andrew_ito Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I'm looking for the perfect travel setup. I want it to be lightweight and versatile and have top notch optics. Right now my travel rig is a 20D with 10-22, Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 f4L. I already have the 70-200 f2.8 IS so the second 70-200 seems like a lesser duplicate of what I already have. Since I shoot some portraiture and weddings it seems like the 135 f2L would be another great option to the 70-200 IS that I already have for portraits. I also already have the 1.4x to essentially make the 135 f2 into a 189 f2.8. What do you folks out there think? Should I keep my 70-200 f4L or get the 135 f2L? What would you do and why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_austin Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Depends how much you need a lens this fast in this FL range. To whom do you have to show any responses in the affirmative to obtain approval for this purchase? ; ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant g Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Tough call, but I'd lean towards the 135/2L, Which I still covet, but find it hard to justify since I have the 70-200IS and the 200/2.8L. both of which I use often with the 1.4x converter (even stacked with a 1.4x kenko pro 300 too). I had thought about selling the 200/2.8 to get the 135/2, but it is much more expensive. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everheul Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Wow, what a nice delima. I have the 135mm f2.0 and 1.4x, and almost had the 70-200f2.8 but decided on wanting the f2.0 for my needs. My personal preferance for travel is to go as light as possible. I'd probably go for carrying the 10-22, and get the 70-200 f4.0, and use the 50mm f1.4 (or 35mm f1.4 if I had the funds) instead of the tamron, in case I needed a low light lens. Just my two cents worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheldonnalos Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 FYI - the 135mm f/2 is actually heavier than the 70-200mm f/4, though it is more compact (shorter). If I were in your shoes, I'd sell the 70-200 f/4 because you already have the f/2.8 IS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_perlberg Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 I have the 70-200 f4 and just bought the 135 f2 because its black, shorter and thus less conspicuous which makes it a better walk around/travel lens to my way of thinking (I like to be as inconspicuous as I can be). At the moment I either walk around with just the 135, with the 135 and the extender or with a 50 f1.4 also. That gives me essentially a 50-189 f1.4-2.8 which seems to be pretty versatile. For a travel lens presumably you want to travel as light as possible and yet cover a range that you like to work in. The 135 is as sharp as a lens comes though I haven't used it enough to decide if it has the special "glow" that I sometimes I get with the 70-200 (if I was a better photographer I'd have this down but at the moment it seems to just sometimes "happen"). One question to ask yurself is how you feel about working with primes vs zooms. I'm discovering that I like how primes make me work to get a shot I like rather than just seeing something, zooming to frame and shooting. I think it makes for more interesting shots but YMMV. The other question to ask yourself is how do you feel about changing lenses or going back and forth with mounting and unmounting the extender. There are no right answers but you have to like the workflow. Considering you'll be traveling and flashing all this nice kit around in various places, in dust, in rain, on busy streets, etc. And of course with the extender the 70-200 becomes a 70-280 compared to the 135/189 combo albeit a rather longer and even more visible chunk of metal at the end of your camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 >> I'm looking for the perfect travel setup. No such thing. What is perfect for one will not be so for the other. >> I want it to be lightweight and versatile and have top notch optics. Don't we all..... :-) >> Right now my travel rig is a 20D with 10-22, Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 f4L. Excellent set. What exactly is wrong with it? >> What do you folks out there think? Should I keep my 70-200 f4L or get the 135 f2L? What would you do and why? Again this is very personal and again what is perfect for one will not be so for the other. My personal suggestions are: Lightweight and cheap: 10-22, 50/1.8, 135/2.8. Lightweight but more expensive: 10-22, 50/1.4, 135/2. All have excellent optical quality. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_ito Posted August 13, 2005 Author Share Posted August 13, 2005 Yes, what is perfect for some might not be perfect for others. I already have the 50 f1.4 and just sold the 135 f2.8 SF but am looking for the speed of the 135L and the sharpness and bokeh it gives. Personally, the 10-22, 28-75 f2.8 and a longer focal length feels like it might be just right. I was shooting some med low light indoor stuff today with my 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.8 and would've absolutely loved the 135L in that situation. I believe the 70-200 f4 would've been too slow. I typically like working with zooms but don't mind switching to primes for long stuff. For my wide angle to med tele I will be well covered by the 10-22 and Tamron 28-75. I think I'll try out the 135L. Thanks for all your comments! They've been helpful in my decision making process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now