Thanks for this video ! I already have the 135mm , I was struggling between 50mm and 85mm f1.2 Now, I can decide ! for my EF lenses, I just buy a adapter for each one to make it RF - not having to fiddle with adapter when changing between different RF/EF lenses helps a lot. Enjoy your videos very much !!
I owned a EF 135 2L and it was one of my favorite lenses. It was super sharp and very contrasty. It had “the look.” It is an extremely good value in uses lenses for portraits.
Wonderful approach, and helpful, too. I love the 135 l because it's a magnificent stage event lens that crops ++beautifully++. For portraits, it brings out the humanity in a face better than any other lens I've used.
Oh man! I loved this! I just bought the 85 and flip flopped between all of these. Almost snagged the 135….then decided well 85 1.8 seems popular and should give similar effects just to try out!
The 135 to me is what the 85 is to Katelyn - magical! The only reason I also own an RF 85 1.2 is that I don’t usually have the needed space to employ it (edit: the 135) indoors and within most venues.
After watching the whole video, I think the choice of lenses to recommend to shooters is also driven by several realities and objectives - here’s my food for thought questions: - Use case, budget and career aspirations? - Do you have the skill level to capitalize on the premium glass and bodies vs entry-level? - One body or two bodies (not including backups)? - Primes or zooms? Or both? - The sensor resolution (R5 can crop in on an 85 and lose basically nothing to the 135 for composition; i also frequently crop in on my 28-70 shots where I would have gone to my 2nd body and the 70-200 before my R5) - Which stage of the wedding/event are we talking about? I use my 11-24 and 100 macro for details and environments, 35/50/85/135 L primes for bride/groom portraits and large group formals (camera locked off on tripod for my blinkers in the group), and 15-35/28-70/70-200 zooms for everything else that is on the move. I also keep the 28-70 full time on one of my bodies, and the other body rotating between my primes and other zooms. If i had to limit my kit to the absolute bare minimum essentials for budget or portability, i would go with R6, 24-105L, RF 16, RF 35 and 85 macro, transmitter and two speedlight flashes (Godox V1s or Canon EL-1s) w stands and magmod accessories (mainly the diffuser, CTOs and grids). All of those lenses are cheaper than one 28-70 or 85 1.2, and far more flexible as a set without giving enough away that your average client would notice. I would build from there by adding another body, then replacing individual lenses to L-series equivalents and then, after buying all of the glass you really need as an artist, maxing out on bodies to the R3 or R5 and future R mount bodies. Lastly, one could go with all zooms or all primes. I just recommend having zooms for events and ceremonies where movement and time to capture are limited or unknown/dynamic. Regardless of our artistic preferences, clients expect us to get the key shots!
@@bvill6749I edited for clarity - I don’t use the 135 as much as I like indoors because there isn’t enough room. As Katelynn demonstrated, even though it isn’t much walking distance difference for 135 from where she would frame an 85, I usually find myself dealing with a bunch of clutter, chairs, onlookers, etc that slows down my process that could have been avoided at 85. Plus every foot of distance between me and my subject(s) lessens the chemistry and I have to raise my voice more to be heard, slowing things down even more. 85 1.2 is just long enough for me to get that compression and isolation that makes it interchangeable with everything between 85 to 150. 200 is a whole different ballgame, but then you’re shooting from the double the distance.
I have a crop sensor camera so .... although I love the comparison, I have to adjust..i use 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 both ef on Canon R7 ....and I'm looking around for my first Rf lens to buy.. 😍. Thanks for sharing. And BTW your color coordination is so lovely. You know exactly how to bring out the best of your skin tone and beautiful hair .😍 The white green and black ....even the frame on your wall.....All so beautiful 😍
I have a 135mm that my second shooter uses on wedding days.. he's my husband!! :) This 135mm stays on his camera ALL day and never changes it!! Great images, buy it!!
I love your lens reviews -- you put together some of the best thought out lens comparisons (that end of saying more about a lens than the tech specs can)! I'm really eager for you to review the new RF 135mm 1.8, and compare it to the RF 85mm 1.2. I keep wondering what the real world differences are going to be (especially when shooting handheld as the new 135s have IS whereas the 85s do not). Thanks for putting together such great reviews!
Great comparison, thank you! I'd add a few thoughts: On the 200mm, I think the compression is so extreme, you can see an effect even on the outer 'ring' of her head/hair. It makes it look a bit distorted, like that part is thicker than natural. Also, one difference still in the 85 and 135 to me looks like the bokeh is rounder and more pleasing on the 85mm. Probably to do with the glass quality and blade/element shape or number.
I loved this video!!! the most helpful video I've seen yet on lenses. Could you please try 50mm and 135mm shoot, and see if you can get all the shots you want? THX
I’m a full-time medical student but have managed to build a pretty successful portrait business, and I shoot almost 75% of the photos I take on the 100mm f/2.8. A very non-traditional choice, but so budget-friendly for high-quality glass and gives me enough of that compression and bokeh to look ultra expensive. Plus, I rarely shoot below 1.8 on any lens, so the aperture doesn’t drive me *tooooo* crazy. Would love to invest in many more primes, but the 100mm is definitely an under-appreciated workhorse!
Agree. My 100 2.8 is my go-to (though honestly I will be getting the 85 1.2 in the next year or so). You get used to the tools you have - a bit more distance between the subject and the background can help maintain that separation and I generally like the look of the 100mm focal length for couples especially.
Great video. There are people out there who think the depth of field on an 85mm @ 1.8 is too shallow for portraits but I say it's just about ideal. Thanks for this.
Honestly, I shoot the RF 70-200 in low light events all the time, weddings, concerts, it is BEAUTIFUL in low light, I have no issues.. I can't imagine using a prime that falls within the focal length of the 70-200mm... it is perfect for those situations, SHARP as anything and low to no noise. I have also used it for portraits very successfully. I LOVE it!
