Come'on brother... it's never about doing justice... it's about the once in a lifetime moment that you didn't have to correct lens for. Ideas for the 135/2 (assuming FF), mid-range sports (wife playing badminton will be nice) Wonderful portrait lens (a bit sharp though so dun bother stopping down). Wonderful portrait lens #2, available light Kids running around the park (even better if you are APS-C) Intensed facial expressions of that cute babe preparing to receive the serve Your most hated opponent on his bum Any other permutation of mid-distance/high-crop/available light Go BBB!!!!
If i understand it.. - kwun mentioned he is not immune to any photog gears. But his lack of immunity doesn't apply to a $1800 lens. Meaning: it's a no go. - What are his requirements? If he tells us his requirements, then i doubt any one of us would be able to sponsor his wishes; not the least himself..is that correct, master kwun??.. - That price tag was for a lens, not a camera body.
the 28/1.4 is like $3000 *used*? my Canon 35/1.4 only cost me $900 used. yes, agree that it is a great focal range. i used it 75% of the time.
what!!!??? which one is dark side?? shall be like this!! kwun, come back to the true side. the dark side has you for few years and it is time for you to leave the DARK SIDE.
i will figure that out when time comes. i have no scheduled tournament to take until at least end of 2010 (even that is not sure at this point). i will for sure miss HK/China Open this year. so there is no hurry at this point. my mk3 still have other lens. it is no where near deprived.
it is a great lens if you need that focal length. perfect lens for indoor sports or for portrait. i used it a little for macro with tube as well. however, these days i am so busy i hardly have time to shoot any of the above.
i have no idea what requirement there are. i seem to be sufficient with what i have. i guess i am satisfied and right now see no reason to splurge on a new lens. one thing about lenses is that they really do preserve value. i sold all 3 lenses with minimal loss. maybe around $5-10 loss each. and even more incredible since two of them i bought new.
Hmm.. - if there is no plan to get a new/used lens, then i'm guessing most likely you'll be stashing the money away for a while. until.......the new 1D MkIV comes out??.. - not all lenses preserve their value, no?? i guess only the higher IQ lenses (like the ones you just sold) will preserve most of their value. lower IQ lenses will likely lose more of their value.
I guess im in same boat with you Kwun. Im sure its a great lens but since I'm just doing photog more for serious hobby rather than pros I think I'm better to stay with 70-200 2.8 IS, I lost some IQ and don't have the 2.0 but gain versatility with the zoom. my current setup is 24-70 and 70-200, and if I need more opening I have 50 1.8 (might getting 85 1.8 but its on the bottom list) also I have 18-55 mk.2 (non-IS) and 55-200 (which I put 3 ext tube to make this into macro lens)
I'd put the 85/1.8 at the top of your list for indoor badminton and portrait shots on a 30D I can assure you it will be much better than the 50/1.8.
Yes, so would l. Particularly if you have a budget.For the money, nothing really beats it for speedy, low light shots. The one that might come close is the 100mm f/2. The 135mm f/2 would be excellent but the budget stretch is quite a long way off. Also, its not so good if you're space constrained like a small gym court or shooting with no more than 15m to move around from the subject.
excellent advice from Cheung. i used to have 4 primes, 135/2, 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 35/1.4. i sold the 135 and 50. i find myself using the 35 and 85 a lot more. the IQ and AF speed of the 85 is one level above the 50. on par with the 135L, actually.
it depends. true, lower end lens preserve less. also, as long as there is no "mk2" replacement. my 50/1.4 is not really consider high end, but the retail price really shot up since i bought it so does the used price.
ouch.. more poison on me I was actually aiming for the 85 initially but Kwun's 135 photo tempted me. But well when money say no, I can't do much.. 85 at the moment is more feasible and fit my budget at the moment.
Indeed. The 85/1.8 was the reason I almost went Canon -- there was no equivalent in the other systems. Excellent close portrait lens at a reasonable price. Most portrait photographers will want both the 85 and a 135 -- the 135 is easier when warming up the subject. I went with Minolta due to the placement of the dials but will never go Sony for the same reason (how silly). I notice that photographers tend to be split between 28+50+100 or 24+35+70-90 when they go prime. I also belong to the latter too with the 35 being my most used FL. It's great for street and group work. Hardly touch my 50 and 45mm. Given that you are reducing the lens collection, the tendency then is either in preparation to switch system or to replace the current body. Is the 1DSmk2 getting too heavy?
Some antidote for you. You already have a 70-200/2.8 IS. That'll cover most grounds for badminton photography. The thinner DoF of 85/1.8 or 135/2 will not really help you there and the 70-200 provides much better reach/flexibility. Unless you are troubled by the weight or you want nicer bokeh of either the 85 or 135.
Yep, exactly. my 70-200 2.8 really cover that part and more flexibility.. when comparing 85's IQ with 70-200 IQ, I think only at pixel peeper level then I can see difference.