reportages made with 35L and 135L on FF

<p>I read that 35L and 135L are a great combo on FF.</p>

<p>Could you post reportages made with only these two lenses on a FF body, preferably wide open?<br /> Press, street, travel, wedding... whathever kind of reportage as long as the pictures show cohesion. By this I mean do not post random pictures taken at different events.</p>

<p>I ask this because I'd love to see what is possible with just these two lenses in terms of story-telling.</p>

<p>Best wishes</p>

<p>I like using a 35 prime as one of my two light carry primes. The EF 35 f2 is no slouch for family stuff, light carry and quick work, but in situations in which I want the best image quality, your 35 L is tops (in the centers) and my Leica R 35 f2 delivers great corners at mid apertures, if not the centers of your L. None of these 35's is bad wide open. My second choice is the 85 f 1.8. Again, your 135 L has better bokeh, but my 85 is lighter, smaller and cheaper. The 5D2 and both lenses carry well in a Mountainsmith fanny pack (using the shoulder strap). You have the best in IQ, and, if you don't mind the weight and the cost, go with what ya got.</p>

<p>Sorry, I misread your post. You said "only these two lenses". That's why you don't have many replies; it's too narrow a concern.</p>

<p>I've used both lenses at the same event before, but wasn't ever satisfied with the 'cohesiveness' the two alone gave. I almost always went to the 85 first as opposed to straight to the 135.</p>

<p>Not to say it can't be done, it's just a bit long of a gap (IME) to combine and 'cohesify' a story. The stunning IQ from these lenses isn't a strong enough reason to limit your FL range by itself.</p>

<p>I don't really had the intention to talk about whether this is a successful combo or not.</p>

<p>Rather than discuss tech talk, I'd want to <em>view </em>reportages done with solely these two lenses on FF.</p>

<p>Focal length or IQ is not really the issue here.</p>

 

<p>For images alone look on lens specific Flickr groups. As for cohesive images shot with both at the same event/place by the same photographer wide open, I very much doubt you'll find that anywhere.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>As for cohesive images shot with both at the same event/place by the same photographer wide open, I very much doubt you'll find that anywhere.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Perhaps someone's personal website?</p>

<p>There must be people here using those two lenses.</p>

 

<p>I have those two lenses and they're excellent. For wedding work I've found the pair of 35L and 85L work better for me. They aren't as wide apart in focal length as the 35/135 pair. You best bet would be to rent them and get a feel for their abilities.</p>

<p>I'm familiar with the 135L. It has the same minimum focusing distance as the 85mm. At 3 to 6' the 135L makes poweful head shots. Because of its focal length and fast AF, I can also use it for landscape and sports, whereas 85mm is more of a dedicated portrait lens. Also, for candids 135mm is better suited than 85mm.</p>

<p>Therefore, I consider the 135L more versatile than any of the 85mm lenses. But that's just me.</p>

<p>Up close, I would use the 35L for 3/4 body shots, group shots and environmental portraits. I don't own the 35L but I do use 35mm quite often on a zoom. It's a very convenient focal length.</p>

<p>Where you need to go for this sort of thing is the appropriately named Pixel-Peeper ( http://www.pixel-peeper.com/ )</p>

<p>There are examples there, many of them, from just about any lens you could think of.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I ask this because I'd love to see what is possible with just these two lenses in terms of story-telling.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am not too sure what you are trying to achieve form this post. Story-telling is as much a function of individual style as it is of lens focal length and aperture choice. To be honest, I'm not sure that you will get much feedback in the way of images, especially being such a specialised/restricted sample pool. Flickr often is, however, a good source of such images. There are all sorts of niche groups there if you have the time and patience to sift through them.</p>

<p>Having said all that, I know a UK-based photographer who uses these lenses (among other primes). Check out this <a href="http://alakija.com/">link</a>.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=Don+McCullin&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=4942l4942l5l5507l1l1l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&biw=1633&bih=808&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=9FUFT7W3J6jRiAL4qsjJDg">Don McCullin</a></p>

<p>I have shot with the Canon 135/2 L and its an excellent portrait lens, one of the finest lenses I have ever used for Canon with excellent bokeh.</p>