Nice! The only thing I would add - is that 135mm and up can make some girls/women look/feel puffy (face compression) and some of them are sensitive and will tell you right away that they look fat in the photos. while the 85 and 50 make their face look slimmer. if you're shooting from far away though, it's less noticeable. love your videos!
This is one of the "Best" shootout videos I've seen in lens comparisons. I'm a portrait photographer and have the 50mm 1.4 which I hardly ever use, the 135mm and the 85mm. I used the 135mm once, because I'm an 85mm snob. But after seeing this review I think I'm going to bring out my 135mm and put it to good use.
This video could not have come at a better time! I already own a 70-200 and a 100 macro but I’ve been struggling to decide on whether to get the 135 or the 85. My 135 was just delivered an hour ago :)
Really impressed by the EF 135mm f/2 the rendering is top drawer (do I dare say better than the RF 85mm f/1.2?). It all depends on if you really need that 1 and a third extra stop of light.
great video!!! I would love to see a shoot out between the 100mm macro and the 35mm macro I for sure know YOU don't need to buy the 35mm when you have the 100mm but I'd love just to see your take on using the two side by side for ring shots - maybe just rent the 35?
I use a 35, 50, RF 85F2 (with 1:2 macro) and 135mm for weddings. I try and be as light as possible and the 70-200 was just ugh. The 135mm is my favorite lens for portraits and ceremony though, and if I have the room to use it, I’m using it. 😆
I have these 4 lenses along with the 28-70 but found lately that I have been reaching for my 100 mm ALOT!! Especially since shooting on the R 6 I am limited to 20megapixels , because the 100 gives me 4x the zoom ability. I shoot a lot senior sessions, prom , casuals and cap & gown. It might be because it’s so much lighter too. I love the 28-70 for the versatility, and the 85 is like a specialty lens- helps set my pictures apart from other portraiture.
I recently purchased a 135 1.8 for a wedding as I was worried that I may not have enough reach during the ceremony, but in reality I did not need it. An 85 would have been more than adequate. I was shooting video and my 35mm 1.4 stayed on my camera 85% of the time. My wide angle 5% and my 135 5% too. Unlike a 35 or a 50 I felt the need to switch out the 135 came much sooner, ie almost as soon as I got the 1 or two clips I wanted. The other thing I have to say about the 135 is that it does put weight on the subject. Even with the model in this video, it was apparent. My bride and groom were both on the larger side, and both looked lovely, but would not have appreciated images that made them look heavier than they are, particularly as the groom had dieted for months, especially for the wedding. I feel that the compression you get with the 85 is somehow optimal. It flatters whilst at the same time remaining truer to the look of the subject.
I used to have a love/hate relationship with my Canon 135 mm f2 as it was so 'shaky' on my 5DIII. I had to use shutterspeeds of 1/320th or shorter. I was planning on selling it, but on my new R6 (with IBIS) it's not shaky at all and I'll keep it.
I shoot more video than stills. This week I shot a rodeo in a dark indoor arena. My results were mixed. I was flipping between video and stills. Used a R 70-105 and R 100-500 is what I used. Horses were coming at me. Barrel racers going away. Any suggestions. I shoot rodeo twice a year. Never the same camera twice. Shooting Canon R6 .
Great test, big thanks for Your job. You missing 85 f1.4 IS EF with converter. Lower price, lower weight, image stabilisation, maybe its worth to reconsider ? I'm waiting for 1.4 IS RF version, 85 1.2 is great, but to big and to heavy to carry all day long.
I think for kids photoshoot 135 is the best. Good great background compression and photographer can give some space for kids to play or do something to capture nice moments
I do a few weddings a year. I only bring the 35 , 85 and 100 mm (macro), and 2 cameras (and flashes). I don't want to carry my heavy 70-200 mm f2.8 IS II all day. My 85 mm is 4x as fast in terms of exposure, so a huge advantage in a dark church or party venue.
Katelyn, there is now an RF 135. Please review. I am new to the professional world. I have the R6 and the 28-70 RF L lens. I shoot families and seniors and have been hoping to get an 85 1.2 this year for the magic but I am now hearing a lot of good things about the new RF 135. What would you recommend for me. Thank you for all you do and all your education has taught me!💖
If you aren’t wanting to do wedding and do mostly, couples, families and maternity photos, what lenses would you recommend? Do you have like a top 2 that are a must? I’m just getting started so budget is small. Thanks
I mainly use two lenses, RF 35mm and EF 135mm. I will say that I use my 135mm probably 70% of my day. All my portrait shots are using 135. I love using it for full body photos and close up shots as well. Its such a great lens.
@@onlysublime it can be! I pretty much learned with a 135 so I’m definitely used to it now. I do bring my 35 With me also though just in case I don’t have that space to back up, large group photos look bomb with the 135 though I must say!
Looking at the 200mm 2.8 vs the 85mm 1.2 shots and I'm frankly more drawn to and enjoy the look of the 200 more. The lighter blur allows the beautiful colors of the greenery behind the subject to still shine while not taking anything away from her. That being said, I completely agree that if I were in a setting where I want the background to be a great contrast without definition then I would gravitate to the 1.2. I guess it's why I prefer if in urban portrait shoots. I can do alley shots in front of a trash can and still make it look good with a faster lens.
