DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Do I really need an 135mm f/2L for portraits?

Started Feb 24, 2020 | Questions thread
Dave
Dave Veteran Member • Posts: 6,231
Re: Do I really need an 135mm f/2L for portraits?

Risto456 wrote:

Dave, I see that you also use 100mm 2.8L IS;
I thought that in my case it might be too close to 135mm.

In your experience, would you say the 135mm complements the 100mm more (being brighter or for some other reason)?

I do think the two lenses complement each other.  While the 100 L macro is useful for portraits, I prefer the 135 f/2's bokeh (which has variously been described using words such as "creamy).  Experience has taught me which one to grab, including the two other lenses that also offer those focal lengths.  I like my 17-55 f/2.8 when shooting groups.

 Dave's gear list:Dave's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM +10 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
BAK
BAK
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow