Canon 135mm F2.0 or Canon 200mm F2.8 for India trip

[alireza_r]

<p>I am planning a backpacking trip to India, and I'm going all primes with my 5D. The purpose is mainly street photography, portraits, and landscape. My kit is now Voigtlander 20mm and 40mm, and Canon 85mm f1.8, so really a compact size kit. However, I'm concerned if I really need something longer than 85mm. So my first question, to those who have travelled in India, is that if I am going to miss "a lot" by not having a tele lens longer than 85mm?<br>

If I'm going to take a longer lens, it will be either the 135mm f2.0 or 200mm f2.8 (currently do not own either of them). Now, I am wondering if 135mm will be too close to 85mm, that it will not be of much use. I know when I have to reach for my 20, my 40, or my 85. But if 135 is too close to 85, it will of little use. On the other hand, I reckon that the 200mm will be too long for portraits and candid shots in the street, and will be mostly used for detail shots and wildlife (I don't know how plenty the situations are).<br>

I would prefer to go without either of them, to have a smaller camera bag and less lens swaping. But I don't know if I miss a lot by not bringing a longer tele lens. The thing is that I've never used any of these focal lengths before, so I'm not familiar with them.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>I never traveled to India, but when it comes to travel a Tele lens comes in real handy. I would definately go with the 135mm f2.0. It is on the short end of a tele lens, but it wont scare off people as much as a 200mm lens would. </p>

[randallfarhy]

<p>Backpacking trip-are you taking more than one body? I realise you want to take all primes, however, I would still strongly suggest a 70-200 F4IS as an alternative to yet another lens that will need to be switched out. Even if you are planning to carry two bodies, I'd set one up with your favorite prime and the other with the zoom. Street images are often fleeting moments, no telling how many you could potentially miss fumbling with lenses. Only potential drawbacks are visibilty, and F4 as opposed to a fast F2 or 2.8. Wouldn't recommend the 70-200F2.8- it's both larger and heavier-a real concern when packing.</p>

<p>Good shooting on your trip-Randall</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I do think the 85mm and 135mm are a little close. I would pair the 200mm with the 85mm. The 135 and 200mm are about the same size once hoods are taken into consideration.</p>

<p>Another option is just to take a 135 as your only tele (leave the 85mm at home)- the 135mm is plenty fast and is a really "special" lens and would fit the bill nicely. On the other hand the 200mm is cheaper.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I'm with Randall in recommending the 70-200/4 L IS over either the 135/2 L or the 200/2.8 L (I have all three). The image quality of these lenses is nearly indistinguishable, and the versatility of the zoom (not to mention its having IS) would be invaluable for travel shooting, which often involves capturing "fleeting moments," as Randall so well puts it.</p>

<p>An alternative would be to do as Robin suggests: take a 135 instead of your 85 and forget about the 200. Or, if you envision needing more reach (to capture details in street markets, for example), take a 200 instead of the other two.</p>

[matthijs]

Totally agree.

 

Either 85 plus 200 or just the 135.

 

(plus 20 and 40)

 

Have fun and bring back nice memories of the mental and the digital kind.

 

Matthijs.

[jeffrey_c1]

Another good option maybe to carry a 135mm and a 1.4x extender along with the rest of your kit. This way, you get

two focal lengths at a minimal weight increase of your camera bag. But that is provided that you already have a 1.4x

extender. With the extender, the new focal length will be 189mm at f2.8.

[alan_bryant1]

<p>I'm with Jeffrey - the 135/2 and a 1.4x converter would be an excellent compromise.</p>

[sreegraphy]

<p>70-200 f4 will be good enough and should be good walk around lens. Since you mentioned your focus would be on street photography I assume you'll be taking pics by the fly.. Prime's will be of very less use here... </p>

[jack_nordine]

<p>Why in the world would 200mm be "too long" for portraits and candids in the street? 200mm is a great focal length to give yourself a little more room between you and your subject to assure your photos are indeed candid. And posed portraits are quite pleasing at 200mm with a 5D. Whether you bring a 200mm 2.8, the 70-200mm f/4 zoom or the 135mm 2.0 with an extender, a 200mm option would be nice to have.</p>

[bengt_rehn]

<p>I used a Canon FD system for film with a set of primes including 85/1,8 135/2,0 and 200/2,8 + 2x conv. I did many travels in Europe with various lens kits, but never outside Europe. My experience is that I always miss the lenses I left at home, but over the years I brought less gear with me and accept that I couldnt take all the pictures I wanted.<br>

If I were about to go to India with my film gear, I would take the 85/1,8 for sure and I would be tempted to bring the 200/2,8 + 2x conv, but I think I would left it at home at last.</p>

 

[alwin_lai]

<p>Despite owning a 135L which I absolute adore, for unpredictable situations you are best served with a zoom lens. It's just more versatile.<br>

70-200mm makes for good travel companion especially the lighter and smaller F4L version.</p>

[alireza_r]