I am about to buy a Canon RF 85 mm L USM Lens - is the USM DS version ($2700) worth the extra money over the USM version ($2500) ? Both are L series glass which seems great.
uuuuuh thank you so so much for this video!! I got the R6 and the 85mm f2 macro lens back in March, and I am thinking of going all out and investing in the 70-200 for weddings in a church etc.. So I am rethinking that now after seeing this :D Would you recommend getting one? I have a sigma 35mm 1.4, a canon 50mm 1.8 (which I may be replacing some time, but not for now) and the 85mm. Not sure if I should wait for a 135mm rf lens or not and I am just getting started in the wedding photo business. Thank you so much for your help! :)
Good stuff, i’m surprised we never hear you talk about a 50mm 1.2. I recently got the 85 and 50 for my wife and she seems to gravitate toward that 50 more. Both are fantastic lenses though.
What I noticed is that as the focal length got longer, it seemed like the model’s face got more squared. I’d be interested to know which images clients tend to prefer. If you subtly offered subjects a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm option, would they like the compression of the longer focal lengths because of the novelty? Or would the 35 and 50 be preferred? Perhaps simply out of familiarity of seeing so many photos of themselves at 35 and 50? This sort of comparison is so much more interesting than the typical video topic. In the real world, photography is constrained by lens choices you may have made with less knowledge and care in your early days. So that 70-300 f/5.6-f/7.1 you got as a kit lens might be one of your options. Maybe selling it and spending a teeny bit more money to have an 85mm f/1.8 gives you more than you’d realize.
Thank you, Katelyn! Loved this! I have the EF version of the 70-200 but moved to the R6 a year ago. I kind of wish I hadn’t bought the 70-200mm, but I bought it 14 years ago and didn’t know what I know now! I have an 85mm, but I have the 1.8 version. I’d love to upgrade that lens! Someday!!! 😂
Dear Katelyn. You are such a treasure. Your videos are incredible, always hands on and super practical. And the 85mm R1.2 is just MAGIC :D I was thinking... oh, all those portraits look quite nice... and then you showed the 85mm at F1.2 :D
Exellent video! I got rid of the 70-200mm exactly for the reason of being disconnected with my subject, and use the 135mm now, specially its alive with R6 and image stabilisation :-) Also, you can calculate the amount of "bokeh" by dividing aperture with focal lengh, 135mm / 2 = 67,5 & 85 / 1.2 = 70, so they are quite close. The bigger number, the more amount of bokeh :-) Fun fact is that 85 1.2 is developed for astro photography, and 135mm for indoor sports ;-)
The 135 is so surprising given it's a 25 year old lens. I think a 24/50/135 combo is amazing for weddings. Or you could also just do the 28-70 with the 135 too. Either way, the 135 is great to have in the bag, especially on a budget.
As of June 20 2022 no RF 135 and I would love to see canon make it. I love my EF 85 1.4 IS with out the same price tag as the 1.2. I’ve noticed I’m more of a prime 50/85 for its too true I am getting the blur to make the background cleaner. Thanks for post it it help me rethink about how I use the 100 mm macro
Thanks for the video! I have 50stm, 100L EF and 24-105/4 rf Want BOKEH, versatility and compression. 100L is enough, but I want better image's by lenses. Magic of 50-85 1.2-1.4 (extremely wide aputure) is the possibility for make amazing BOKEH in close distance without need to go far back. 85 1.4 is shorter and more comfortable, but this lens only for portraits in low light. For the day light 70-200 will be awesome. Cream bokeh = 85 1.2(1.4) = 135 2 = 200 2.8. Already sell 135/2. Don't like range and that bokeh. What do you think about this dilemma?
Excellent and informative review/presentation. I do have the RF 70-200mm f2.8 on my R6, and I have my eyes on the EF 135mm f2 for a while. I don’t think Canon will release the RF version at an affordable price? Your presentation will help me to make up my mind. Thank you.
Maybe they will put out a mid priced variant like they did with others already. But they are currently focused on the professional segment showing off what’s possible. Another reason not compared here are other points line sharpness and quality etc. the RF glass is build for resolution over 100mp and usually have much better sharpness and image quality. So the price is usually justified by that
I picked up the idea somewhere that the sharpest aperture is slightly above the lowest possible number. So a 1.2 lens would be sharpest at maybe 2.8 or 3.0? I don't shoot wide open ever but I am wondering if I need to buy a lens with a very wide open option so that I can shoot at 2.8 and have it be sharp?
Do you think the same would apply for family sessions? My lens just died in the ocean so I have to re-buy and so I'm clear to buy what I want and no idea if I should stick with the 70-200!
Thanks for the interesting video. Now that Canon has announced the new RF 135 1.8, it would be interesting to see if there is a noticeable difference between that and the 135 2.0.
Have you had a chance to try the Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM DS (Defocus Smoothing) lens? I would love to see you compare it to your non-DS lens and hear what you think. The bokeh looks amazing in sample images but while it is also a F1.2 lens, due to the coating it loses about 1 1/3 stops of light. If you could do a comparison of the two lenses it would be great to hear if you feel the nicer bokeh make up for the darker lens. Who knows, maybe this will be the one that replaces your beloved 85mm :)
Thanks for the in-depth comparisons, I'd love to see a low-light comparison video as a follow up - maybe it will be a good test of the camera's ISO as well!
Love the video, BUT when doing this Shootout I would have expected the SIGMA 105/1.4 Art as the ultimative contender. Yes it is enourmous bulky and heavy and really a speciality lens even for a wedding, there are perfect conditions for the 85 as well as for the 105. Would never give away either of them! ;-)
The 85mm 1.2 renders bokeh in a very nice way tho… but like i said, i LOVE the 135 sony gm as it has the same smooth rendering and has that wow-faktor..
