Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 14, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 19

Lens advice on Canon

:icontammyphotography:
TammyPhotography Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Hi! :wave:
I am a starting photographer and I want to become a bit more serious with my hobby. I am saving money for a new lens, seeing I only have a standard lens and my nifty fifty Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, I thought it be time to expand my lens collection.
I have a Canon EOS 60D, which I got as birthday gift from my lovely boyfriend.
Now I'm looking for a good all-around lens, seeing I like taking pictures of everything and don't really have a preference (although currently I take a lot of animal photo's).
I heard and seen a lot of good stuff about the Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L USM.
It has the sharpness and quickness I want when photographing. Plus I could actually save up for this, seeing it is affordable.

Does anybody have any experience with this lens? And would like to share their experience.
Or do you know another great lens that you would recommend. Please leave a comment if you do. Thanks. :aww:
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconmylifeinfocus:
MyLifeInFocus Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Here's the first thing I would say against the 135, although I'm sure it's a heckuva lens the problem with all-around/general purpose may be the lack of zoom, it's going to rely on you to be the right area to frame the shot, so although you can zoom with your feet, you may miss a good moment being too close or far away. A good zoom in the same range would be the 24-105 F/4L, I've heard the 24-70 is amazing but it's more than twice expensive. Hope this helps, best of luck with your decision!
Reply
:iconcoterabeth:
Coterabeth Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Can't go wrong with the 50mm f/1.4 USM. ;)
Reply
:iconajuk:
ajuk Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2012
You don't also have the kit zoom?
Reply
:iconstromstoerung:
stromstoerung Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
I use the 15-85 IS USM as all-around lens on my 60D and it rocks ;) Bear in mind that the 60D is a crop cam. So a 24-105 would be 38-168 in fact!
Reply
:iconjordan-roberts:
Jordan-Roberts Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2012  Professional Photographer
Ya I would look at the 24-105mm for an all-around lens. Anything with a wide zoom range will be all around. For a cheaper variant (aka more affordable) try looking at the 28-13mm, similar zoom range and more affordable. Of course the L lens is nice but it's not required because the 60D is a cropped sensor. Some food for thought and a cheaper alternative.
Reply
:iconskankinmike:
SkankinMike Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2012
28-135 is very soft around the edges though.
Reply
:iconjordan-roberts:
Jordan-Roberts Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2012  Professional Photographer
It doesnt matter what it is, if money is an issue you have to take what you can get unfortunately.
Reply
:iconskankinmike:
SkankinMike Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2012
true, but the 28-135 is about half the price of the 24-105 and would be worth saving up for twice as long! ;)
Reply
:iconjordan-roberts:
Jordan-Roberts Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2012  Professional Photographer
Edit: It's the 28-135*mm IS USM
Reply
:icondelahkel:
Delahkel Featured By Owner Nov 15, 2012  Professional Photographer
For all around, I'd get the 24-105 IS f/4L. the 135 f/2L is a phenomenal lens, but it's mostly for portraiture. Not really an all around lens.

For animal photos though, you might want to think of investing in one of the 70-200s Canon offers, or maybe get a Sigma one.
Reply
:icontammyphotography:
TammyPhotography Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
:iconthankyoububble: for the advice. Someone else suggested a Sigma variation on the Canon as well. I heard that Sigma is a bit more grainy than canon lenses.
Reply
:icondelahkel:
Delahkel Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2012  Professional Photographer
Grain is more caused by the sensor rather than the lens. It IS a bit softer wide open, but still very usable, and by stopping 2/3s of a stop it catches up to the Canon. If you plan on shooting wide open at 2.8, and print big, I'd save up and get the Canon (or wait and see how the new Tamron is going to fare up when it's released in December), otherwise, get the Sigma.
Reply
:iconmichaelrowlandson:
MichaelRowlandson Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012  Professional Photographer
the canon 135mm L is amazing!
70-200 f4 is is a nice lens also
If you have the money 70-200 is ii is the way to go.
You can also try a 24mm lens
Reply
:icontammyphotography:
TammyPhotography Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
:iconthankyoububble: for your advice. I'll look into those lenses. :)
Reply
:iconskankinmike:
SkankinMike Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012
on your 60D, I'd be +1 for the 24-105, or the 17-55 F2.8IS
Reply
:icontammyphotography:
TammyPhotography Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
:iconthankyoububble:
You are the second one who suggested the 24-105 lens. I'll be looking into them. Thanks for your help. :)
Reply
:iconrcooper102:
rcooper102 Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012
A 135mm F2.0 is not an "all around" lens, it is a very specialized portrait lens used for getting tight shots with super shallow depth of field. An example of a good quality "all around" lens in a similar price range would be the 24-105mm F4 (about $1100) or the 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 (about $600)
Reply
:icontammyphotography:
TammyPhotography Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
:iconthankyoububble: That is very helpful... I need a little help as a noob. :XD:
I saw the 135mm on Digital RevTV and I loved the sharpness and depth of field - [link]
But seeing you said it's not an all-round lens I'll go look into the other two you suggested. Thanks again. :)
Reply
:iconrcooper102:
rcooper102 Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2012
Oh for sure, it is an amazing lens, no question about it. It just has very little versatility. It is a weird focal length that is too long for more scenic shots but too short for sports or wildlife. It is perfect for head-shots and portraiture though. Really if you truly want something that is versatile enough for shooting wildlife effectively you might have to look into a 70-200mm lens ($1350 for F4 and $2100 for F2.8)
Reply
Add a Comment: