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
OP Risto456 Junior Member • Posts: 41
Re: Soft??
1

Scott Larson wrote:

Kjeld Olesen wrote:

Scott Larson wrote:

Joe Mckinney wrote:

Why not try the 100/2 USM? I love it.

It's soft at f2, but that might not be a problem for portraits.

Soft is a relative term, but according to The Digital Picture the 100/2.0 is less soft at f/2.0 than the 135/2.0 L except in the center

If the 100mm is sharper anywhere wide open then I sure didn't notice it. When I got a 1D, I replaced my 100mm f2 with the 135mm f2. Here are some ancient crops from those two lenses.

Scott,
good examples, very useful for such comparison - thanks.

...although I'll refrain from commenting on the subject - let's call it lens variation

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