Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8 - FM Forums

Home · Forums · My Profile · PM · Buddy list · Search · FAQ · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting · Avatar · Software

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs Pages: 1 [2]

Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8 (archived topic)

Roy Pertchik
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Dec 05, 2004
Total Posts: 3105
Country: United States

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

mh2000 wrote:
... but only *just*.... .

My conclusion, too, so I never used it and eventually let it go. :-)

Nov 04, 2007 at 12:36 AM

WebDog
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 20, 2003
Total Posts: 755
Country: Sweden

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

This is what I did a couple of years ago..
http://www.webdog.se/tmp/lenstest/

I still keep the 135... it has something that the others lacks... sligthly better sharpness and could it be micro-contrast? Pictures come out with a bit more "3D"-look. It is simply my BEST lens.

And then there is the extra stop... I ended up using my 135+1D2+ISO3200 at the World Agility Championships this year and met a fellow with a 70-200/2,8IS and 1D3+ISO6400 Even though my rig was a bit less flexible I think the result was at least on par on what he acheived.

/Lasse

Nov 04, 2007 at 01:01 AM

monochrome
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 24, 2007
Total Posts: 1274
Country: United States

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

Nowhere Man wrote:
someone needs to start a website that purely shows shots from every lens available.

Does this help with your statement?

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/

Nov 04, 2007 at 01:36 AM

mh2000
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4727
Country: N/A

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

Yeah, I think the 135L is the *special lens in the pack as well, but interesting differences between the 70-200/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 IS... subtle difference, but it looks like I prefer the bokeh from the non-IS version there. Good tests!

>>This is what I did a couple of years ago..
http://www.webdog.se/tmp/lenstest/

I still keep the 135... i

Nov 04, 2007 at 03:13 AM

RGS65
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2005
Total Posts: 3834
Country: United States

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

Respectfully, this comparison doesn't make much sense to me. Who is gonna lock the zoom at 135mm? You are ignoring the advantage of the zoom at 200mm vs the 135 - isn't that the comparison you should be making?

Even with that said - this comes down to convenience of the zoom vs. a legendary lens quality. Take your pick.

Nov 04, 2007 at 04:07 AM

mh2000
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4727
Country: N/A

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

No, if you want to compare bokeh, you do it at the same settings, if you want to see the differences in DOF you shoot at different FL's etc... you can think of endless comparisons when you are choosing a lens of course. Why stop there? Compare the 135 + TC to equal focal lengths and aperture as well... etc. etc.

>>Respectfully, this comparison doesn't make much sense to me. Who is gonna lock the zoom at 135mm? You are ignoring the advantage of the zoom at 200mm vs the 135 - isn't that the comparison you should be making?

Nov 04, 2007 at 05:28 AM

Jimmy Ho
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Total Posts: 222
Country: N/A

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

Love my 70-200 f/2.8L IS. I can put a 500D on it and get a super macro lens complete with IS. No need for a tripod.

Nov 04, 2007 at 06:53 AM

ISO1600
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 06, 2005
Total Posts: 1936
Country: Japan

Re: Bokeh: 70-200 f2.8 vs 135L @ f2.8

Daan B wrote:
Too bad you have to choose between the 135L and 70-200L... Both different lenses with different usage - best to have them both... Of course, the whole point of the 135L is that it is one stop faster.

I don't think the point of the 135L (when compared to a 70-200) is the one stop- i think that the size and cost are a more important comparison.

If you're comparing it to the non-IS 70-200, then it's close.... one is a zoom but is bigger and a TINY bit more expensive..
compared to the IS version, the 70-200 is FAR more flexible of a lens, but at around twice the price.... and a bit heavier.

In that focal length/aperture combination, IS offers more of an advantage than one stop does, if you like to hand-hold at all.

Nov 04, 2007 at 07:31 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs Pages: 1 [2]