<p>Thanks a lot for your answers. About the 70-200 F4, I don't think I go for it. I have thought about it. It's white, conspicuous, it's only F4, and a bit on tall side (I also have a precision focusing screen on my 5D and anything smaller than f/2.8 will make the viewfinder dark).<br>

But apart from these, I prefer to shoot with a faster lens, at f2.0 or f2.8, rather than having the "comfort" of a zoom lens. It's true, you see something happening in the corner and zoom in and you get it. If I don't have the zoom lens, I lose some images, but I still prefer to take my time and think on one focal length at a time, as I find it to be more inspiring. It's a long story of zoom vs. prime lenses! But as you can guess from my first post, I'm on prime side!<br>

@ Bengt: I like your conclusion: "... but over the years I brought less gear with me and accept that I couldnt take all the pictures I wanted"!</p>

[morthcam]

<p>Maybe it's just me, but I have a hard time with the phrase "backpacking trip" and "135L f2.0" in the same sentence. Since you already have a couple of Voigtlanders, have you considered an alt 135 that might be a little (or a lot) smaller? The Zuiko 135 3.5 is tiny and has a great reputation; yeah, kind of slow. There are a lot of 2.8's out there -- I know that manual focusing a 135 is a lot different from a 40, but it's something to consider.</p>

[jeff_delisio]

<p>My $0.02 in random order</p>

<p>I would not take a lens I was not familiar with</p>

<p>I have always taken zooms (eight trips to India) but maybe I lack creativity, still changing lenses when it is hot, dusty and you are the center of attention is not something that I find relaxing. The 24-105 on the 5DII has worked for me many times and the 70-210 f/4 does allow you to frame some nice portrait shots without getting in anyone's way.</p>

<p>Many of my best people shots were taken spontaneously - even when planned, and had a window of only a few seconds before the subject was swallowed by the crowd or turned away.</p>

<p>You will be conspicuous and candid shots are hard unless you are off in a doorway etc... and a white lens will make little difference in how much you stick out.</p>

<p>Even if you have a bad time you will have a great time and want to return.</p>

 

[thangavelu_nachimithu]

<p>I am In New Delhi, India. You need to carry 70-200 f/4 IS which will take care of your 85mm and 135mm. This time it is summer and you will have plenty of lights up to 7 PM. You will have lot of opportunity to shoot colorful portraits and close ups of faces and this lens will give a wonderful Bokeh . To shoot the monuments you need 24-70 . This two lens will serve the entire purpose. If you are a prime shooter, pl bring 35mm f/1.4 instead of 24-70. You will lot of photo opportunity to shoot wild life, deserts, snow covered mountains, historic places, street photography, etc.... You will definitely enjoy the trip. All the best to you .</p>

[chris_clarke3]

<p>I just came back from a long weekend in NYC. I took my 50 and the 16-35. That did the job and I got some very interesting street scenes.</p>

[tim_walsh]

<p>You might want to consider the 135 with 1.4 TC. You'll still be close to a 200 2.8 with less bulk and more options.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>If you are insistent on taking just primes, then the 135/2 and Extender 1.4× looks like the most versatile combination. The 135/2 on its own is, of course, superb. I have sometimes used mine with the Extender 1.4× II (optically identical to the original Extender 1.4×), and it works pretty well. It is useable wide open (especially with help from the CA correction in DPP – lateral CA is one of the main aberrations introduced by TCs) although there is a clear benefit in stopping down by one stop. The Extender 1.4× III might be a bit better.</p>

[Ian Taylor]

<p>Smaller is better for travel, I would go with the 135mm. I have spent quite a bit of time shooting in and around India the past couple of years, mostly for work. I am using the 135mm instead of the 70-200, which I think is just too much to cart around. I also use the 35L for a lot of stuff.<br>

<a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=906524">You can see some recent images here</a>.<br>

<a href="../photo/12954432&size=lg">And a shot from this month with the 135. </a></p>

[alireza_r]

<p>Impressive shots Ian, impressive! Wish I come back with such photos!</p>

[clgriffin]

<p>The 135 L is a heck of a street lens and is barely diminished by adding the 1.4 extender. Hard to shoot wildlife, however without a zoom--and you don't want to get too close to monkeys, no matter how cute.</p>

<p>I carried three lenses for India and two bodies. 7D and 60D, 10-22mm, 15-85mm IS and 150-500mm OS. At one point or another I used every millimeter.</p><div></div>

[alireza_r]

<p>Thanks everyone for the inputs! I think I settle down with 135mm F2.0, as it can serve as an awesome candid/head shot lens!<br>

For the extender, I think I will take a Canon 400D with me (will buy second hand, as it takes CF cards like my 5D) to be as my back up camera and a 1.6x extender!</p>

[hocus_focus]

<p>Travel with four primes? Not very comfortable.</p>

<p>I'd replace 20 and 40 by 16-35 and add 135/2. Then you have 16-35, 85 and 135.<br /> If you wanna go with only primes, I'd get 24 or 35, 85 and 135.</p>

<p>My favorite travel set is 24-70 and 135/2. Two lenses that cover a big range, are fast and discrete.</p>