Ive been looking at a 135 vs 70-200 so this was super helpful in leaning towards the 135. I didn't expect it to be so similar to the 85 but that's also good for me because I've always loved the look of an 85 so that seems like a good match for me
Katelyn thanks for sharing. The "old" EF lens is a great project, and I agree a 2.8 will never be as a 1.2/1.4 lens. About 100 macro.. mhm.. I honestly would have expected a better result... Why didn't you played with SA ring? :-)
So - I ditched my EF 100mm Macro (with control ring) for the VERY affordable RF 35mm Macro and was so impressed by the macro shots... love how much less room it took in my bag AND it was a nice light lens to use later at the reception. LOVE my RF 70-200! so, Katelyn are you NOT shooting the RF 28-70 at weddings, ever?
The RF 135 was just announced, but it's $2100. If I were looking at that focal length and I were on a budget, I'd still go with the EF 135, or a used EF mount Sigma 135.
For half-length and head & shoulder weddings portraits, I have the option of using any of the following lenses on a full-frame camera: 85mm f/1.4 85mm f/1.8 90mm f/2 (Leica M-mount) 100mm f/2.8 105mm f/2.8 macro 105mm f/2 .5 135mm f/2 135mm f/3.5 180mm f/2.8 75-150mm f/3.5 80-200mm f/2.8 Here are the telephoto lenses I usually choose for my wedding kit: 85mm f/1.4 (my favorite for available light portraits) 105mm f/2.8 macro (use for portraits, ring shot, tight face shots, and food close-ups) 180mm f/2.8 (use for tight face shots and action shots from a distance) 80-200mm f/2.8 (in my backup wedding kit)
would have been perfect if you'd put all four side by side wide open like you did at f2.8. also, while not exactly great for weddings, the 100mm macro can make for some creative closeups that the other lenses just can't come close to
„If we can do portraits with the 135…“…oh man… i have the same relationship to the sony 135 1.8 GM as you have to the canon rf 85 1.2… i personally think the 85 still looks a bit „normal“ while the 135 starts becoming almost surreal and just is so special to me… the working distance is tough, but the results…
I know people love the new 135 (and so do I), but the EF 135 is holding it's own. I've always said, they'd have to pry that lens from my cold dead hands.
Damn katelyn you always do this to me. Ok so I have the 135 but now I’m feeling maybe I don’t need the 70-200. I have an 85 but it’s sigma so When I do switch from the 85 to 135 I have to do the adapter first to the land then I can attach it. I’ve been saving my money up to get the 28th to 70 but I can only get it from Best Buy because I have a Best Buy card and I would take money off of it. Unfortunately Best Buy has only had that lens available twice in the past year and six months. My birthday is in august and feel it won’t be out by the time my 10% with Best Buy reward money. So do I get the 85 or do I get the 70 to 200 ugh life. I’m a developing photographer I enjoy portraits and I’ve been getting opportunity to shoot second wedding my second wedding is this weekend, I have at least cycled all my lenses for about 30 to 40 pictures each that being 24 to 70mm, 50 mm, 85 mm, 135 mm.
The first nice lens I ever got was a 70-200 f2.8 and I loved it. Very versatile
FINALLY! I found the comparison I´ve been looking for
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks for this video ! I already have the 135mm , I was struggling between 50mm and 85mm f1.2 Now, I can decide ! for my EF lenses, I just buy a adapter for each one to make it RF - not having to fiddle with adapter when changing between different RF/EF lenses helps a lot. Enjoy your videos very much !!
I owned a EF 135 2L and it was one of my favorite lenses. It was super sharp and very contrasty. It had “the look.” It is an extremely good value in uses lenses for portraits.
Wonderful approach, and helpful, too. I love the 135 l because it's a magnificent stage event lens that crops ++beautifully++. For portraits, it brings out the humanity in a face better than any other lens I've used.
Thanks for sharing!
Loved the comparison thanks. As a portrait photographer, I'm tempted to go with the older/cheaper/smaller 135mm 2.0 versus the 85mm 1.2.
Thanks for sharing!
Oh man! I loved this! I just bought the 85 and flip flopped between all of these. Almost snagged the 135….then decided well 85 1.8 seems popular and should give similar effects just to try out!
Thanks for sharing!
Omg 😍 I need to come back to All Access… I could watch this for hours 😅 Thank you so much!!
The 135 to me is what the 85 is to Katelyn - magical! The only reason I also own an RF 85 1.2 is that I don’t usually have the needed space to employ it (edit: the 135) indoors and within most venues.
After watching the whole video, I think the choice of lenses to recommend to shooters is also driven by several realities and objectives - here’s my food for thought questions:
- Use case, budget and career aspirations?
- Do you have the skill level to capitalize on the premium glass and bodies vs entry-level?
- One body or two bodies (not including backups)?
- Primes or zooms? Or both?
- The sensor resolution (R5 can crop in on an 85 and lose basically nothing to the 135 for composition; i also frequently crop in on my 28-70 shots where I would have gone to my 2nd body and the 70-200 before my R5)
- Which stage of the wedding/event are we talking about? I use my 11-24 and 100 macro for details and environments, 35/50/85/135 L primes for bride/groom portraits and large group formals (camera locked off on tripod for my blinkers in the group), and 15-35/28-70/70-200 zooms for everything else that is on the move. I also keep the 28-70 full time on one of my bodies, and the other body rotating between my primes and other zooms.
If i had to limit my kit to the absolute bare minimum essentials for budget or portability, i would go with R6, 24-105L, RF 16, RF 35 and 85 macro, transmitter and two speedlight flashes (Godox V1s or Canon EL-1s) w stands and magmod accessories (mainly the diffuser, CTOs and grids). All of those lenses are cheaper than one 28-70 or 85 1.2, and far more flexible as a set without giving enough away that your average client would notice. I would build from there by adding another body, then replacing individual lenses to L-series equivalents and then, after buying all of the glass you really need as an artist, maxing out on bodies to the R3 or R5 and future R mount bodies.
