CWaterston wrote:
MasterWayne wrote:
Anyhow, my suggestion would be to have a look at the EF 135 f2. From my experience the bokeh is just beautiful. My personal wow/price champion.
Another advantage (and I really mean it) is that it is not razor sharp wide open, but instead gives a naturally beautiful rendering perfect for portraits.
I second this. I also have the 85 and 50, but you can't beat the 135 when it comes to pleasing the people you're photographing.
People (not photographers) generally don't give a rat's behind for sharpness. In fact, they typically loathe it. They don't want to see all their pores and blemishes. So let's remove sharpness from the discussion of portrait lenses.
Another excellent lens that gives great environmental portraits is the EF 35 f/1.4L II. But honestly the RF 1.8 is also great, more versatile, and much cheaper.
Wow. What an excellent point, powerfully made. I suspect you are right. But it's hard to remove sharpness from the discussion. Sharpness of the subject and creaminess of the background makes us happy (or else jealous if it's someone else's photo), and we have be happy.
But your point has to be made, and often. One should not pick a lens strictly for the sharpness. One should not pay $2500 for a lens that is even sharper than an already sharp $1500 lens. Well, one could, but one should not feel pressured to.
The EF 135mm F2 feels... aged. I did not look at the release year, but it has the look of an older Canon L lens. Some of those get bad press, and I was talked out of getting one, which was more than reasonably priced.
But I am considering it, I really am.