Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm shooting portraits at 1/60s and static objects at 1/30s with sharp results. I can see in the viewfinder that the lens is well stabilized when IBIS is on. Previously I was getting similar results with the Batis 135/2.8 APO which is stabilized.
Adding OSS would yield a different optical design, perhaps compromising IQ slightly and increasing size/weight.
Got you. Image stabilization is something that has confused me a bit as it has evolved over the years. Where in years past, I would never have been concerned with IS for shorter lenses, voila, short zooms and shorter lenses appeared with IS. Example: 24-105 zoom.
I just got used to shooting with a very steady stance, arms tucked in, you know the drill. I brought it up because it was brought up elsewhere in Internet land.
I'd much rather have the IQ, though, than IS - especially when IBIS and technique will likely take care of what I need it to do.
This if the very first lens I've ever purchased brand spanking new.
I'm really liking what I'm seeing for the first few snaps. Need to compare it to my Canon 200/1.8L.
I would love to see some examples of how the lens renders in low light. I'm not so much a portrait shooter, but would love to have a lens with longer reach for shooting in dimly lit spaces and outdoors at night.
This is looking really, really good - I hope I'm not just saying that because mine is about to arrive at any time. Thank you for sharing your shots everyone - good variety in here.
This lens is saving my ass on this job. Stage is too dark and it’s really tough. Bottom line if it was not as good as it is at 1.8 I would be hosed and that’s at iso 1600 which for me bugs me a little.
I complained to my client and they are going to refocus and line up better. CEO drops in tomorrow so they need to fix it. Sure they focused on Podium here is the problem not one person was at it. So production company gives everyone a lapel mic. Which is fine but put light on the stage now there walking all over the place.
Luckily I’m good at this stuff it’s a instant fail for less experience
Did you notice the internal slight movement coming from inside your lens when it's off that goes away when the lens is mounted and engaged? (sometimes referred to as "clunk") I have that on my Fuji 50-140 as well. Surprised to see it also happening in the 135GM.
pasblues wrote:
Did you notice the internal slight movement coming from inside your lens when it's off that goes away when the lens is mounted and engaged? (sometimes referred to as "clunk") I have that on my Fuji 50-140 as well. Surprised to see it also happening in the 135GM.
No not yet but I’m checking it in morning. I’ll be shooting it mostly all day
Are all these shot in auto mode? So bright outside. Set the ISO to 100 and leave it. Hell. Could go lower in some of those you nearly need an ND filter. 1.8 at 1/8000 I think I saw with an ISO at 320.
So just this one image i have a 1000 more but look at the Exif and its every reason WHY i needed a 135 1.8 lens that is sharp at 1.8
I don't want to shoot slower, trust me there is blur at 1/200 and below and I'm on a monopod , i dont want to press the ISO higher