Lastly, one could go with all zooms or all primes. I just recommend having zooms for events and ceremonies where movement and time to capture are limited or unknown/dynamic. Regardless of our artistic preferences, clients expect us to get the key shots!
You don’t use the 85 because you don’t have the needed space? But yet you use a 135 lol that makes sense
@@bvill6749I edited for clarity - I don’t use the 135 as much as I like indoors because there isn’t enough room. As Katelynn demonstrated, even though it isn’t much walking distance difference for 135 from where she would frame an 85, I usually find myself dealing with a bunch of clutter, chairs, onlookers, etc that slows down my process that could have been avoided at 85. Plus every foot of distance between me and my subject(s) lessens the chemistry and I have to raise my voice more to be heard, slowing things down even more. 85 1.2 is just long enough for me to get that compression and isolation that makes it interchangeable with everything between 85 to 150. 200 is a whole different ballgame, but then you’re shooting from the double the distance.
Thanks for sharing!
I have a crop sensor camera so .... although I love the comparison, I have to adjust..i use 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 both ef on Canon R7 ....and I'm looking around for my first Rf lens to buy.. 😍. Thanks for sharing.
And BTW your color coordination is so lovely. You know exactly how to bring out the best of your skin tone and beautiful hair .😍 The white green and black ....even the frame on your wall.....All so beautiful 😍
Thanks for watching!
Nice review! When on 13:39 you present all pictures side by side, the 70-200 is not so off in color as it is on the end....
I have a 135mm that my second shooter uses on wedding days.. he's my husband!! :) This 135mm stays on his camera ALL day and never changes it!! Great images, buy it!!
Thanks for sharing Renee!
I love your lens reviews -- you put together some of the best thought out lens comparisons (that end of saying more about a lens than the tech specs can)! I'm really eager for you to review the new RF 135mm 1.8, and compare it to the RF 85mm 1.2. I keep wondering what the real world differences are going to be (especially when shooting handheld as the new 135s have IS whereas the 85s do not). Thanks for putting together such great reviews!
Great comparison, thank you! I'd add a few thoughts: On the 200mm, I think the compression is so extreme, you can see an effect even on the outer 'ring' of her head/hair. It makes it look a bit distorted, like that part is thicker than natural. Also, one difference still in the 85 and 135 to me looks like the bokeh is rounder and more pleasing on the 85mm. Probably to do with the glass quality and blade/element shape or number.
Thanks for sharing!
I loved this video!!! the most helpful video I've seen yet on lenses. Could you please try 50mm and 135mm shoot, and see if you can get all the shots you want? THX
Great idea!
Beautiful image❤️.
I use ef 85 f1.2ii,100 f2.8 is and 135 f2 too on my r6 mkii.
I bought the 105 mm Sigma macro 2.8 for its versatility. Beautiful portraits, products pics and macros on a walk through the vineyards.
Thanks for watching!
@@KatelynJames I'm always here.
I’m a full-time medical student but have managed to build a pretty successful portrait business, and I shoot almost 75% of the photos I take on the 100mm f/2.8. A very non-traditional choice, but so budget-friendly for high-quality glass and gives me enough of that compression and bokeh to look ultra expensive. Plus, I rarely shoot below 1.8 on any lens, so the aperture doesn’t drive me *tooooo* crazy.
Would love to invest in many more primes, but the 100mm is definitely an under-appreciated workhorse!
Thanks for sharing! This is amazing
Agree. My 100 2.8 is my go-to (though honestly I will be getting the 85 1.2 in the next year or so). You get used to the tools you have - a bit more distance between the subject and the background can help maintain that separation and I generally like the look of the 100mm focal length for couples especially.
how did you get your first clients?
Great video. There are people out there who think the depth of field on an 85mm @ 1.8 is too shallow for portraits but I say it's just about ideal. Thanks for this.
Thanks for sharing Ian!
I like how you spend time with the images on screen and explain them with depth. :)
Thanks for watching!
Great compare….👍👍👍👍. my dream lens is in the middle of your tought,… I would be take the Nikon 105mm F1.4 😉
Thanks for sharing!
Honestly, I shoot the RF 70-200 in low light events all the time, weddings, concerts, it is BEAUTIFUL in low light, I have no issues.. I can't imagine using a prime that falls within the focal length of the 70-200mm... it is perfect for those situations, SHARP as anything and low to no noise. I have also used it for portraits very successfully. I LOVE it!
Thanks for watching Denise!
Nice! The only thing I would add - is that 135mm and up can make some girls/women look/feel puffy (face compression) and some of them are sensitive and will tell you right away that they look fat in the photos. while the 85 and 50 make their face look slimmer. if you're shooting from far away though, it's less noticeable. love your videos!
Thanks for sharing!
I just love your channel and energy. You are very inviting and refreshing.
Thanks so much!
I own the 135 and I love it - it is however discontinued- if you are able to find one still I’d recommend picking it up asap! ❤❤❤
This is one of the "Best" shootout videos I've seen in lens comparisons. I'm a portrait photographer and have the 50mm 1.4 which I hardly ever use, the 135mm and the 85mm. I used the 135mm once, because I'm an 85mm snob. But after seeing this review I think I'm going to bring out my 135mm and put it to good use.
Thanks so much!
For portrait to consider as well the: Sigma 135mm f1.8 EF Art.
Only downside over the Canon 135mm f2 is the heavier size and weight.
This video could not have come at a better time! I already own a 70-200 and a 100 macro but I’ve been struggling to decide on whether to get the 135 or the 85. My 135 was just delivered an hour ago :)
You’re gonna love it!
Really impressed by the EF 135mm f/2 the rendering is top drawer (do I dare say better than the RF 85mm f/1.2?). It all depends on if you really need that 1 and a third extra stop of light.
Thanks for watching!
