacing little on the close side.

the Batis shots do look incredible, but I dont know about the f2.8 mental barrier. Not sure I could get over that.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:11 PM

pasblues
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly I love my Batis 135 and at 2.8 it’s sharp as a tack. It focuses very fast and tracks well. You could squeeze in the Sony 85 1.8 at 600 dollars it’s a great little lens and I have a golden copy of it. Not sure you would need the 16-35 since you have the GM 24-70 which is great from 24-50 the16-35 may not beat that from 24-35. Maybe grab a Batis 18 or Loxia 21 instead

I want to add something to GM's excellent advice. You know, there's a trend right now of shooting super wide open with greater-than-f2.8 wide aperture lenses. In a practical sense, shooting super wide like that really doesn't make your pictures stand out - it's the content of the subject. Practically speaking, a better general portrait aperture maximum is f2.8 - because super blurry backgrounds don't ONLY depend on max aperture. The distance the subject is from the background certainly plays a role.

Also, it's, frankly, sometimes just weird and eerie to see a background so totally blurred out that you can't distinguish what it is at all. Now, before everyone gets bent outta shape and starts throwing up examples of stellar images where super wide apertures look amazing, let's all agree that there are times when it really is appropriate and artful and amazing. But when I'm out there shooting and I find myself doing speedy calculations in my head about how much DOF I have on a subject, yada yada, I will bump the aperture up to f2, f3.6, etc. Why? Because the shot CALLS FOR IT.

So, there's nothing magic about less than f2.8 aperture. That isn't going to make your images stand apart all in and of itself. And it's sure as heck not a reason to pick a f1.8 lens over a f2.8 max aperture lens if it's that cotton-picking Batis GM is talking about. Wish I could afford it myself. You are probably going to be getting more keepers at f2.8 anyway...again, bearing in mind the things I've said above.

I recently saw a portrait by a great portrait guy of a subject out in a lovely field of grass where i could tell the max aperture used was less than f2.8. There were woods far behind the subject - but the detail was blurred so much that it looked like a solid mass of just orange. It made me think...A LOT. We all do a lot of environmental people stuff and - part of doing that is having other elements that give the images context (for environmental work). Getting rid of all that context...I mean, is that really desirable? Is really tight selective focus the only way to make a "great" portrait?

One fella whose portraiture I LOVE, shoots regularly at f4 and f5.6. His portraits are fantastic because his subjects have expressions, great light, depth. Looking at his work makes me think beyond being a one-trick pony at f1.8.

David Anthony Williams - affordable workshops to up your game.

Nov 06, 2017 at 05:52 PM

notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

I would maybe get the FE 85 1.8 and a Canon EF 135 f2 L and adapter to tide you over. If the 135 works out what you do want, then later get the Batis.

I loved the Canon 135 L but it was a bit long for me at the venues I started going to more and more and I also needed to sell a lens for some extra cash at the time.

I also had (have) a Sigma 150 2.8 APO macro in EF mount and a few 85s including a old FD 85 1.2 L. I then got the EF 100 f2 as a replacement for the EF 135 f2 L but have since got the FE 85 1.8.

The FE 85 has rendered the 100 f2 (as much as I love it) to mainly being used on my M43 camera.

I now use the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8, FE 85 1.8 as my main lenses with the 100 f2 and 150 2.8 when longer is needed (and the 100 and 150 on my M43).

I have also started taking my ancient MF Tamron 300 2.8 for a longer portrait lens if I have the room but I could easily just live with the 55/85 Sony lenses on my A7s (or any FF E mount) when not using a wider angle lens.

Nov 06, 2017 at 06:04 PM

LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

joelRichards wrote:
I see you're in Germany, but for those in the US, Zeiss told me at Photo plus that they'll be discounting (don't know how much) the 135mm for Black Friday.

As a side note, happened to stop by their booth at Photo Plus during a lull and got to talk with the head of the E-mount division for about ten minutes. Great guy, very approachable and very interested in user feedback. He said they had a 135mm 2.8 AND 2.0 on the drawing board but he green-lit the 2.8 design because the 2.0 was too big and would require a different...Show more →

Thanks Joel ! Batis 100/2 would be great addition to the Batis series.

Nov 06, 2017 at 06:09 PM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

pasblues wrote:
I want to add something to GM's excellent advice. You know, there's a trend right now of shooting super wide open with greater-than-f2.8 wide aperture lenses. In a practical sense, shooting super wide like that really doesn't make your pictures stand out - it's the content of the subject. Practically speaking, a better general portrait aperture maximum is f2.8 - because super blurry backgrounds don't ONLY depend on max aperture. The distance the subject is from the background certainly plays a role.

Also, it's, frankly, sometimes just weird and eerie to see a background so totally blurred out that you...Show more →

I agree here , blowing out a really nice background sometimes you wonder what the point was going into that environment in the first place. It’s nice to see some detail so you don’t leave the viewer guessing. Big trick here is camera to subject, subject to background distances and controlling that. Let’s face it given subject even at F8 you can wipe out a background if you have a long lens like a 135 the subject is close to camera and background far enough away. These distances really determine what apertures you use can create. From a Pros seat you have to be very careful shooting wide open, you miss it there is no check at the end of the day. It’s a Rae day on a paying shoot I’m going to risk this and stop down a stop down a stop or two to cover my ass. This whole debate with a 1.8/2.8 135mm lens is really trivial in a away. It’s where you can cheat the most given the long focal length. A 50 or wider this becomes more of a issue because of the DOF involved that goes with wider lenses. Not to mention the Sigma 135 1.8 is a truck to deal with. Lovely lens and I do like it a lot but the Batis 135 kind of dwarfs it. I’m really in both camps with both of these lenses they both are awesome. I just happen to prefer the Batis

Nov 06, 2017 at 06:41 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Nov 06, 2017 at 06:48 PM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Batis 135 2.8 vs 85 1.8 for family lifestyle photography

Context of a scene is the major reason I'm enjoying the 100 STF

Nov 06, 2017 at 07:28 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.