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
J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 20,544
Re: Do I really need an 135mm f/2L for portraits?

C-A-X wrote:

Sure, I only wanted to state that the results (albeit lateral CA maybe) of cropping 85 f/1.4 to (nearly) 135 f/2 will look indistinguishable in > 99% of the cases

The 135L has unique background blur. Whether the 85 could have similar blur when cropped is highly questionable. My impressions of the 85/1.4 is that it has kinda Gaussian blur, very bad IMO.

and you will also have no resolution advantage when using the 135 f/2 (since limited by optics rather than sensor).

This is wrong. Here, the 135/2 resolves more even when you have higher pixel density with the 85 (compared to cropping).

So on a budget I would pick the 85 f/1.4, as it is more versatile. Of course I know that every lens will produce its unique "look" (which is a result, also of its flaws, choice of diaphragm blades etc.), but how many people really can tell the difference?

Well, most people cannot hear the difference between my stereo/HT system and a boombox.

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