Shooting Nikon now, and I love my Nikon 200mm f2, Nikon 58mm f1.4 and Sigma 105mm and 40mm f1.4
Thanks for sharing!
I mainly shoot sports and the 135 f2 helps in really dark fields. The 1.4X and 2X teleconverters will work with the 135mm.
Thanks for sharing!
great video!!! I would love to see a shoot out between the 100mm macro and the 35mm macro
I for sure know YOU don't need to buy the 35mm when you have the 100mm but I'd love just to see your take on using the two side by side for ring shots - maybe just rent the 35?
Great idea!
I use a 35, 50, RF 85F2 (with 1:2 macro) and 135mm for weddings. I try and be as light as possible and the 70-200 was just ugh. The 135mm is my favorite lens for portraits and ceremony though, and if I have the room to use it, I’m using it. 😆
Thanks for sharing!
That 85 f2 is an extremely underrated lens. Can't be beat for the price and versatility.
I have these 4 lenses along with the 28-70 but found lately that I have been reaching for my 100 mm ALOT!! Especially since shooting on the R 6 I am limited to 20megapixels , because the 100 gives me 4x the zoom ability. I shoot a lot senior sessions, prom , casuals and cap & gown. It might be because it’s so much lighter too. I love the 28-70 for the versatility, and the 85 is like a specialty lens- helps set my pictures apart from other portraiture.
I have to agree, the RF 100mm is a fantastic optic!
Thanks for sharing Ruby
One of the best video of you! Above all the youtubers. :)))
Thank you so much 😀
Very clear comparison. Love your videos!
Thanks so much Carlos!
I recently purchased a 135 1.8 for a wedding as I was worried that I may not have enough reach during the ceremony, but in reality I did not need it. An 85 would have been more than adequate. I was shooting video and my 35mm 1.4 stayed on my camera 85% of the time. My wide angle 5% and my 135 5% too. Unlike a 35 or a 50 I felt the need to switch out the 135 came much sooner, ie almost as soon as I got the 1 or two clips I wanted. The other thing I have to say about the 135 is that it does put weight on the subject. Even with the model in this video, it was apparent. My bride and groom were both on the larger side, and both looked lovely, but would not have appreciated images that made them look heavier than they are, particularly as the groom had dieted for months, especially for the wedding. I feel that the compression you get with the 85 is somehow optimal. It flatters whilst at the same time remaining truer to the look of the subject.
Thanks for watching!
I have 85mm 2.8 and I'm obsessed with this lens. it's cheap but it's great.
you meant 85 1.8
I used to have a love/hate relationship with my Canon 135 mm f2 as it was so 'shaky' on my 5DIII. I had to use shutterspeeds of 1/320th or shorter. I was planning on selling it, but on my new R6 (with IBIS) it's not shaky at all and I'll keep it.
I shoot more video than stills. This week I shot a rodeo in a dark indoor arena.
My results were mixed.
I was flipping between video and stills. Used a R 70-105 and R 100-500 is what I used. Horses were coming at me.
Barrel racers going away.
Any suggestions. I shoot rodeo twice a year. Never the same camera twice. Shooting Canon R6 .
Thanks for watching!
Great test, big thanks for Your job. You missing 85 f1.4 IS EF with converter. Lower price, lower weight, image stabilisation, maybe its worth to reconsider ? I'm waiting for 1.4 IS RF version, 85 1.2 is great, but to big and to heavy to carry all day long.
Thanks for watching!
I think for kids photoshoot 135 is the best. Good great background compression and photographer can give some space for kids to play or do something to capture nice moments
I loved this video!! Please do more videos like this!
Will do thanks for watching!
Sigma 135 1.8 is the sharpest lens I have, followed by Sigma 18-35 1.8 crop. Thanks for the video!
I do a few weddings a year. I only bring the 35 , 85 and 100 mm (macro), and 2 cameras (and flashes). I don't want to carry my heavy 70-200 mm f2.8 IS II all day. My 85 mm is 4x as fast in terms of exposure, so a huge advantage in a dark church or party venue.
I have that 135mm on my EOS R and I love it so much. It's so sharp compared to my old 50mm 1.4 from 1993.
Thanks for the video. I had no idea the 200mm had less saturation. I love the 85 1.2 color rendering. Also, I believe the 85mm is actually a 90mm.
Thanks for sharing!
Katelyn, there is now an RF 135. Please review. I am new to the professional world. I have the R6 and the 28-70 RF L lens. I shoot families and seniors and have been hoping to get an 85 1.2 this year for the magic but I am now hearing a lot of good things about the new RF 135. What would you recommend for me.
Thank you for all you do and all your education has taught me!💖
The 100mm has been my go to portrait lens for years!! I used to use the ef and now I use the RF.
Thanks for watching!
It’s my favorite portrait lens right now! I just love the look and colors that lens gives!
If you aren’t wanting to do wedding and do mostly, couples, families and maternity photos, what lenses would you recommend? Do you have like a top 2 that are a must? I’m just getting started so budget is small. Thanks
I mainly use two lenses, RF 35mm and EF 135mm. I will say that I use my 135mm probably 70% of my day. All my portrait shots are using 135. I love using it for full body photos and close up shots as well. Its such a great lens.
I use the same! It gives an awesome variety
I like the look of the 135 but it's so impractical at a lot of locations especially when people want to take pics together. But it does look good.
@@onlysublime it can be! I pretty much learned with a 135 so I’m definitely used to it now. I do bring my 35 With me also though just in case I don’t have that space to back
up, large group photos look bomb with the 135 though I must say!
Thanks for sharing Rob!
