christian_scarnici1 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 I was wondering if anyone has any feedback on this lens? I was also wodering what is the "Soft Focus"? Thanks for the information I am new to digital photography? Christian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppyDigs Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 It's among the sharpest teles I've owned. Even wide open my 1990 copy was tack sharp. AF is fast due to interbal focus albeit you hear a pianoissmo "shiiish" due to the older style AF motor. It's also small 'n light and makes a wonderful outdoor portrait, street and indoor sport lens. The designation "Soft Focus" refers to the two levels of dial-in spherical aberration that softens and imparts a beautiful glow to the image. Unlike a soft filter, you can quickly vary the effect by changing the aperture or soft focus setting. AF works perfectly with soft focus engaged, but if you change soft focusing settings after AF, you'll have to refocus. The soft focus effect is only visible from F2.8 to 4, so you need to use Av or M mode and shoot slow ISO during the day. Highlights, especially on backlit subjects, enhance and intensify the glowing effect. I didn't find much use for the SF, except for a few portraits of older women (removes wrinkles!). Sometimes the light’s all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. - Robert Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtwhite Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 I picked one up, but mostly because it makes a fast, lightweight, relatively cheap and razor sharp ~200mm equivalent on my XT that shares nice inexpensive 52mm filters with my 28/2.8 and 50/1.8. The softfocus is interesting but I never played with it much; it feels too gimmicky for most situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjb Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Ditto with puppy, its my favourite lens next to 200/2.8, light sharp, noisy AF but bang on target always, dreamy SF that I`ve never seen duplicated in PS or with filters, (close but not). great outdoor portraits specially those soft bride shots. just a little long in the studio on x1.6. saw one recently brsmd new in box s/h less than 1/2 price. Well worth its value, I often use it instead of the long end of the 28 135IS as its much better with IQ. HTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenwah_lee Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Ideal focal length for outdoors head and shoulder shot. Photo taken at f/2.8 with SF set to 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powderbear Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 An all-around awesome lens. I think that the fact that this is the only original EF lens still being produced today without modification (it is a nineteen year-old design after all) is testament to its virtues. It is tack sharp even wide open, and stands its ground against its much more expensive cousin the 135mm f/2L. If you like the outstanding results only a prime lens can offer, it will not disappoint. If you love zoom lenses, you?ll be blown away by how sharp images are with this lens. On top of that there is the soft-focusing ability which no other EF lens offers. It effectively offers #1 and #2 diffusing filters along with the normal (sharp setting). Actually this is really achieved by moving an aspherical element in the lens so you need not set the lens to any preset setting; it will work fine anywhere between the ?0? and ?2? settings. My favorite portrait setting is about where 2/3 would be on the dial. As Puppy Face has noted there are two minor tribulations to consider. First, the older AFD style motor is loud and slow by today?s standards. Second, the soft-focus ability is only really for use at large apertures. Really though, neither of these minor details should discourage you from considering this lens. I highly recommend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenwah_lee Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Here is the photo.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stb Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I own it as well and am delighted with it on my 5D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 The soft focus effect varies with the setting on the lens which is infinitely variable anywhere from 0 to 2 - you do NOT have to feel limited to the detents. But it also is decreased by stopping down the aperture as well. So bear in mind that setting #2 at f/2.8 is going to be much softer than setting #2 at f/16. As the others have said above, it's cheap, sharp, light, and the AF is fast and quiet. I really like this lens and would not give it up. It also resists flare better than about anything else I have, which is a good side bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourfa Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 can anyone make a functional comparison to Nikon's DC type lenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 If I was after a light tele lens then this is the one I'd choose. http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_135_28sf/index.htm Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 "can anyone make a functional comparison to Nikon's DC type lenses?" No, because they are totally different. DC lenses are not soft focus, and soft focus lenses will not allow defocus control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourfa Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 my quick reading of the SF feature is that it controls correction or uncorrection of spherical aberration, which seems pretty similar to Nikon's DC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 Andrew, I am not 100% sure but I think you are wrong. As I understand this, Nikon DC lenses offer you the choice between front and rear defocus while the Canon version does not. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fourfa Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 quoted directly from your own link: "The position of an aspherical element can be altered by the user causing a varying degree of spherical aberrations" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stb Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 It should be re-emphasized, I think, that the most compelling feature of the EF 135/2.8 SF is not the soft focus, it is the amazing value it gives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 Andy, please look at the pictures in this test. http://www.kramery.com/DUarticles/detail.asp?iArt=445 It is in Hebrew but the important part are the pictures. First batch (three pictures) are tagged as 'Normal', 'Front' and 'Rear'. Second batch (three pictures) are tagged the same. I hope they emphasize what I meant to say. The Canon lens allows you to alter the degree of the spherical aberration. The Nikon lens allows you to alter the position of the spherical aberration. Am I making myself clear? Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 "Andrew, I am not 100% sure but I think you are wrong. As I understand this, Nikon DC lenses offer you the choice between front and rear defocus while the Canon version does not. Happy shooting, Yakim." The DC lenses let users control the rendering of the out of focus portion of the frame. But they do not provide any sort of 'soft focus' effect at all. By contrast, the Canon lens provides soft focus, but doesn't allow one to have any 'defocus control'. Two completely different lenses without a thing in common with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 Can you explain - in details - what is the exact difference between "soft focus" and "defocus"? The author of this article is a professional photographer and extremely knowledgeable person. He claims they are the same. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 From what I understand, the defocus control lenses allow you to alter the appearance of the out of focus parts of the image, creating more or less blur in front of or behind the subject plane. You can crank the defocus control all the way to one side or another and decrease image sharpness that way, but I don't think these lenses have the same uses. Many of the example photographs show part of the subject as being blurred, but another part sharp. See http://www.stacken.kth.se/~maxz/defocuscontrol/ for more details. Additionally, most soft focus filters tend to cast a haze over the entire image, whereas soft focus lenses tend to impart a glow to the lighter parts of the image, while affecting the darker components a bit less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 20, 2006 Share Posted December 20, 2006 Apologies. I still do not understand the difference. Happy shooting, Yakim. 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