<p><br />That said, I agree with Marcus, those two lenses ( 35L , 135L) are a big gap for documentary photography: press, street, travel, wedding...ect. For documentary my first choice would be the 35/1.4 L, then the 50/1.2 L or 85/1.2 L or 135/2 L lenses in that order with the three/four Canon kings. I cant imagine a better lens for documentary than the 35/1.4 L. In fact probably most of your shots including headshots could be covered in your shoot with that wide angle lens alone.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I cant imagine a better lens for documentary than the 35/1.4 L. In fact probably most of your shots including headshots could be covered in your shoot with that wide angle lens alone.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Then why would you need 50L and 85L and why do you worry about a gap?</p>

 

<p>I don't see how Don McCullin is a good reference for the use of the two lenses asked about. I thought he was a dispassionate Nikon and Mamiya shooter, with the vast majority of his famous work shot on film before either lens was made. I say dispassionate because he has never been a gear head not because of the quality of his images.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Then why would you need 50L and 85L and why do you worry about a gap?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thats my point! This is a question for<em> you</em>. As others have already mentioned to you, instead of limiting yourself to a big gap in focal length, try shooting from the wide angle end and work your way up in FL as you go? You should be able to get most the shots you want with that lens alone, a lens you mentioned you are not shooting with right now. I have seen the most amazing documentary, portraits and wedding photography shot with the Canon 35/1.4 L. In fact, one of the posters right here on this thread, Ian , has excellent examples shot with the 35/1.4 L.</p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>"I don't see how Don McCullin is a good reference for the use of the two lenses asked about. I thought he was a dispassionate Nikon and Mamiya shooter..."</em><br>

He mainly used 35mm and 135mm for his work. (And sometimes 28mm apparently.) I don't buy the whole Nikon vs Canon thing. A photo is a photo.</p>

<p><em>"I don't see how Don McCullin is a good reference for the use of the two lenses asked about. I thought he was a dispassionate Nikon and Mamiya shooter..."</em><br>

He mainly used 35mm and 135mm for his work. </p>

<p><em>"I don't buy the whole Nikon vs Canon thing"</em></p>

<p>Whilst I agree to an extent, I think as an answer to this specific thread, <em>"post reportages made with only these two lenses",</em> pointing to images not made with those two lenses, or that system, or that medium, seem a little irrelevant.</p>

<p>You could just as easily say HCB, only he used 135 format Leica rangefinders with a 35mm lens for much of his work, also totally irrelevant.</p>

<p>However for some truly masterful use of Canons fast primes wide open the best guy I know is <a href="http://jeffascough.com/">Jeff Ascough</a>, the reason I didn't point to him earlier is because he predominantly uses 1D cameras with a 1.3 crop and he uses pretty much every lens Canon makes below 200mm, he does favor the fast primes though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...instead of limiting yourself to a big gap in focal length, try shooting from the wide angle end and work your way up in FL as you go?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That's good advice, although it's an expensive approach (50L, 85L, 135L...).</p>

<p>However, I don't want to turn this topic into a debate about assembling a lens set. I only asked to view work done by others using these particular lenses ;)</p>

<p>Mc Cullin's work looks good<em>.<br /></em></p>

<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://jeffascough.com/" target="_blank">Jeff Ascough</a>, does he use film? Take <a href="http://jeffascough.com/gallery/original/wedding-022.jpg">this picture</a> for instance, had I shot it with digital, the windows would be completely blown out.</p>

<p>Save the image and watch the histogram. You'll see that nothing is blown out. Such compression of highlights can only come from film. I strongly doubt he bracketed hdr or used flash.</p>

<p>The grain and color tones are also different from what I get from a RAW file.</p>

<p><em>", does he use film?"</em></p>

<p>Not that I know of, but that image has been worked quite hard, there is no dark shoulder on the curve at all. RAW, especially on the 1 series cameras, gives huge headroom.</p>

<p>Here is a miss fire of the ground in LR, the red is blown highlights.</p><div></div>

<p>Here it is reworked to show overexposure headroom.</p><div></div>

<p>What do you mean by no dark shoulder? The shadows go completely black.</p>

<p>I was referring to the tone curve, I should, more accurately of said "toe" as "shoulder" more commonly refers to the highlight end of the tone curve.</p>

<p>There is very little tonality in the darker shades, there is a lot of tonality in the lighter ones. This is not a natural response curve from a 1 series, in bringing down the highlights he has blocked up the shadows. He has done it intentionally and it is an aspect of his style, but that is the payoff for holding detail in the window. Mind you, he is quite happy to blow windows completely when needed, it is the tonality of the faces that is the key. Most shooters would have used a touch of flash to lower contrast in this situation, but he is a natural light shooter and chooses to work curves to achieve his style.</p>