Looking at the 200mm 2.8 vs the 85mm 1.2 shots and I'm frankly more drawn to and enjoy the look of the 200 more. The lighter blur allows the beautiful colors of the greenery behind the subject to still shine while not taking anything away from her. That being said, I completely agree that if I were in a setting where I want the background to be a great contrast without definition then I would gravitate to the 1.2. I guess it's why I prefer if in urban portrait shoots. I can do alley shots in front of a trash can and still make it look good with a faster lens.
I am about to buy a Canon RF 85 mm L USM Lens - is the USM DS version ($2700) worth the extra money over the USM version ($2500) ? Both are L series glass which seems great.
Hiya - can we have a review of the RF 135mm lens please? Please?
uuuuuh thank you so so much for this video!! I got the R6 and the 85mm f2 macro lens back in March, and I am thinking of going all out and investing in the 70-200 for weddings in a church etc.. So I am rethinking that now after seeing this :D Would you recommend getting one? I have a sigma 35mm 1.4, a canon 50mm 1.8 (which I may be replacing some time, but not for now) and the 85mm. Not sure if I should wait for a 135mm rf lens or not and I am just getting started in the wedding photo business. Thank you so much for your help! :)
Glad it was helpful!
Good stuff, i’m surprised we never hear you talk about a 50mm 1.2. I recently got the 85 and 50 for my wife and she seems to gravitate toward that 50 more. Both are fantastic lenses though.
Totally agree!
What I noticed is that as the focal length got longer, it seemed like the model’s face got more squared. I’d be interested to know which images clients tend to prefer. If you subtly offered subjects a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm option, would they like the compression of the longer focal lengths because of the novelty? Or would the 35 and 50 be preferred? Perhaps simply out of familiarity of seeing so many photos of themselves at 35 and 50?
This sort of comparison is so much more interesting than the typical video topic. In the real world, photography is constrained by lens choices you may have made with less knowledge and care in your early days. So that 70-300 f/5.6-f/7.1 you got as a kit lens might be one of your options. Maybe selling it and spending a teeny bit more money to have an 85mm f/1.8 gives you more than you’d realize.
Thank you, Katelyn! Loved this! I have the EF version of the 70-200 but moved to the R6 a year ago. I kind of wish I hadn’t bought the 70-200mm, but I bought it 14 years ago and didn’t know what I know now! I have an 85mm, but I have the 1.8 version. I’d love to upgrade that lens! Someday!!! 😂
Thanks for sharing!
Amazing video. She looks gorgeous in all the photos. But, I like the face with the 135 and 70-200. It is a lot better than the 85. In my opinion.
Thanks for sharing!
Dear Katelyn. You are such a treasure. Your videos are incredible, always hands on and super practical. And the 85mm R1.2 is just MAGIC :D I was thinking... oh, all those portraits look quite nice... and then you showed the 85mm at F1.2 :D
Wait until you ever see the potential of the DS version of that. That’s crazy
Thanks so much!
What’s your opinion on the RF 85MM 1.2 DS? I might pick up the DS version of the lens instead for the standard one.
Exellent video! I got rid of the 70-200mm exactly for the reason of being disconnected with my subject, and use the 135mm now, specially its alive with R6 and image stabilisation :-) Also, you can calculate the amount of "bokeh" by dividing aperture with focal lengh, 135mm / 2 = 67,5 & 85 / 1.2 = 70, so they are quite close. The bigger number, the more amount of bokeh :-) Fun fact is that 85 1.2 is developed for astro photography, and 135mm for indoor sports ;-)
The 135 is so surprising given it's a 25 year old lens. I think a 24/50/135 combo is amazing for weddings. Or you could also just do the 28-70 with the 135 too. Either way, the 135 is great to have in the bag, especially on a budget.
Thanks for sharing!
Yeah Canon really nailed it with the EF 135. I can't wait to see the lens that deserves to take its place
@@mxilplict there are rumors of a 135 1.4! I’d personally be ok with a 135 1.8 or f2 though. A 135 1.4 would be both huge and expensive.
@@alexmohammadi3828 Expensive and large wouldn't deter me if this lens will be my mainstay for the next 20 years like its predecessor
As of June 20 2022 no RF 135 and I would love to see canon make it. I love my EF 85 1.4 IS with out the same price tag as the 1.2. I’ve noticed I’m more of a prime 50/85 for its too true I am getting the blur to make the background cleaner. Thanks for post it it help me rethink about how I use the 100 mm macro
For portraits I choose my 105mm f/1.4 over the 70-200mm f/2.8. My 85mm is a f/1.8, but I almost never shoot with it.
Thanks for sharing!
Great video! Tbh, just would’ve loved to see the 28-70mm RF in here too 😅
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the video!
I have 50stm, 100L EF and 24-105/4 rf
Want BOKEH, versatility and compression.
100L is enough, but I want better image's by lenses.
Magic of 50-85 1.2-1.4 (extremely wide aputure) is the possibility for make amazing BOKEH in close distance without need to go far back.
85 1.4 is shorter and more comfortable, but this lens only for portraits in low light.
For the day light 70-200 will be awesome. Cream bokeh = 85 1.2(1.4) = 135 2 = 200 2.8.
Already sell 135/2. Don't like range and that bokeh.
What do you think about this dilemma?
Great video thanks. What ND filter do you use for the 85? Thanks
Excellent and informative review/presentation. I do have the RF 70-200mm f2.8 on my R6, and I have my eyes on the EF 135mm f2 for a while. I don’t think Canon will release the RF version at an affordable price? Your presentation will help me to make up my mind. Thank you.
Maybe they will put out a mid priced variant like they did with others already. But they are currently focused on the professional segment showing off what’s possible. Another reason not compared here are other points line sharpness and quality etc. the RF glass is build for resolution over 100mp and usually have much better sharpness and image quality. So the price is usually justified by that
Hi Katelyn, thanks so much for these videos. What's the video camera you're using for this video? it looks so good! Thanks.
Ty shoots with the Canon C70!
Earllyyy crowd!!
Love it! Thanks for watching!
What a great video! Which of those lenses, other then the 70-200 would be good for the group shots as well?
I picked up the idea somewhere that the sharpest aperture is slightly above the lowest possible number. So a 1.2 lens would be sharpest at maybe 2.8 or 3.0? I don't shoot wide open ever but I am wondering if I need to buy a lens with a very wide open option so that I can shoot at 2.8 and have it be sharp?
Do you think the same would apply for family sessions? My lens just died in the ocean so I have to re-buy and so I'm clear to buy what I want and no idea if I should stick with the 70-200!
Thanks for the interesting video. Now that Canon has announced the new RF 135 1.8, it would be interesting to see if there is a noticeable difference between that and the 135 2.0.
Have you had a chance to try the Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM DS (Defocus Smoothing) lens? I would love to see you compare it to your non-DS lens and hear what you think. The bokeh looks amazing in sample images but while it is also a F1.2 lens, due to the coating it loses about 1 1/3 stops of light. If you could do a comparison of the two lenses it would be great to hear if you feel the nicer bokeh make up for the darker lens. Who knows, maybe this will be the one that replaces your beloved 85mm :)
I have not!
Thanks for the in-depth comparisons, I'd love to see a low-light comparison video as a follow up - maybe it will be a good test of the camera's ISO as well!
Thank you so much for your videos!! :)
Glad you like them!
Great video!!
Glad you liked it!
Love the video, BUT when doing this Shootout I would have expected the SIGMA 105/1.4 Art as the ultimative contender. Yes it is enourmous bulky and heavy and really a speciality lens even for a wedding, there are perfect conditions for the 85 as well as for the 105. Would never give away either of them! ;-)
Thanks for sharing!
The 85mm 1.2 renders bokeh in a very nice way tho… but like i said, i LOVE the 135 sony gm as it has the same smooth rendering and has that wow-faktor..
Thanks for watching!
Ive been looking at a 135 vs 70-200 so this was super helpful in leaning towards the 135. I didn't expect it to be so similar to the 85 but that's also good for me because I've always loved the look of an 85 so that seems like a good match for me
Get the 70-200mm I have one,it’s sweet
The 135 1.8 is an insane lens.
Canon RF85MM F2 Macro, that’s the best lens for portrait plus a little Macro for the rings.
My favorite lens right now is the 100mm 2.8
It is a great lens!
Katelyn thanks for sharing. The "old" EF lens is a great project, and I agree a 2.8 will never be as a 1.2/1.4 lens. About 100 macro.. mhm.. I
honestly
would have expected a better result... Why didn't you played with SA ring? :-)
So - I ditched my EF 100mm Macro (with control ring) for the VERY affordable RF 35mm Macro and was so impressed by the macro shots... love how much less room it took in my bag AND it was a nice light lens to use later at the reception. LOVE my RF 70-200! so, Katelyn are you NOT shooting the RF 28-70 at weddings, ever?
Interesting thanks for sharing!
Team 85mm all the way!!
The RF 135 was just announced, but it's $2100. If I were looking at that focal length and I were on a budget, I'd still go with the EF 135, or a used EF mount Sigma 135.
I love my 135!!
It really is a great lens!
Great
Comparison.
Thanks John!
For half-length and head & shoulder weddings portraits, I have the option of using any of the following lenses on a full-frame camera:
85mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
90mm f/2 (Leica M-mount)
100mm f/2.8
105mm f/2.8 macro
105mm f/2 .5
135mm f/2
135mm f/3.5
180mm f/2.8
75-150mm f/3.5
80-200mm f/2.8
Here are the telephoto lenses I usually choose for my wedding kit:
85mm f/1.4 (my favorite for available light portraits)
105mm f/2.8 macro (use for portraits, ring shot, tight face shots, and food close-ups)
180mm f/2.8 (use for tight face shots and action shots from a distance)
80-200mm f/2.8 (in my backup wedding kit)
I own 135mm and I love it.
It really is great!
Great info
Glad it was helpful!
would have been perfect if you'd put all four side by side wide open like you did at f2.8. also, while not exactly great for weddings, the 100mm macro can make for some creative closeups that the other lenses just can't come close to
„If we can do portraits with the 135…“…oh man… i have the same relationship to the sony 135 1.8 GM as you have to the canon rf 85 1.2… i personally think the 85 still looks a bit „normal“ while the 135 starts becoming almost surreal and just is so special to me… the working distance is tough, but the results…
Thanks for watching!
I know people love the new 135 (and so do I), but the EF 135 is holding it's own. I've always said, they'd have to pry that lens from my cold dead hands.
Thanks for watching!
Great comparisons.
Thanks for watching!
I still miss my 135 F2...glad it was part of this "challenge"
Thanks for watching!
gasp! is that a UV filter I see on the 85???
It’s just a clear filter for protection.
Damn katelyn you always do this to me. Ok so I have the 135 but now I’m feeling maybe I don’t need the 70-200. I have an 85 but it’s sigma so When I do switch from the 85 to 135 I have to do the adapter first to the land then I can attach it. I’ve been saving my money up to get the 28th to 70 but I can only get it from Best Buy because I have a Best Buy card and I would take money off of it. Unfortunately Best Buy has only had that lens available twice in the past year and six months. My birthday is in august and feel it won’t be out by the time my 10% with Best Buy reward money. So do I get the 85 or do I get the 70 to 200 ugh life. I’m a developing photographer I enjoy portraits and I’ve been getting opportunity to shoot second wedding my second wedding is this weekend, I have at least cycled all my lenses for about 30 to 40 pictures each that being 24 to 70mm, 50 mm, 85 mm, 135 mm.